-~/i > -i jtVy « !»{ >!^' '/u' ..fcV. S' ■' * "■ ( ■- ii /'■ i f . t. y I Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2018 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library https://archive.org/details/historyofphilosoOOenfi V f *1 t- I • r. % ft t 1? » i L THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, FROM THE EARLIEST PERIODS: DRAWN UP FROM BRUCKER’S HISTORIA CRITICA PHILOSOPHISE. /" WILLIAM ENFIELD, LL.D. “OPINIONUM COMMENTA DELET DIES, NATURAi JODICIA CONFIRMAT,” — CIC. LONDON: PRINTED FOR THOMAS TE G G, 73, C H R A PS I D E. 1840. LONDON : RICHARD CLAV, PRINTER, DREAD STREET HILL. PREFACE. In a country, which has so long held a distinguished place in the Republic of Letters as Great Britain, it is surprising that so small a share of attention should hitherto have been paid to the subject of this work. While the events of civil history have been related in every possible variety of method and language, and have been made the frequent subject of philosophical discussion, a series of facts, less adapted, indeed, to impress the imagination, but by no means less instructive, has been almost entirely overlooked. A British student, who, in his search after truth, should be desirous of taking a general survey of the rise and progress of opinions on the more important subjects of speculation, and by a fair compari¬ son of different systems to draw legitimate conclusions for himself, would seek in vain for the necessary information in any English work. The only treatise which might seem to promise him much assistance on this subject is Stanley's History of Philosophy ; but, to say nothing of the uncouth and obscure style in which this work is written, he would find, upon examination, that the author’s plan extended little further than to the history of the Grecian sects of philosophy ; and that, in executing it, he has rather performed the office of an industrious compiler, than that of a judicious critic. When, a few years ago, I first consulted Brucker’s History of Philosophy,* it was merely in hopes of obtaining, from so extensive and elaborate a work, further satisfaction than I had hitherto been * Edit. sec. Lips. 1767. A 11 PREFACE. able to gain respecting the opinions of the ancients ; and the only i use I then proposed to make of the book was, to borrow from it some assistance in drawing up a Course of Lectures to young men >, on the pursuit of knowledge. But upon a careful perusal of this history, I found it a vast magazine of important facts, collected with indefatigable industry, digested with admirable perspicuity of method, and written with every appearance of candour and impar¬ tiality. I regretted that so valuable a fund of information should be accessible only to those who had learning, leisure, and per¬ severance, sufficient to read in Latin six closely-printed quarto volumes, containing, on the average, about a thousand pages each. I thought I could not render my countrymen better service than i by talcing upon myself to become, in this instance, their reader ; and determined to undertake the task of communicating to them, in their vernacular tongue, the substance of this great, and, as it appeared to me, valuable work. The task was not without difficulties. Having neither leisure, nor in many cases opportunity, to compare the history with the numerous authorities to which it refers, I was obliged, for the most part, to give my author implicit credit for fidelity and accuracy : this, however, I thought myself justified in doing, partly because, wherever I have consulted the originals, I have found the quota¬ tions and references sufficiently correct; but chiefly on account of the high reputation which the author has obtained upon the continent : I have, nevertheless, thought it right to give his refer¬ ences, as far as my plan would permit, that they may be consulted by such readers as may wish to compare them with the work. In the selection of materials, I had no resource but to rely upon my i own judgment. The only rule I have followed has been to choose such particulars as were most likely to be generally interesting. Those who are inclined to enter into more minute inquiries will of course consult the original authors ; and for their convenience, a general list of references is given at the close of each chapter or section. In regard to language, I have found it wholly impractica¬ ble to follow my author. His style is so exceedingly verbose, that PREFACE. Ill it would have been impossible to have made this volume a trans- ' lation of select parts, without omitting others equally important, ‘ and without, at the same time, rendering the work tedious to an * English reader. Instead of translating the original, I have, there- ^ fore, endeavoured to give a faithful representation of its general f meaning and spirit : to express these with perspicuity and precision ■ has been, as far as respects style, my utmost aim. ^ Of the author’s Abridgment of his great work, published, in a ■ large octavo volume,* under the title of Institutiones Histories Phi- > losopliiccB Usui Academicce Juventutes adornates, I have made as ‘ much use as was consistent with the dilferent views with which ■ that abstract and this history were drawn up. The former appears ! to have been written almost entirely for the sake of academic I students, and rather to assist their recollection in studying the sub- t ject, than to supersede the use of the larger history. The latter is designed to give those, who may not have leisure or opportunity I to peruse the original, an idea of its contents sufficiently complete ! to answer every purpose of interesting or useful information. If ' it be asked, whether the trouble of drawing up this history from the larger work might not have been spared by translating the author’s own abridgment, my answer is, that such a translation • would only have furnished the English reader wdth a dry sketch of ; leading incidents and opinions; whereas, in this work it is in- ! tended, not only to communicate information by a detail of facts, but to enliven the detail by anecdotes and reflections of various kinds. Few persons, I apprehend, would prefer the bare outline of a portrait, (though sketched in full size by the hand of a master,) to a miniature picture ; which, at the same time that it sufficiently preserves the likeness, copies in some measure the expression and the colouring of the original. For any occasional mistakes which the learned reader may detect in the course of this history, I have no other apology to make, than that I have endeavoured to render it as correct as I was able. With regard to the errors which may be charged upon * Lips. 1756. A 2 IV PREFACE. my author, I am inclined to speak with less diffidence. His work bears throughout such evident marks of diligent attention, cool judgment, and freedom from prejudice, as justly to entitle even his opinions to no small degree of respect ; but as far as concerns facts, perhaps no historian ever had a better claim to confidence. No candid reader will, without the most careful inquiry, pronounce that statement of facts erroneous, which was the result of a course of investigation, in which the life of an industrious student was principally occupied for the long term of fifty years. The uses which may be made of the History of Philosophy are so fully enumerated in the author’s preliminary observations, as to leave me little to add upon the subject. I must not, how¬ ever, omit to mention certain applications of this branch of know¬ ledge, which, from causes into which it is of little consequence to inquire, Brucker has either barely hinted at, or wholly over¬ looked. Experience is universally acknowledged to be the best preceptor. The History of Philosophy is a register of experiments to ascertain the strength of the human understanding. As far as they have been successful, they at once serve to guide and to encourage our future researches; and even those which have been unsuccessful may perhaps prove of equal use in preventing the repetition of unprofitable labours. To infer from the diversity of opinions on metaphysical subjects, which, after ages of disputation, has sub¬ sisted, and still continues, among philosophers, that the whole field of metaphysics ought to be abandoned as barren ground, would be a rash and precipitate conclusion. But the dialectic combatants of the Grecian, Alexandrian, Arabian, and Christian schools have lived to little purpose, if they have not convinced the world, that by far the greater part of their ingenuity and industry was employed, either upon mere words, or upon nugce difficiles, which have never yielded, and are never likely to yield, any substantial benefit to mankind. With respect to those more important inquiries, whicli have been always interwoven with scholastic logomachies, such as concern. PREFACE. V for example, the origin of things, the nature of the Supreme Being, the distinct existence and duration of the human soul, the foundation of morals, and other similar subjects ; although the different systems which are embraced with equal confidence by dogmatists of every sect, ought not to be pleaded as an argument for abandoning the search after truth, as altogether a hopeless pursuit, they ought, unquestionably, to teach every inquirer cau¬ tion and diffidence, and every disputant candour and moderation. Perhaps, too, men’s researches into these subjects have now been carried to such extent, and every argument upon them has been so thoroughly discussed, that it may he possible to determine, with sufficient precision, how far it is possible for the human faculties to proceed in the investigation of truth, and why it can proceed no further. Possibly, the time may not be far distant, when an end will be put to fruitless controversy, by distinctly ascertaining the limits of the human understanding. If this desir¬ able point be ever attained, it is obvious that one of the means of accomplishing it must be an accurate attention to the manner in which different sects in philosophy and religion have from time to time arisen, and to the various causes of diversity of opinion. But, among the advantages which may be expected from a com¬ parison of the History of Philosophy with the present state of opinions, one of the principal is, that it will lead to the full dis¬ covery of the origin of many notions and practices, which have no other support than their antiquity, and consequently to much im¬ portant reformation and improvement. The doctrines, the forms, and even the technical language of our public schools, may he easily traced hack to the Scholastic age, and through this to the ancient Grecian sects, particularly to the Peripatetic school. It is impossible that the present state of knowledge should he fairly compared with ancient wisdom, without discovering the absolute necessity of enlarging the field of education beyond the utmost limits prescribed by our most enlightened ancestors. From the same comparison similar effects may be confidently expected, with respect to religious tenets and institutions. When it is clearly VI PREFACE. understood (as from the present free discussion of these subjects it is likely soon to be) that many of the doctrines commonly received as of Divine authority originated in the Pagan schools, and were thence transplanted at a very early period into the Christian church ; more particularly, when it is generally known (and it is impossible it can be long concealed even from the lowest classes of the people) that the fundamental doctrine of the unity of the Divine nature has undergone corruptions, from which no established church in Christendom has ever yet been purged ; it cannot fail to become an object of general attention to produce such a reform in religion, as shall free its public institutions from the incumbrance of Scholastic subtleties, and to render religion itself more interesting and efficacious, by making its forms more simple and intelligible. It has not been without the hope of contributing, in some de¬ gree, towards the abolition of ancient errors, and the extension of useful knowledge, that I have drawn up this History of Philosophy. W. E. Norwich, June, 1791. AN EPITOME OF THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, IN THUEE PERIODS. PERIOD THE FIRST, FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES, TO THE DECLINE OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC ; WHICH COMPREHENDS, I. BARBARIC PHILOSOPHY, including that of all ancient Nations among whom the Greek Language was not spoken. 1. EASTERN NATIONS. (1.) Hebrews, comprehending the posterity of Abraham to the time of the Babylonish Captivity ; after their return from which they were called Jews. Among their wise men, the most celebrated names are Moses, Solomon, and Daniel. Their wisdom, derived from Divine Revelation, is not to be confounded with philosophical and speculative science. (2.) Chaldeans, the author of whose philosophy was Zoroaster. Belus was another celebrated teacher of wisdom among the Assyrians ; but both his age and history are uncertain. Later than these lived Berosus, who first taught the Chaldean learning to. the Greeks. (3.) Persians, among whom Zardhust, also called Zoroaster, was the founder of wisdom ; he wrote a sacred book called Zend. Among the Persian Magi were Plystaspes and Hostanes. (4.) Indians, whose wise men were called Gymnosophists and Braeh- mans. Among these were Buddas, Dandamis, and Calanus. (5.) Arabians, among whom the Zabii, a sect of philosophers, and Lokman, an elegant writer of fables, are memorable. (6.) Phoenicians, to whom is ascribed the invention of letters. Mos- chus, Cadmus, and Sanchoniathon, are among their celebrated men. 2. SOUTHERN NATIONS. (1.) Egyptians, the founder of whose wisdom was Theut, or Thoth, whom the Greeks call Hermes and the Latins Mercury. After him arose a second Hermes, called also Trismegistus, to whom various books and in¬ ventions are ascribed. (2.) Ethiopians, whose wisdom seems to have been borrowed from the Egyptians. Atlas was one of their first astronomers. vm AN EPITOME OF THE 3. WESTERN NATIONS. (1.) Celts, whose philosophers were called Druids. Under the general name of the Celtic nations were comprehended the Gauls, Britons, Germans, and Cambrians. (2.) Etrurians and Romans: among the former flourished Tages, the inventor of augury ; among the latter, Nuraa is improperly styled a philosopher. 4. NORTHERN NATIONS. These include the Northern Scythians (distinct from the Celtic Scy¬ thians,) Thracians, Getae, &c. Among whom Abaris, Anacharsis, Toxaris, and Zamolxis, obtained the praise of wisdom. II. GRECIAN PHILOSOPHY ; which was. First, . . . Fabulous, as taught by Prometheus, Linus, Orpheus, Musaeus, Eumolpus, Melampus, Amphion, Hesiod, Epimenides, and Homer. Secondly, Political, chiefly adapted to the formation and improvement of states and the civilization of society. Among the authors of this philosophy were the legislators Zeleucus, Triptolemus, Draco, Solon, and Lycurgus ; the Seven Wise Men of Greece, Thales, Chilo, Pittacus, Bias, Cleobulus, and Peri- ander ; and the fabulist, AUsop. Thirdly, Sectarian, which owes its birth to '^hales and Pythagoras, and was divided into two leading schools, the Ionic and Italic. Of the IONIC SCHOOL were 1. The Ionic Sect proper, whose founder Thales had, as his successors, Anaximenes, Anaxagoras, Diogenes Apolloniates, and Archelaus. 2. The Socratic School, founded by Socrates ; the jDrincipal of whose disciples were Xenophon, Aeschines, Simon, Cebes, Aristippus, Phmdo, Euclid, Plato, Antisthenes, Critus, and Alcibiades. 3. The Cyrenaic Sect, of which Aristippus was the author: his followers were, his daughter Arete, Hegesias, Anicerris, Theodorus, and Bion. 4. The Megaric, or Eristic Sect, formed by Euclid of Megara ; to whom succeeded Eubulides, Diodorus, and Stilpo, famous for their logical subtlety. 5. The Eliac, or Eretriac School, raised by Pha:do of Elis, who, though he closely adhered to the doctrine of Socrates, gave name to his school. His successors were Plistanus and Menedemus ; the latter of whom, being a native of Eretria, transferred the school and name to his own country. 6. The Academic Sect, of which Plato was the founder. After his death, many of his disciples deviating from his doctrine, the school was divided into (1.) The Old Academy, which strictly retained its tenets, and in which the chair of Plato was successively filled by Speusippus Xeiiocrates, Polemo, Crates, and Crantor. HISTORY OF THiLOSOPHY. IX (2.) The Middle Academy, founded by Arcesilaus, and continued by Lacydes, Evander, and Egesinus. (3.) The New Academy, of which Carneades was the author : he was succeeded by Clitomachus, Philo of Larissa, Charmidas, and Antiochus of Ascalon, the last preceptor of the Platonic school in Greece. 7. The Peripatetic Sect, founded by Aristotle ; whose successors in the Lyceum were Theophrastus, Strato, Lycon, Aristo, Critolaus, and Diodorus. Among the Peripatetics, besides those who occupied the chair, were also Dicaearchus, Eudemus, and Demetrius*Phalereus. 8. The Cynic Sect, of which the author was Antisthenes ; whom Diogenes, Onesicritus, Crates, Metrocles, Menippus, and Menedemus, suc¬ ceeded. In the list of Cynic philosophers must also be reckoned Hippar- chia, the wife of Crates. 9. The Stoic Sect, of which Zeno was the founder. His successors in the porch were Persaeus, Aristo of Chios, Herillus, Sphaerus, Cleanlhes, Chrysippus, Zeno of Tarsus, Diogenes the Babylonian, Antipater, Panaetius, and Posidonius. Of the ITALIC SCHOOL were 1. The Italic Sect, proper: it was founded by Pythagoras, a disciple of Pherecydes. The followers of Pythagoras were Aristaeus, Mnesarchus, Alcmaeon, Ecphantus, Hippo, Empedocles, Epicharmus, Ocellus, Timaeus, Archytas, Hippasus, Philolaus, and Eudoxus. 2. The Eleatic Sect, of which Xenophanes was the author : his successors, Parmenides, Melissus, and Zeno, belonged to the metaphysical class of this sect ; Leucippus, Democritus, Protagoras, Diagoras, and Anax- archus, to the physical. 3. The Heraclitean Sect, which was founded by Heraclitus, and soon afterwards expired : Zeno and Hippocrates philosophised after the manner of Heraclitus, and other philosophers borrowed freely from his system. 4. The Epicurean Sect, a branch of the Eleatic, had Epicurus for its author ; among whose followers were Metrodorus, Polyaenus, Hermachus, Polystratus, Basilides, and Protarchus. 5. The Pyrrhonic, or Sceptic Sect, the parent of which was Pyrrho : his doctrine was taught by Timon, the Phliasian ; and, after some interval, was continued by Ptolemy, a Cyrenean, and at Alexandria by Ailnesidemus. The Grecian Philosophy, at length, passed from Greece and Italy : 1. Into Asia. Alexander, in his Asiatic expedition, was attended by many philosophers, particularly Callisthenes and Anaxarchus ; several of whom he sent to hold conference with the wise men of the East, particularly the Persian Magi and the Indian Brachmans. The consequence was, that by means of the mythological cast of the Oriental theology, the Grecian and Oriental dogmas were blended together ; and hence arose a new kind of doctrine in the East. 2. Into Egypt. After Alexander had conquered Egypt, he permitted the people, whom he collected from diflerent countries in Alexandria, to profess their respective religious and philosophical tenets ; whence these gradually became incorporated with those of the Greeks. This coalition X AN EPITOME OF THE was afterwards greatly promoted by the encouragement which was given to learned men and philosophers of all nations and sects to settle at Alex¬ andria. From this time, the names of almost all the Greek sects were heard in Egypt ; but that which was chiefly prevalent was the Platonic. The remains of the Italian school of Pythagoras also fled into Egypt, and their institutions suited the taste of that superstitious nation. Thus an alliance gradually took place between the Egyptian, Platonic, and Pytha¬ gorean systems ; and from this heterogeneous combination both philosophy and theology assumed a new form in Egypt ; when, under Ptolemy Physcon, the philosophers were for a time driven from Egypt into Asia ; but upon their return the Oriental philosophy was added to the mass, and the confusion of opinions was completed in the Eclectic sect. PERIOD THE SECOND, FROM THE DECLINE OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC TO THE REVIVAL OF LETTERS, WHICH COMPREHENDS, First, THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ROMANS ; concerning which may be considered its State, I. Before the Establishment of the Monarchy ; when it may be remarked, that the Grecian philosophy was not received without great difficulty. For when Carneades, Diogenes, and Critolaus, were sent to Rome on an embassy from the Athenians, and the Roman youths of dis¬ tinction flocked together to hear the philosophers, it was thought necessary, after giving them an honourable dismission, to pass a decree of the senate, that no philosophers should reside at Rome. When the same young men, however, were soon afterwards sent to Athens in a military capacity, they visited the schools of the philosophers, and became acquainted with their doctrines. This was first done by Scipio Africanus, Lelius, and Furius, whose example was soon followed by many others. Lucullus, who was instructed in philosophy by Antiochus the Ascalonite, erected a magnifl- cent library at his house, which he opened for the use of the learned, and hereby enticed philosophers of all sects to settle at Rome. Sylla, after the siege of Athens, first brought to light the writings of Aristotle and Theo¬ phrastus, and conveyed them to Rome. From the times of Lucullus and Sylla commences the epocha of the flourishing state of philosophy in Rome, during which there was scarcely any Grecian sect which had not its patrons and followers among the Romans. This was the case particularly with respect to 1. The Pythagoric Sect, to which Ennius, Cato the Censor, and Nigidius Figulus were adherents ; after whom the Pythagoric discipline soon disappeared. 2. The Academic, Old, Middle, and New ; the Old having among its followers Lucullus, Brutus, Varro, and Piso ; the Middle being espoused by Cicero, and the New by Philo. 3. The Stoic Sect, to which, besides many other illustrious Romans, Balbus and Cato of Utica were addicted. HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. XI 4. The Peripatetic Sect; for, after the writings of Aristotle had been copied by Tyrannic, and commented upon by Andronicus the Rhodian, a Peripatetic philosopher, this sect also engaged much attention in Rome. Cato, Crassus, and Piso, received instructions from philosophers of this sect; and Cicero com¬ mitted the charge of his son to Cratippus, a teacher of the Peripatetic philosophy at Athens. 5 The Epicurean Sect, which was patronised by Torquatus, Velleius, Trebatius, Pansa, Atticus, Cassius, and others. b. The Sceptic Sect, which was indeed thought to be extinct in the time of Cicero ; but was not without secret friends among the professed Academics, and was publicly revived at Alex¬ andria by A^nesidemus. II. From the time of the Establishment of the Roman Monarchy, when, though Roman liberty expired, the study of philoso¬ phy was not neglected. For with the poets, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Lucan, Manilius, and Persius ; and the historians, Livy, Tacitus, and Strabo, whose writings are enriched with many sentiments borrowed from the schools of philosophy, we find many professed philosophers : 1 Pythagoric : for though the sect of the Pythagoreans soon failed, and, strictly speaking, was never afterwards revived, there were some philosophers who adopted Pythagoric dogmas, and followed the Pythagoric discipline ; among whom were Nigi- dius, Anaxilaus, Sextius, Sotion, Moderatus, Nicomachus, and, above all the rest, Apollonius Tyanaeus. 2. Platonic ; to which class belonged Thraysillus, Theon, Alcinous, Favorinus, Taurus, Apuleius, Atticus, Numenius, Maximus Tyrius, Plutarch, and Galen. 3. Eclectic, or Later Platonists: a body of philosophers, who raised a new edifice of opinions from materials collected from various philosophical and religious sects, not excepting the Christian. The seeds of this sect were sown in Egypt by PoTAMO, an Alexandrian philosopher. It rose to full growth under Ammon lus Sacca. Among his disciples were Longinus, Ilerennius, Origen, and Plotinus. Under Plotinus this sect became so flourishing, that he may be considered as a second father of the Alexandrian Eclectic school. The sect was supported in Egypt and Asia by Amelius, Porphyry, Maximus, Jamblichus, Aldesius, Eustathius, Chrj^santhius, and Hierocles ; and afterwards, at Athens, by Plutarch the son of Nestorius, Syrian, Proclus, Marinus, Isidore, and Damascius. 4. Peripatetic: who may be divided into two classes; The first, Pure, which, from Andronicus to the time of Nero, preserved the peculiar characters of the sect, and kept it distinct from all others. To this class belonged, Sosigenes, Nicolaus Da- mascenus, Xenarchus, Athenaeus, and Alexander Algeus. The second, Mixed, which owed its origin to Ammonius the Peripatetic, who mixed Platonic and Stoic dogmas with those of his own sect. His example was followed by Eudemus, XU AN EPITOME OF THE Alexander Damascenus, Themistius, Olympiodorus, Simplicius, and others. Notwithstanding the attempts which were made by Alexander Aphrodiseus, Anatolius, and some others, to restore the purity of the Aristotelian doctrine, it remained ■ in a corrupt state, till, in the seventh century, it passed over to the Arabian and Christian schools. 5. Cynic: of whom the most memorable names are Musonius, Deme¬ trius, Demonax, Crescens, Peregrinus, and Salustius. 6. Stoic : who flourished with peculiar distinction under the patron¬ age of several of the emperors. The most celebrated Stoics of this period are, Athenodorus, Cornutus, Musonius Rufus, Chaeremon, Seneca, Dio of Prusa, Euphrates, Epictetus, and Sextus of Chaeronea. 7. Epicurean: among whom Pliny, Lucian, and Diogenes Laertius, are to be reckoned: some add Celsus, but without sufficient reason. 8. Sceptic : of whom the principle are .®nesidemus and Sextus Empiricus. Secondly, THE ORIENTAL PPIILOSOPHY. This philosophy, which sprung up a little before the Christian era, from the remains of the Zoroastrean doctrine, had many followers in various parts of Asia. Of these not a few passed over into Egypt, and contami¬ nated not only the Pagan, but the Christian and Jewish schools; producing among the Jews the Cabbalistic mysteries, and among the Christians the Gnostic heresies. The Oriental philosophy, which first appeared in Chal¬ dea and Persia, and was afterwards disseminated through other countries, bears so near a resemblance to that of Zoroaster, that it may be reasonably referred to this origin. Thirdly, THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE JEWS, after their Return from the Babylonish Captivity : concerning which is to be considered, I. The Jewish Philosophy from the End of the Captivity TO THE Destruction of Jerusalem; during which period the things chiefly to be noted are : 1. That the Samaritans embraced a mixed system of religion, partly Jewish and partly Pagan, and received from the Oriental schools certain doctrines concerning emanations from the Divine nature ; whence arose the heresy of Simon Magus. 2. That, by the help of allegory, an Egyptian colony of Jews incor¬ porated Pagan philosophy, chiefly the Platonic mixed with Oriental dogmas, with the mystical interpretation of their sacred law ; and that among the first of these corrupters of Jewish wisdom are to be ranked Philo and Aristobulus, 3. That the Cabbala, or mystical interpretation of the law, was brought over from Egypt to Palestine by Simeon Shetach : and that after this there were learned men in Judea who studied Pagan philosophy, of which Jose¬ phus the. historian is an example. 4. That the principal sects of the Jews were the Sadducees, the Karaeites, HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. XIU the Pharisees, the Essenes, and the Therapeutas, whose origin, however, is uncertain: of their learned men some of the most eminent were, Jesus the son of Sirach, Philo, Hillel, and Shammai. II. The Jewish Philosophy from the Destruction of Jeru¬ salem TO modern times : during which period the principal objects of attention are : 1 . The learned men who, having escaped the general destruction, erected schools at Jamnia, Tiberias, Bittera, Lydda, &c. The most celebrated doctors of the law, at that time, were Eliezer, Johannan Jebudah Hakkadosh, and Akibha, the compilers of the Talmud. In Babylon were the Jewish schools of Sorana, Naharda, and Pumbeditha ; among the more celebrated preceptors of whom were the rabbis Ashe and Jose, the compilers of the later Talmud, called the Babylonian. 2. The traditionary mystical wisdom, called the Cabbala, which after the destruction of the Jewish state was studied and taught with great industry. The most famous Cabbalists were Akibha, the author of the book Jezirah, and Simeon Jochaides, who wrote the book Soliar. A disciple of the former was Simeon Ben Jochai; after whom, till the tenth century, we meet with few traces of the Cabbalistic philosophy, and Saadias Gaon is the only distinguished name. The Jews, at this time grievously perse¬ cuted by the Saracens, fled from the East into Europe, and many of them settled in Spain. 3. The revival of Talmudical, Cabbalistic, and Pagan learning among the Jews in Spain, by whom the writings of Aristotle were translated from Arabic versions into Hebrew. The most eminent Jew of this age was Maimonides. III.— THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SARACENS, OR ARABIANS. Before the publication of the Islamitic Law by Mahomet, philosophy had little or no existence among the Arabians. At the beginning of the Abbasidean dynasty, in the eighth century, the light of science began to dawn ; and under Al-Mamon, in the ninth century, learning of every kind, and especially philosophy, flourished. Mesue Damascenus opened a school at Bagdat, and taught philosophy in the Syriac tongue. His disciple Ho- nain also promoted the study of philosophy, which was greatly facilitated by the Christian libraries which came into the possession of the Saracens. The works of Galen and Aristotle were translated into Arabic. Public schools were instituted, and long flourished, at Bagdat, Bassora, and Bochara. Nor was philosophy, at this time, conflned to the countries of the East; with the Saracenic empire, it extended to the western world. Numerous schools were founded, in which professors of philosophy were appointed. During the period of Arabian learning, the most eminent philosophers were Rasi, Essereph, Thophail, Averroes, Al-Ashari, Alkendi, Alfarabi, Avicenna, Avenzoar, Avenpace, Al-Gazel, Abulfaragius, &c. IV.— THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CHRISTIANS. I. From the Birth of Christ to the Seventh Century. The fathers of the Christian church, who were distinguished by philoso- XIV AN EPITOME OF THE pineal learning were, in the second century, Justin Martyr, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Irena3us, Clemens Alexandrinus, Pantsenus, and Hermias, who all favoured the Platonism which then prevailed ; Tatian, who went over to the Gnostics ; and Tertullian, who, though well skilled in ancient philosophy, rejected it altogether : — in the third century, Origen, who mixed the Eclectic philosophy of Alexandria with the Christrian doctrine : — in the fourth century, Arnobius, Lactantius, Eusebius, Didymus, Augustine, Chal- cidius : — in t\\e fifth century, Synesius, and Pseudo-Dionysius, in the East ; and in the West, Claudius Mammertus and Boethius who, after Origen, leaned towards the Eclectic sect, while Boethius favoured the Peripa¬ tetic : — in the sixth century, Aeneas Gaza, and Zecharias Scholasticus, who were inclined to the Eclectic philosophy ; to whom may be added, Philo- ponus, who, though attached to the same system, turned his attention chiefly to the interpretation of Aristotle. II. From the Seventh Century to the Revival of -Letters ; during which come under consideration, 1. The philosophy of the Greek or Oriental Christians from the seventh century to the taking of Constantinople ; where the following things are chiefly to be remarked : — Alexandrian Platonism expired among the Pagans in the seventh century ; and its remains were only found among the Christians, and chiefly among the monks. Out of the monasteries, the Aristotelian philosophy began to revive, through the labours of John of Damascus, who called in this philosophy to the aid of theology. He may not improperly be considered as the harbinger of the Scholastic philosophy. After his time barbarism prevailed ; till, in the ninth century, under the Emperors Michael and Barda, learning was in some degree revived. The most celebrated names, at this period, in the East, were, Psellus the Elder, Leo the Philosopher, Photius, Nicetas, Nicephorus, Pachymerus, and La- pitha, all Peripatetics ; and Psellus the Younger, an admirer of the Alex¬ andrian philosophy. 2. The philosophy of the Western Christians from the seventh century to the twelfth : during which period flourished, in the seventh century, Boethius and Isidore ; — in the eighth, Bede, Theodore Cilix, Alcuin, &c. ; — in the ninth, Rabanus, Erigena, Eginhard, Adelard, Grimbald, &c. ; — in the tenth, Bridferd, Dunstan, Remigius, Nanno, Gerbert, &c. ; in the eleventh, Fulbert, Berengar, Lanfranc, Anselm, Hermannus, &c. and Ros¬ celin, from whom arose the memorable controversy between the Nomi¬ nalists and Realists. The wisdom of this period was almost wholly wasted in dialectic subtleties. 3. The Scholastic thilosophy, which was a confused mass of notions compounded of Arabian and Aristotelian philosophy and polemic the¬ ology. Lanfranc, Roscelin, and others, have been called the fathers of this philosophy. From the beginning of the twelfth century to the middle of the thirteenth, the more celebrated Scholastics were, Abelard, Lombard, Porretan, Comestor, John of Salisbury, and Pulleyn; between the middle of the thir¬ teenth century and the year 1330, flourished Albert, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Roger Bacon, jEgidius, Duns Scotus ; to these succeeded, before the revival of letters, Durand, Occam, Suisset, and Wessel. HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. XV The Scholastics were divided into various sects, such as Albertists, Tho- mists, Scotists, Occamists; but those of the Nominalists and Realists are most celebrated. PERIOD THE THIRD, FROM THE REVIVAL OF LETTERS TO THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENT CENTURY ; IN WHICH WE FIND, I. ATTEMPTS TO RESTORE AND CORRECT THE SECTARIAN PHILOSOPHY. These we owe to the restoration of learning, and particularly to the revival of the study of the Greek language. 1. After Raymund Lully, in the thirteenth century, had in vain pre¬ tended to improve philosophy by his inventive art, in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, many learned men arose, who, either by reviving a taste for classical studies, or by translating and commenting upon the writings of the ancient philosophers, or by satirising the Scholastic philosophy and its professors, prepared the way for the reformation of philosophy. Among these, some of the more celebrated names are Chrysoloras, Paleologus, Dante, Petrarch, Boccace, Aretin, Politian, Philelphus, Valla, Agricola, and Argyropulus. 2. The revival of learning, accompanied with the reformation of religion, produced a general inclination to restore the ancient honours of philosophy. Erasmus, Vives, Nizolius, and others, exposed to ridicule the false philo¬ sophy of the Scholastics ; Luther, Melancthon, Faber, Agricola, Camera- rius, and others, contributed in various ways to the correction of philosophy in general. 3. Learned men arose, who formed the design of reviving the ancient Grecian sects, and arranged themselves, respectively, under the standards of the ancient masters. Particularly, (1.) The Platonic Philosophy, mixed with the Pythagorean, was revived by Pletho, Bessario, and Ficinus : Picus added the Cabbalistic doctrine ; and his footsteps were followed by Reuchlin, Venetus, Agrippa, and More ; while Patricius, Gale, Cudworth, Burnet, and others, rejecting the Cabbalistic dreams, endeavoured to restore Alexandrian Platonism. (2.) The Aristotelian Philosophy was taught, either mixed with the Scholastic by Lobkowitz, Ricciolus, Honoratus Faber, and others ; or pure, by Gaza, Trapezuntius, Scholarius, Pom- ponatius, Niphus, Cremoninus, Melancthon, Simon, Schegkius, Sherbius, Taurellus, Sonerus, Conringius, and many more. (3.) The Parmenidean Philosophy was restored by Telesius, who, meeting with much opposition, was ably defended by • Campanella. (4.) The Ionic Philosophy had a new advocate in Berigard ; who, however, acknowledged that both the Ionic and the Peripatetic systems were defective, and was hence inclined to scepticism. XVI HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. (5.) The Stoic Philosophy found an able patron in Lipsius, who was closely followed by Scioppiiis and Gataker. (6.) The Epicurean Philosophy, after an unsuccessful attempt by Magnenus, was revived by Gassendi, who was followed by Bernier and Charleton. II. ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW METHODS OF PHILOSOPHISING, made by 1. Modern Sceptics; of whom the most celebrated are Sanchez, Hernhaym, Vayer, Huet, and Bayle. 2. Scriptural Philosophers, who, despairing of being able to arrive at truth by the light of reason, had recourse to the scriptures, particularly to the Mosaic cosmogony, and endeavoured upon this foundation to raise a new structure of philosophy. These are chiefly, Alsted, Dickinson, Burnet, Whiston, Comenius, and Bayer. 3. Theosophists, who boast that they derive their 'hidden wisdom, not from the exercise of the understanding in inquiries after truth, but from immediate Divine illumination. To this class of philosophers are to be referred, Paracelsus and his disciples, Fludd, Boehmen, Helmont, Poiret, and according to some, the Rosicrusians. 4. Professed Enemies of Philosophy ; of whom the principal are, besides the Sceptics, and Theosophists, Pomponatius, Cremoninus, and Daniel Hoffman. III. ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE PHILOSOPHY IN THE TRUE ECLECTIC METHOD ; not such as was fol¬ lowed by the Alexandrian philosophers, but that which consists in rejecting prejudices of every kind ; subjecting the opinions of former philosophers to the strict scrutiny of reason, and admitting no conclusions but such as may be clearly deduced from principles founded in the nature of things, and discovered by experience. Among modern Eclectic Philosophers are, 1. Those who have endeavoured to improve Philosophy in general ; of whom the principal are Bruno, Cardan, Bacon, Campanella, Hobbes, Des Cartes, Leibnitz, Thomas, and Wolfe. 2. Those who have endeavoured to improve particular branches OF Philosophy : as, (1.) Logic and Metaphysics ; such as, Peter Ramus, Arnold, Spinoza and his followers, Mallebranehe, Tschernhausen, Locke. (2.) Morals and Jurisprudence; as Montaigne, Charron, Scultet, Boden, Machiavel, Grotius, Selden, Puffendorf. (3.) Natural Philosophy ; as Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, Gilbert, Boyle, Newton. HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY. PEELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. In an undertaking so extensive as the ensuing, it is necessary that the general object be at first clearly ascertained, and that the limits of the design be accurately defined. As this work is intended to be a history, not of literature or science in general, but of Philosophy, the reader should be previously informed in what sense the author understands the term ; especially, as there are few words to which a greater variety of significations has been annexed. What is now called Philosophy, was, in the infancy of human society, denominated Wisdom ; and indeed every ingenious discovery, and useful art, was then honoured with this appellation.* The title of Wise Men was, at that time, frequently conferred upon persons who had little claim to such a distinction ; and superstition very early bestowed it upon those who were entrusted with the direction of religious concerns ;j' although it cannot be doubted that they had often no other right to such pre-emi¬ nence than that which was founded upon ingenious imposture. Men of superior understanding, at length, detecting the fallacy of these preten¬ sions, were induced to assert their own right of free inquiry, and prose¬ cuted their researches after truth, if not with the success which they expected, at least with that liberal spirit which gave them a just claim to the title of Wise Men. The Wisdom which they in this manner acquired, many of them applied to purposes highly beneficial to mankind : whence the term Wisdom came, by degrees, to denote both the scientific study and the practical application of such truths as were adapted to promote the happiness of human life. In process of time, when a race of self-created preceptors arose in Greece, who assumed the name of Sophists, or Wise Men, their arrogant pretensions gave great offence to such as were capable of distinguishing between real and counterfeit wisdom, and led them to adopt an appella¬ tion more suitable to the character of men who modestly professed them¬ selves to be in the pursuit rather than in the possession of truth and wisdom, — namely, that of Philosophers. Cicero ascribes the invention of this term to Pythagoras, and thus relates the occasion upon which it was introduced.' — Every one knows, that among the Greeks there were seven eminent men, who have since been universally denominated the Seven Wise Men of Greece ; that, at a still earlier period, Lycurgus, and, even in the heroic ages, Ulysses and Nestor, were called Wise Men ; and, in short, that this appellation, has, from the most ancient times, been given to those who have devoted them¬ selves to the contemplation of nature. This title continued in common * Aristot. Ethic, ad Nicom. 1. vi. c. 7. f Strabo, 1. xv, p. 501. Diog. Laert. 1. i. sect. 1, 2. 2 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. use till the time of Pythagoras. It happened, whilst this great man was at Phlius, that Leon, the chief of the Phliasians, was exceedingly charmed with the ingenuity and eloquence with which he discoursed upon various topics, and asked him in what art he principally excelled : to which Pytha¬ goras replied, that he did not profess himself master of any art, but that he was a philosopher. Leon, struck with the novelty of the terra, asked Pythagoras who were philosophers, and wherein they differed from other men. Pythagoras replied, that, as in the public games, whilst some are contending for glory, and others are buying and selling in pursuit of gain, there is always a third class, who attend merely as spectators ; so, in human life, amidst the various characters of men, there is a select num¬ ber, who, despising all other pursuits, assiduously apply themselves to the study of nature, and the search after wisdom : these, added Pythagoras, are the persons whom I call philosophers.* This appellation, thus assumed merely through modesty, to intimate that even they who have made the greatest advances in knowledge, are rather to be considered as Lovers of Wisdom than as Wise Men, soon lost its original meaning, and was borne with as much haughtiness and vanity as if it had implied an exclusive right to the possession of wisdom. “ Some there are,” says Quintilian, “ who, despising the occupation of an orator, have employed themselves in prescribing rules for the conduct of life : these have insolently assumed to themselves the title of the Sole Professors of Wisdom. At a later period the signification of the term Philosophy was extended so far, as to include not only all speculative science, but also skill in muni¬ cipal law, the knowledge of medicine, the art of criticism, and the whole circle of polite literature. The term was even transferred to theology ; the Christian religion was called sacred philosophy ; and ecclesiastical doctors and monks were styled philosophers. This brief account of the changes which this term has undergone in its meaning and use, may serve to show the necessity of fixing, with some degree of precision, the sense in which we understand the word, before we attempt to trace the rise and progress of Philosophy. Philosophy may be defined, that Love of Wisdom, which incites to the pursuit of important and useful science. Philosophy discovers and teaches those principles by means of which happiness maybe acquired, preserved, and increased ; Wisdom applies these principles to the benefit of indi¬ viduals, and of society. “ Knowledge which is applicable to no useful purpose, cannot deserve the name of Wisdom : ” “Qui ipsi sibi sapiens prodesse nequit nequiequam sapit.” (a) The sources of that knowledge of truth which leads to the possession of happiness are two, — Reason and Revelation. To instruct men in those truths which God hath communicated to mankind by revelation, is the province of theology. To teach them such truths, connected with their happiness, as are capable of being discovered by the powers of reason, is the province of philosophy. These two provinces are perfectly distinct, and ought to be kept separate, except where the one may occasionally serve to cast light upon the other. The leading offices of philosophy may be easily deduced from the general idea of its object. For if the end to be attained be the permanent * Cic. Tuscul. Disp. 1. v. c. 3. f Quintil. Prooem. Instil. («) Ennius ap. Cic. Epist. Fam. 1. vii. ep. G. PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. 3 enjoyment of real good, it must unquestionably be the business of philo¬ sophy to investigate the nature of good, and the means by which it may be acquired, and so to form and improve the whole man, that he may arrive at the complete possession of true felicity. Consequently, the business of philosophy will be, to cultivate the understanding, and point out the manner in which it may best perform its operations ; to correct and meli¬ orate the will and affections, by discovering what objects are desirable, comparing their respective claims, and showing how they may be rendered most productive of happiness ; to inquire into the causes of natural appear¬ ances, and hence arrive at the knowledge of the First Cause, under those characters and relations which are most interesting to mankind ; to con¬ duct men to such an acquaintance with the properties of natural bodies, and their reciprocal actions, as shall enable them to apply the objects around them to their own convenience ; and finally to assist them in inves¬ tigating the principles of social virtue, and to provide them with such rules of .conduct as arise from mutual convenience and interest, from the natural sentiments of justice and humanity, and from the voluntary en¬ gagements of civil society. Dialectics, physics, natural religion, ethics, and policy, are thus comprehended under the general term philosophy. How far this distribution agrees with the arrangements adopted by the ancients, and comprehends their several objects of philosophical discussion, will appear in the sequel. From this explanation of the sense in which w'e understand the term philosophy, the reader will easily perceive what is to be expected from the present undertaking. A history of philosophy is a history of doctrines, and of men. As a history of doctrines, it lays open the origin of opinions, the changes which they have undergone, the distinct characters of different systems, and the leading points in which they agree or differ : it is there¬ fore, in fact, a history of the human understanding. As a history of men, it relates the principal incidents in the lives of the more eminent philoso¬ phers ; remarks, particularly, those circumstances in their character or situation which may be supposed to have influenced their opinions ; takes notice of their followers and their opponents, and describes the origin, progress, and decline of their respective sects. In this manner we have undertaken to trace the history of philosophy, and philosophers, from the earliest records to the present time. The undertaking, we are sensible, is attended with many difficulties, and re¬ quires much industry and impartiality. That we might proce'ed in the execution of so extensive and arduous a design, with some probability of success, we have found it necessary to prescribe to ourselves certain rules and cautions, which we have invariably endeavoured to follow. Wherever original authors were to be obtained, we have carefully exa¬ mined them. In perusing these, we have considered, whether they deliver their own opinions, or merely relate the opinions of others ; attending all along to the general phraseology, and particularly to the technical terms made use of by the sect which they founded, or to which they belonged. We have, in the first place, endeavoured to discover the general principles on which each system is built, and then to trace out the particular con¬ clusions which have been deduced from these ; always preferring that interpretation of any doubtful passage which best agrees with the funda¬ mental principles and the spirit of the system. We have carefully remarked those personal circumstances, respecting any philosopher, which might serve to throw light upon his opinions ; such, for example, as his country. Ids family, his education, his natural temper, his habits of life, his patrons, B 2 4 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. friends, or enemies. In those cases, in which the founder of a sect has either left no writings behind him, or his works are lost, we have preferred the authority of his immediate followers, or of such as lived nearest his time, to the testimony of later writers. Well aware of the unpardonable liberties which have been taken, in imposing spurious books upon the world under the sanction of the most venerable names of antiquity, we have been constantly upon our guard against this kind of deception, and have rejected without hesitation, such writings as bear the evident marks of imposture.* In comparing the proofs of questionable facts, we have endeavoured to weigh them fairly in the scale of probability ; asserting or denying nothing with greater confidence than the nature of the evidence adduced will justify, and always suspending our judgment where we are uncertain ; and where means of information are wanting, confessing our ignorance. We have been particularly careful not to ascribe modern ideas and opinions to the ancients, nor to torture their expressions into a mean¬ ing which probably never entered into their thoughts, in order to accom¬ modate them to a modern hypothesis or system. Where we have found any doctrine imperfectly explained, or have met with any philosopher, who appears to have been himself defective in perspicuity of conception, or who, by making use of vague and indeterminate language, leaves his reader in uncertainty, we have rather chosen to let the veil of obscurity remain upon his system, than to substitute our own ideas in the room of the writer’s, from the hope of making that clear, which the author himself has left obscure. In fine, we have not neglected to make use of every collateral aid, which chronology, ecclesiastical history, or general litera¬ ture could afford. By observing these rules and precautions, we trust we have been enabled, in some measure, to rise superior to the difficulties of our undertaking. After all, however, we cannot but exceedingly regret that our sources of information are so defective, and the materials which they supply so im¬ perfect : — a circumstance which the reader will easily account for, when, besides the unavoidable injuries of time, he recollects how many famous libraries of ancient manuscripts have been destroyed by military plunder, or by the still more barbarous hand of religious bigotry. It is well known, that the celebrated collection which had been made by the Egyptian Ptolemies was consumed, through the ignorance and rashness of Julius Caesar’s soldiers ; that the public library which had been formed at Rome, in the palace of the Caesars, and was carefully preserved in a temple dedi¬ cated to Apollo, was destroyed by lightning ; that Pope Gregory issued a general order for burning all the Heathen writings which remained at Rome that when Alexandria was taken by Omer, the Saracen caliph, its immense library, which had been accumulating for several centuries, in a place distinguished for the study of philosophy, was consigned to the flames, and furnished fuel for heating the baths of the city for the space of six months and that Al-Manion, an Arabian, whose name is cele¬ brated for the protection which he afforded to learning and learned men, in order to give greater value to the translations which were at that time made, under his patronage, from the Greek tongue, destroyed the original manuscripts as soon as the Arabic or Latin version was finished. § The uses to which an impartial and accurate inquiry into the rise and * Vid. Fabricii Bibl. Graec. vol. xiv. p. 131. + Sarisberiensis Policrat. I. ii. p. 123. + Abulphar. Hist. Dynast, p. 114. § Leo Africanus de Viris Illustr. Arab. c. 1. apucl Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol.xiii. p. 260. Conf. Schelhornii Aincenit, t. vii. p. 75. ^ PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. progress of philosophy may be applied, and the advantages which are to be expected from it, are numerous and important. The history of philosophy is, as we have said, the history of the human understanding, clearly showing the extent of its capacity, the causes of its perversion, and the means by which it may be recalled from its unpro- titable wanderings, and successfully employed in subserviency to the happiness of mankind. Whilst it traces the origin and growth of useful knowledge, it also discovers the manner in which errors have arisen and been propagated, and exposes the injury which they have done to science, literature, and religion. It exhibits great and exalted minds as forsaking the path of truth, and adopting opinions at once the most absurd and the most pernicious : a representation which cannot fail to show the folly of placing an implicit confidence in the judgment of celebrated men, or of admitting any system as true before it has undergone an accurate exami¬ nation. Nor is there any hazard, as some suppose, lest such a freedom from the shackles of authority should produce a contempt of truly wise and learned men, and cherish the humour of conceit and vanity : for, an acquaintance with the mistakes and failures of men, who have unsuccess¬ fully employed great ingenuity and industry in the pursuit of truth, suggests a useful lesson of modesty and diffidence in our own inquiries, and of candour towards the mistakes of others. A clear detection of error, and of the sources whence it has sprung, furnishes facts to prove, that opinions which have no other foundation than weak misconception, a blind respect for authority or antiquity, or selfish attention to interest, may be embraced by multitudes as true ; and that, on the other hand, truths, which have been long rejected as idle paradoxes or pernicious principles, may at length lift up their heads, and triumph over prejudice : whence will naturally arise enlargement of mind, and a manly freedom of thinking. The history of philosophy may also be useful, as a faithful register of discoveries in the world of science, and as a skilful guide towards unknown regions, whither future adventurers may with advantage direct their course. It may serve to prevent the farther waste of precious time in speculations, which experience has shown to lie beyond the reach of the human facul¬ ties, and to give that prudent direction to philosophical industry, without which the boundaries of knowledge can never be enlarged. By showing how far science has been hitherto successfully prosecuted, and in what instances it has been treated injudiciously, inaccurately explained, or im¬ perfectly explored, it instructs men what is to be avoided, and what yet remains to be done, in the pursuit of knowledge ; puts them upon their guard against the repetition of attempts, which have already, in many instances, proved fruitless ; enables them to distinguish new doctrines, or discoveries from things already known and taught, and to strip off' the plumes from imposing plagiaries, and assist them in the choibe of a proper field of in¬ quiry, and in the regulation of their future speculations. An acquaintance with the history of philosophy, moreover, includes the knowledge of the general sources of science, of the names and characters of valuable authors, the subjects of their works, and the assistance which may be expected from them in scientific researches. The history of phi¬ losophy is, in this view, an important branch of the history of universal erudition, serving to introduce the young inquirer to an acquaintance with those silent preceptors, from whose instructions he may expect the daily increase of his intellectual stores. In several distinct branches of science, the history of philosophy may afford much assistance. In theology, it may be of great use, in discovering 6 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. tlie origin of natural religion, and tracing the course of its stream, even when united with the foul current of gentile idolatry ; in confirming the credit of sacred history by external testimony ; in ascertaining the limits between the province of reason and that of revelation, and in reflecting light upon many passages in sacred writings. In ecclesiastical history, it enables us to account for the early introduction of metaphysical subtleties into the Christian system, as well as the consequent corruption of the sim¬ plicity of its doctrine, and to explain the origin of many obscure tenets and idle fictions which have, at different periods, gained admission into the Church of Christ. In jurisprudence, it assists us in discovering the foundation of municipal law, by showing, that in every age of the world the principles of natural justice have been known, and that they have been admitted into every philosophical system, and received by every nation of the earth. It is particularly useful in the study of the civil law, many of the ideas and terras of which are borrowed from the Stoic philosophy. It might easily be shown, in like manner, that the history of philosophy casts light upon mathematics, medicine, and other sciences; but, in a matter so exceedingly obvious, a farther detail would be su¬ perfluous. To these benefits, which may be expected to accrue from a history of opinions, may be added others, of great importance, arising from the history of philosophers and sects. Besides the biographical entertainment and instruction which such memoirs may afford, they must contain much useful information peculiar to this branch of learning. To observe by what means they who have been engaged in the pursuit and propagation of knowledge have accomplished their design ; what obstacles they have overcome ; in what instances, and from \\hat causes, they have been im¬ posed upon by the semblance of truth, and have embraced the shadow for the substance ; into what mistakes they have fallen through prejudice, precipitation, or vanity ; what inconveniences they have suffered from their misconceptions and errors, and what advantages they have derived from their wisdom, with' other circumstances of a similar nature, cannot fail to suggest hints and reflections, which may be of great use in the pro¬ secution of science. Having said thus much to explain the nature of our design, the rules which we have prescribed to ourselves in the execution, and the advantages which are to be expected from a work of this kind, we have nothing further to add, in the way of introduction, than to give our readers a general view of our plan. The whole history of philosophy we divide into Three Periods. The period traces its rise and progress from the earliest times to the estab¬ lishment of the Roman empire. The second period represents its state among the Heathens, whilst it flourished under the emperors, which brings the history down to the sixth century ; and among the Jews, Saracens, and Christians, from the commencement of the Christian era to the time of the revival of letters. The third period relates the attempts which have since been made for the reformation and improvement of philosophy, and describes the various forms which it has assumed from the revival of letters to the present century. Thus the whole history of philosophy is con¬ veniently divided into ancient, middle, Q,n6.modern. In order to assist the memory, the utmost care has been taken to give each of these periods its distinct characters of time and place. The First period includes the Barbaric and the Grecian philosophy ; the former comprehending all those nations, which before tlie time when the PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS, >T Grecian philosophy passed over to the Romans, did not make use of the Greek language ; the latter, all those countries in which that language was spoken. We shall find, in treating of the Barbaric philosophy, that, as might be expected in the infancy of the world, it was simple in its nature and office, and was taught, without any laboured efforts of reasoning, merely by tradition. As knowledge advanced, philosophy assumed a more manly tone, and put on the habit of science; till, at length, it appeared with great dignity among the Greeks, the freedom of whose spirit and manners led them to lay open the mysteries of wisdom, and to make use of their own faculties in investigating new truths, and framing new systems. Our survey of the state of philosophy among the barbaric nations takes its rise, with respect to time, from the first records of history, and follows, with respect to place, the natural order of East, South, West, and North; an order which was followed by the ancients, who divided the inhabitants of the world into four parts, calling the inhabitants of the east, Indians ; those of the south, Ethiopians ; those of the west, Celts ; and those of the north, Scythians.* Among the eastern nations, our design will lead us to treat distinctly concerning the Hebrews, the Chaldeans, the Persians, the Arabians or Sabeans, the Phoenicians, and the Indians : our account of the southern barbaric nations will include the people of Egypt and Libya ; in the west, we shall take notice of the Celts or Gauls, the Germans, the Britons, and the ancient Romans ; and in the north, we shall treat of the Scythians, Thracians, and other neighbouring nations. The philosophy of Greece we shall find to have a double character. In its infancy, and in its juvenile state, we shall see it, like the barbaric phi¬ losophy, rather simple than artificial, rather empiric than theoretical, ex¬ pressed in fable, and in moral and political maxims or rules of prudence. Afterwards, we shall find the Greek philosophy, improved by the ingenuity of many eminent men, becoming systematic, and branching out into a great number of sects, of which a particular account will be given in this part of our work. To preserve this period entire, we have subjoined an account of the fate of the Grecian philosophy in Egypt and in Asia. The Second Period, from the beginning of the Roman Empire to the revival of letters, will open before us a field of philosophical history not less spacious than the former. It will exhibit the state of philosophy during the course of 1,200 years, among the Romans, the Orientalists, the Jews, the Saracens, and the Christians. With respect to the Romans, philosophy having met with much opposition when it was first introduced among them by the Greeks, did not obtain a firm footing till towards the close of the Republic. Under the Caesars, philosophy almost entirely deserted Athens, its native seat, and took up its residence in Rome, where almost every Grecian sect fiourished ; till at length, that which had been formed in the Alexandrian school, by combination from the rest, called the Eclectic, became predominant. Among the Asiatics a new kind of philosophy sprung up, formed upon the doctrine, real or supposed, of the ancient Zoroastrian and Greek mythology. The nation of the Jews, after their return from their Babylonish captivity, though they chiefiy devoted themselves to the study of their own law, were not strangers to the gentile philosophy, especially those of them who resided in Egypt ; and in a subsequent period, in which the Aristotelian philosophy was pre¬ dominant, they ranked themselves among the Peripatetics. The Arabians, * Pompon. Mela de Situ Orbis, 1. ii. c. I. Strabonis Geogr. 1. ii. 8 PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS. who, under the name of Saracens, in the seventh century, disturbed the Eastern empire, although at first exceedingly averse to inquiry, (Mahomet, their leader, having prudently denied the privilege of private judgment to the people whom he had destined to slavery,) became at last so much devoted to philosophy, according to the Peripatetic sect, that during a long period of general darkness and confusion, they were almost the only nation who afforded her an asylum. Among the first Christians who were industriously employed in disseminating the divine doctrine of their Master, the subtleties of gentile philosophy obtained little credit. But, very soon after the rise of Christianity, many persons who had been educated in the schools of the philosophers becoming converts to the Chris¬ tian faith, the doctrines of the Grecian sects, and especially of Platonism, were interwoven with the simple truths of pure religion. As the Eclectic philosophy spread. Heathen and Christian doctrines were still more inti¬ mately blended, till at last both were almost entirely lost in the thick clouds of ignorance and barbarism, which covered the earth ; except that the Aristotelian philosophy had a few followers among the Greeks, and Platonic Christianity was cherished in the cloisters of monks. About the beginning of the eleventh century, a new kind of philosophy sprung up, called the Scholastic, which, while it professed to follow the doctrine of Aristotle, corrupted every principle of sound reasoning, and hindered, instead of assisting, men in their inquiries after truth. At length, learning beginning to revive, and to be disseminated by the Greeks, who after the taking of Constantinople were dispersed through Europe, a happy oppor¬ tunity was afforded for restoring philosophy to its ancient honours. This resurrection of literature and science is the commencement of the Third Period of our history. In this part of our course we shall see the successful efforts of philosophy to rise above the unwholesome atmo¬ sphere of tyranny, superstition, and bigotry, into the pure regions of freedom and truth ; we shall find the several ancient sects reviving, new and better methods of philosophising discovered, the chains of authority in some measure shaken off, and farther advances made in true philosophy, within the course of a single century, than had before been made in a thousand years. To the general history of these three periods of philosophy will be added, by way of Appendix, a brief sketch of the progress and present state of philosophy in the Indies and among the Chinese. 9 BOOK 1. OF BARBARIC PHILOSOPHY. CHAPTER L OF BARBARIC PHILOSOPHY IN GENERAL. The term Barbarian was applied by the Greeks* to all those nations who spoke a language different from their own. We shall adopt the obvious division which arises from this signification of the term ; and, in treating of the First Period of the history of philosophy /rom the earliest records of the world to the heginning of the Roman Empire.^ we shall first inquire into the state of philosophy, during that period, among barbaric nations, and then trace its rise and progress in the states of Greece. It has long been a subject of dispute, whether philosophy first appeared among the Barbarians, or among the Greeks. The inhabitants of Greece, who were very early remarkable for literary and philosophical vanity, and soon learned to make use of an artificial method of philosophising, were unwilling to allow that philosophy had any existence in other countries, except where it had been borrowed from them. They could not persuade themselves, that the mere communication of precepts of wisdom in the simple form of tradition, and in languages harsh and dissonant compared with their own, could deserve to be called philosophising. On the other hand, the barbaric nations, in their turn, treated the Greeks as Barbarians, and looked upon them as children in philosophy. Plato, in his Timaeus, introduces a Barbarian as instructing the wise Solon, and saying, “ You Greeks are always children ; there is not an old man among you : you have no such thing as grey-headed wisdom.” They were the more con¬ firmed in this persuasion when they understood that the most learned men, and the most ancient philosophers among the Greeks, had either been Barbarians by birth, or instructed by Barbarians ;j' that Pythagoras, for example, was a Tuscan, Antisthenes a Phrygian, Orpheus a Thracian, Thales a Phoenician ; and that Thales, Pythagoras, Plato, and others, had derived their knowledge from Chaldean and Egyptian priests. Many of the Christian fathers espoused, in this dispute, the cause of the Barbarians, and maintained, with great vehemence, and with all the learning they could command, that the barbaric philosophy was the fountain of all the wisdom that had appeared among the Greeks, except so far as they had been indebted, in the way of tradition, to divine reve¬ lation. In this question, as it frequently happens in controversy, from a want of distinct ideas, and an accurate use of terms, many things foreign to the argument were advanced. If the meaning of the term Philosophy had been correctly settled ; if the infant state of knowledge had been distin¬ guished from its more advanced age ; and especially, if due attention had been paid to the essential difference between communicating doctrines by mere authority, and investigating the principles, relations, and causes of things by diligent study, the whole dispute would soon have been found to be nothing more than a logomachy. Ovid. Trist. 1. v. el. 10. v. 37. t Clem. Alex. Stromata, 1. i. p. 302, 303. 10 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. For no one would assert, that the barbaric nations were wholly inatten¬ tive to wisdom, or strangers to every kind of knowledge, human or divine. On the other side, it cannot be questioned that they became possessed of knowledge rather by simple reflection than by scientific investigation, and that they transmitted it to posterity rather by tradition than by de¬ monstration. Whereas, the Greeks, as soon as they began to be civilized, discovered a general propensity to inquiry, and made use of scientific rules and methods of reasoning. Hence it is easy to perceive, that though the improvement of philosophy is to be ascribed to the Greeks, its origin is to be sought for* among the barbaric nations.^ CHAPTER H. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ANCIENT HEBREWS. Among the barbaric nations (using the term barbaric in the sense before explained) the most ancient people, concerning whom any au¬ thentic records remain, are the Hebrews. We shall inquire into the state )/ of philosophy among this people, from the earliest period of their history to the time of their return from their Babylonish captivity ; after which, the Jewish philosophy will be more properly considered in connexion with the Grecian. From the praises which are bestowed, in the Jewish history, upon some of their more illustrious ancestors, patriarchs, prophets, and princes, some have been induced to place them upon a level, in respect of speculative wisdom, with the philosophers of Greece, and even with those of modern ^ times. But that this is a misconception, must be evident to every one who recollects the state of science, and of general civilization at that early period. A better or more certain judgment concerning the wisdom of the ancient Hebrews cannot be formed, than from the monuments which they themselves, or their descendants, have left in the sacred Scriptures. Much greater credit, particularly in this instance, is due to domestic_than to foreign testimony ; for the Jewish historians had their information, concerning the ancient state of their nation, from records preserved with the utmost care by their ancestors ; whereas other writers, in speaking of a people who had little intercourse with their neighbours, for want of a better guide than vague report, must necessarily have given a precipitate, and often an erroneous judgment. We learn from the Scriptures, that among the ancient Hebrews there were many eminent men, who made use of the elear light of divine truth, with which they were favoured by Heaven, as their guide in the conduct of life. In practical and moral wisdom it cannot be doubted that they held a place of high distinction. Their wisdom, however, must not be '' confounded with philosophy, in the strict acceptation of the term. Blessed with a divine revelation, they have transmitted to posterity rays of sacred truth, which have been spread through the world ; and they have hence * Tatian. in procera. Clem. Al. Strom. 1. i. p. 302. Origen adv. Celsum, 1. i. p. 5. Ed. Hoeshel. f Consult also, upon the subject of this chapter, Beausobre Hist, du Manicheisme, р. ii. 1. i. c. 2. Scaliger, Exerc. li. contra Cardan, p. 188. Bos Animadv. ad Script. с. ii. p. 12. Heuman. Act. Phil. v. ii. p. 204. Heurnii Ant. Phil. Barb. Ed. Lugd. Bat. 1600. Chap. 2. OF THE HEBREWS! 11 obtained an immortal name in an order of higher dignity than that of v philosophers. Under the direction of genuine principles of religion, they pursued the plain path of simple virtue, without being led astray by vain curiosity into fruitless speculations. In the first ages of their history, their patriarchs were shepherds, who, by their domestic virtues, obtained great authority over the people among whom they lived, and seem to have had no other object of ambition, than that of providing for the safety and prosperity of their families. Joseph, the son of Jacob, and after him Moses, David, Solomon, Ezra, and other eminent men, were occupied in affairs of legislation and government, and, by the wisdom with which they conducted them, acquired high renown. Others, who were distinguished by the name of prophets, were employed in declaring to the people the will of God, in managing the affairs of religion, and in training up disciples for these sacred services. Among the Hebrews we are therefore to look , for prudent statesmen, upright judges, and priests learned in the law; but i not for philosophers, in the limited sense in which we understand the term. Much pains has indeed been taken, both by Jewish and Christian writers, to affix this character to several illustrious names in the ancient Hebrew nation, particularly Moses, Solomon, and Daniel ; but it will not be diffi¬ cult to prove that this has been attempted without sufficient reason. Upon the authority of Philo,* and other Jewish writers, it is asserted by Clemens Alexandrinus,'|- Justin Martyr, j; Origen, § and other Chris¬ tian fathers, that Moses reached the summit of human learning ; and he is represented as having been a perfect master of astronomy, geometry, music, medicine, occult philosophy, and, in short, of the whole circle of the arts and sciences which were at that time known ; and this opinion, like many others, has been received, without much examination, in later times. The principal arguments by which it has been supported are, that St. Stephen speaks of him|| as having been “learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians that a general tradition to this purpose has prevailed among the Jews from the most ancient times ; that in reducing Aaron’s golden calf to powder,^ he showed great chemical skill; that his account of the creation discovers an extensive acquaintance with nature; and that his laws abound with moral wisdom. To this it has been added, that Moses, during the forty days in which he was upon the mount with God, besides the written code, received also an oral or traditionary law, since called the Cabbala, and that he taught this concealed doctrine to persons selected out of all the tribes of Israel, by whom they were transmitted to posterity. Some have even asserted that he wrote books, now lost, from which Pythagoras and Plato drew a great part of their doctrine : the authority of Eusebius has often been quoted in support of this assertion, in a passage** where he mentions, on the credit of Jewish tradition, several theological and philosophical tenets of Moses ; and amongst the rest, his opinion concerning the immortality of the soul. With respect to the evidence from testimony on this subject, it is easy to see that it may all be traced up to Philo, who will have little credit Avith those who remark, how exactly he has adapted his account of the opinions of Moses to the philosophy of the times in which he lived, and how egregiously he mistakes, in supposing learned men to have come from Greece, at a period when Greece was in a state of barbarism. The judgment of Clemens Alexandrinus, and other Christian fathers, upon this * De Vila Mosis, p. 604'. De Mundi opificio, p. 2. f Strom. 1. i. p. 343. J Quest. 25. ad Orthod. § Advers. Celsum, 1. i. p. 14. || Acts. vii. 22. Exod. xxxii. 20. Deut. ix. 21. ** Demon. Evang. 1. iii. c. 2. OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. V2 question, is of little weight: for they were induced to accommodate their idea of the wisdom of Moses to the model of the Greek philosophy, by an opinion, which they took up without examination from the Jews, that all the genuine wisdom which was found among the Heathens, had passed over to them from the Hebrews, and was originally derived from divine revelation. Little stress is to be laid upon the account given of Moses by St. Stephen, since the learning which he ascribes to him was only that of the Egyptians at the time when he flourished, which, as we shall after¬ wards see, was confined within v’^ery narrow limits. The skill which Moses discovered in the affair of Aaron’s golden calf was probably not chemical, as many have supposed, but merely mechanical ; for nothing further can with certainty be inferred from the Scripture account of this transaction, than that Moses ordered the calf, which had been made an object of idolatry, to be cut into small pieces, and thrown into an adjoining river, whence the Israelites were, at that time, supplied with water ; probably, that, as often as they should fetch water from this stream, they might be reminded of their offence. In delivering laws and institutions to the Jews, Moses is to be considered, not as a philosopher, but in the higher character of minister and representative of Jehovah, by whose immediate authority their nation was governed. As to the traditionary law, which the Jewish writers supposed to have been the ground of their Cabbala, if it were not a mere invention of later times, it must have been given by divine reve¬ lation, and can furnish no argument in defence of the philosophy of Moses. Much less can any argument, for this purpose, be derived from writings which are confessedly lost, and which have not been proved to have ever existed. Solomon, in the Jewish Scriptures, has the first place assigned him among the wise men of the East. But the later Jewish writers, not satisfied with this general encomium, have advanced the most extravagant assertions concerning his wisdom. They have not scrupled to say, that Aristotle pillaged his doctrine from the writings of Solomon. A bold assertion of this kind might have been endured from a people, whose vanity has always been equal to their ignorance ; but that learned men of later times should adopt so absurd an opinion, is truly wonderful. Yet an English writer, of no mean name in the republic of letters,* * * § has main¬ tained, that Aristotle and Theophrastus learnt natural history ; Hippo¬ crates, medicine ; the Stoics, ethics ; and Pythagoras and Plato the symbolical philosophy, from Solomon. Others have supposed him to have known the use of the mariner’s compass, f and to have been ac¬ quainted with the doctrine of the circulation of the blood,J and with other anatomical discoveries. And Pineda, a Jesuit,§ has gone so far as to ascribe to Solomon the perfect knowledge of every modern as well as ancient science. Upon all this it is sufficient to remark, that had Solomon been thus wonderfully enlightened, it must have been by divine revelation, and not by philosophy ; and that the wisdom which is attributed to him in Scripture II was not speculative science, but that practical wisdom which was necessary to qualify him for the offices of government. Daniel takes the next place among the wise men of Israel. From the particulars related concerning him in the book which bears his name, some have concluded that he was an eminent teacher of the Chaldean philosophy, * Gale Phil, gener. sect. 8. f Fuller’s Sacred Miscell. b. iv. ch. 19. t Corn. Bontekoe de Vit. hum. p. ii. sect. 10. Witsii Miscell. Sac. t. ii. ex. 13. sect. 24. § De Rebus Solom. Mogunt. 1613. II 1 Kings iii. 9 — 11. iv. 29. Chap. 2. OF THE HEBREWS. 13 and a great master of all the wisdom of the East. It has even been said tliat he was acquainted with the whole circle of Aristotelian learning.* All this, however, is founded upon mere conjecture ; for we have no cer¬ tain information concerning this prophet except from his own writings ; and these only relate, in general terms, that he was well furnished with that kind of wisdom, which served to obtain him influence, and procure him esteem and confidence, in the court of Babylon, and that, besides this, he was endowed with miraculous powers from heaven. Jn the history of the Jews, frequent mention is made of their prophets ; and a great part of the Jewish Scriptures consist of prophecies; but these prophets appear in no other light than as good men supernaturally illumi¬ nated, for the purposes of instructing and admonishing the Jewish people, and predicting the great events which were to befall them. We are also informed, that there were, among the Hebrews, schools, in which the prophets presided, and gave instruction to their disciples ; but we are not A to imagine that these schools were colleges of philosophers, or, as some have done,t to apply our modern idea of academical life to these institu¬ tions. As the prophets were employed in delivering the will of God to the people, and in inculcating upon them the principles, and inspiring them with the sentiments of religion, by means of sacred hymns accom¬ panied with music, so it was, doubtless, the business of the schools to train up young men who were devoted to the priesthood for the same offices. The account which the sacred writings give of the schools of the prophets in Kirjath-jearim and Ramoth-Gilead, is far from conveying any idea of a philosophical seat of learning. We do not mean to assert that the ancient Hebrews were destitute of learning ;§ we only maintain that it was of a very different kind from that philosophy which we meet with in later ages. Their learned men were chiefly occupied in explaining the Mosaic law, and in inculcating principles of religion, and precepts of >( morality, drawn from the pure fountain of divine revelation. The sacred Odes or Psalms of David afford an excellent specimen of Hebrew learn¬ ing. They every where breathe the spirit of sublime piety, but discover no traces of abstract philosophy. We shall conclude our view of the state of philosophy among the Hebrews in the words of an eminent English writer : — “ It is well known that the Hebrews never excelled in mathematical or philosophical learning, or liberal arts, nor were ever distinguished by any ingenious discoveries. Whence Apollonius passes this severe judgment upon them, that they are to be ranked among the most stupid Barbarians, and are perhaps the only people who have never produced any single invention. Their ancient ^ institutions, called Schools of the Prophets, were not so much intended for the purpose of instruction in the circle of the sciences, after the manner of modern schools, as for that of training up youth for discharging the prophetic and priestly functions. No nation or country, upon the face of the earth, has abounded so much with prophets and inspired men : one might almost imagine that some divine virtue resided even in the soil and climate of Judea.” ll * Horn. Hist. Phil. 1. v. c. 20. Huet. Dem. Ev. Pr. iv. p. 278. t Altingii Hist. Ebr. Acad. p. 281. t 1 Sam. x. 5. xix. 18. 2 Kings ii. 3 — 5. § I Kingsiv. 11. II T. Burnetii Archaeologia, Phil. 1. i. c. 7. Joseph, contr. Apion, 1. ii. Videncl. Albert. Fabricii Cod. Vet. T. Buddaei Hist. Phil. Hebr. Spencer, de Legibus Hebr. Dickinson. Phys. Vet. c. xx. Altingii Hist. Acad. Heb. Witsius de Prophetis. Hornii Hist, Phil. 1. v. Galaei Phil. Gent. 1. i. Mali Diss. de Phil. Job. Recinan. Ant. Lit. Algypt. 1. i. Bauingarten’s notes on Ant. Univ. History, v.i. note 327. H OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. CHAPTER III. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CHALDEANS. Among the Eastern nations, the most ancient people next to the He¬ brews, who appear to have been acquainted with philosophy, (using the term in its more relaxed sense,) are the Chaldeans. For, although the Egyptians have claimed the honour of being the more ancient nation, and contended that the Chaldeans were an Egyptian colony, and consequently derived all their learning from Eg5'pt, there is reason to believe* * * § that the kingdom of Babylon, of which Chaldea was a part, flourished before the Egyptian monarchy : whence it is probable, that, with respect to know¬ ledge, the Egyptians were rather indebted to the Chaldeans, than the Chal¬ deans to the Egyptians. There is little room, however, to doubt that Chaldea had, from the most remote times, its own preceptors, and was not indebted for its wisdom -j- to any other country. There were, it must be owned, amongst the Chaldeans themselves, fabulous accounts of the antiquity of their learning. When Alexander became possessed of Babylon, Aristotle, who was desirous of making the Asiatic expedition subservient to philosophy, requested Callisthenes to inform himself concerning the origin of science in Chaldea, for at that time the Chaldeans boasted that their ancestors had continued their astro¬ nomical observations through a period of 470,000 years. J Callisthenes, through the interest of Alexander, examined into the grounds of this report, and found that the Chaldean observations reached no farther back¬ ward than 1903 years. If this term be subtracted from 4383, the year of the Julian period in which Babylon was taken, these observations will appear to have commenced in the year of the Julian period 2480, or 2234 years before the Christian era. And even these are not mentioned by Ptolemy, who takes notice of no Chaldean observations prior to the Nabo- nasserian era which commenced in the 3967th of the Julian period, or before Christ 747 years. Nevertheless, the great antiquity of the Chal¬ dean learning cannot be disputed. Aristotle, § on the credit of the most ancient records, speaks of the Chaldean Magi as prior to the Egyptian priests, who, it is well known, cultivated learning before the time of Moses. The history of the Chaldean or Babylonian philosophy is, from its great antiquity, necessarily involved in much uncertainty. The only remaining- records, which can cast any light upon the subject, we owe, not to the Chaldeans themselves, but to other nations, chiefly the Greeks, whose genius was not adapted to the oriental learning, and whose vanity fre¬ quently led them into misrepresentations in their accounts of barbaric nations. Add to this, that in consequence of the symbolical mode of instruction made use of by the Chaldeans, their doctrines have been trans¬ mitted to posterity under a veil of obscurity, which it is now become ex¬ tremely difficult to remove. The difficulty was greatly increased by a race of philosophers, who, about the beginning of the Christian era, in order to obtain credit for certain wild and extravagant doctrines of their own, passed them upon the world as the ancient wisdom of the Chaldeans * Pompon. Mela de Situ Orbis, 1. i. c. 9. p. 21. ed. Gron. Plin. N. Hist. 1. v. c. 9. f Conf. Diodor. Sicul. 1. ii. t Porphyr. apud Simplic. Comment, in Aristot. de Coelo, 1. ii. Cicero de Divin. 1. i. § Apud Laert. 1. i. sect. 8. Chap. 3. OF THE CHALDEANS. 15 and Persians, in spurious books, which they ascribed to Zoroaster, or some other eastern philosopher. Thus the fictions of these impostors became confounded with the genuine dogmas of the ancient eastern nations. And the industry of modern critics has done little towards removing these diffi¬ culties ; for either they have not attended to the causes of uncertainty which have been enumerated, or they have suffered themselves to be imposed upon by forged writings ; or they have given credit to the falla¬ cious pretences of the Arabian writers, who have boasted that they had, in their language, the exclusive possession of many valuable treasures of ancient learning. All that can be related, with any tolerable degree of probability, concerning the Chaldean philosophy, may be comprised within a small compass. The Chaldean philosophers were the priests of the Babylonian nation, who instructed the people in the principles of religion, interpreted its laws, and conducted its ceremonies. They sustained the same character with the Persian Magi, afterwards to be noticed, and are often confounded with them by the Greek historians. Like the priests in most other ancient nations, they employed religion in subserviency to the ruling powers, and made use of imposture to serve the purposes of civil policy. This is con¬ firmed by the general testimony of ancient history, and by the express authority of the historian Diodorus Siculus, who relates,* that they pre¬ tended to predict future events by divination, to explain prodigies, and interpret dreams, and to avert evils, or confer benefits, by means of augury and incantations. They retained, for many ages, a principal place among diviners. In the reign of Marcus Antoninus, when the emperor and his army, who were perishing with thirst, were suddenly relieved by a shower, the prodigy was ascribed to the power and skill of the Chaldean soothsayers, f No wonder that, as long as these Chaldean priests could perform such marvels, they retained their consequence in the courts of princes. The principal instrument which these impostors employed in support of superstition was astrology. The Chaldeans were probably the first people who made regular observations upon the heavenly bodies. J This kind of knowledge w^as in such high estimation among them, that a distinct order of men was appointed for this purpose, and supported at the public expense ;§ whence the appellation of Chaldean afterwards became syno¬ nymous with that of astronomer. But all their observations were applied to the single purpose of establishing the credit of judicial astrology ; and they employed their pretended skill in this art in calculating nativities, foretelling the weather, predicting good and bad fortune, 1| and other practices usual with impostors of this class. Teaching the vulgar that all human affairs are influenced by the stars, and professing to be acquainted with the nature and laws of this influence, and consequently to possess a power of prying into futurity, they encouraged much idle superstition, and many fraudulent practices. Hence other professors of these mischievous arts were afterwards called Chaldeans, and the arts themselves were called Babylonian arts. Among the Romans, these impostors were so trouble¬ some, that it was found necessary, during the time of the Republic, to issue an edict, ^ requiring the Chaldeans, or mathematicians, (for they were * L. ii. p. 81. Compare Dan. ii. 1, &c. Ecclus. xliv. 3. Vid. Just. Mart. Cohort, ad Gent. p. 12. -f- Lamprid. in Heliogab. c. 9. Claudian. in vi. Consul. Honor. X Cic. de Divin. 1. i. Strabo,' 1. xv. § Arrian. Exp. 1. vii. c. 16. II Sextus Empir. adv. Matth. 1. v. sec. 2. Aulus Gellius, 1. xiv. c. 1. Strabo, 1. c. ^ Valer. Maxim. 1. i. c. .I. Diod. Sic. 1. xvii. p. 622. Sueton. in Tiber. 16 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. commonly known by this latter appellation,) to depart from Rome and Italy within ten days ; and afterwards, under the emperors, these sooth¬ sayers were put under the most severe interdiction. Still farther to lay open the true character of the Chaldean philosophy, it must be remarked, that it consisted, not in a free and diligent examina¬ tion of the nature of things, but in the bare transmission of certain settled opinions from father to son. Diodorus Siculus (who herein shows how little he himself was entitled to the character of a philosopher) commends the Chaldeans for having taken up their opinions upon the authority of their ancestors, and says, “ that, in this respect, they acted much more wisely than the Greeks, who, addicting themselves to disputation, were ever ready to embrace new opinions, and thus oblige their disciples to wander through their whole lives in perpetual uncertainty.”* Whether the Grecian method of proceeding, or the Chaldean, was most likely to lead to the discovery of truth, it can require no extraordinary sagacity to discover. But, for the purpose for which the Chaldean philosophy appears to have been chiefly instituted, no mode of philosophising could have been better chosen. Their mysteries were to be revealed only to a select few, and to be studiously concealed from the multitude, that a veil of sanctity might be cast over their doctrine, which would, by this means, be the more easily employed in the support of civil and religious tyranny. Another circumstance, which greatly contributed to produce the same effect was the care which was taken by the Chaldean priests to prevent the spread of religious and philosophical knowledge among the people. Instead of teaching their doctrines promiscuously to all who were disposed to receive it, after the manner of the Greeks, they confined it to a certain tribe and district. Instead of communicating important truths to the people in intelligible language, they gave forth their dogmas under the veil of symbols ; hereby always reserving to themselves a power of vary¬ ing the popular system, according to the exigencies of the times, or the pleasure of the ruling powers, without danger of detection. The implicit credit which, by these artifices, the Chaldean priests obtained among the people is particularly remarked by Juvenal.-j- Chaldseis sed major erit fiducia ; quicquid Dixerit astrologus, credent a fonte relatum Ammonis, quoniam Delphis oracula cessant, Et genus humanum dainnat caligo futuri. (a) From this account of the Chaldeans, it is easy to perceive what title they had to the appellation of wise men. No one, who has a just idea of the nature and use of philosophy, can hesitate in dismissing them from the rank of philosophers, to their proper station among impostors. What¬ ever share of knowledge they possessed, it is evident that they applied it to the purposes of superstition. Little regard is, therefore, due to the encomiums which some ancient writers, particularly Philo,+ have passed upon this race of sages 5 and still less to the general admiration, which, at a very early period, they obtained in the East ; for it is easy to perceive, • L. ii. p. 81. f Sat. vi. 552. («) More credit, yet, is to Chaldeans given ; What they foretel is deem’d the voice of Heaven : Their answers as from Ammon’s altar come; Since now the Delphian oracles are dumb, And mankind, ignorant of future fate. Believes what fond astrologers relate. Dryden, I De Nominum Mutat. Op, p. 1016. Chap. 3. OP THE CHALDEANS. 17 that this was the natural effect of the successful practice of the arts of imposture among an ignorant and credulous people. Omnia enim stolidi magis admirantur amantque Inversis quae sub verbis latitantia cernunt. (a) It is not, however, to be inferred, from what * is known of the manner in which philosophy was taught and propagated by the Chaldeans, that there was among them no variety of opinions. We learn, from the au¬ thority of Strabo "j- and Pliny, J which is confirmed by the testimony of the Jewish prophets, § that there were, in Assyria and Chaldea, different schools or sects. But the accounts which we have of these sects are so general and imperfect, that they will scarcely authorise us to do more than give it as a probable opinion that they differed from each other chiefly in the mode of practising the arts of divination and astrology, and that their knowledge of nature extended little farther than to the discovery of the supposed magical uses of certain natural bodies, particularly minerals and herbs. 1| Whatever were the tenets, or the institutions of each sect, they were implicitly transmitted from father to son ; and it was seldom known that the followers of one sect revolted to another. It is universally acknowledged by the ancients that Zoroaster was the founder of the Chaldean philosophy. But learned industry has in vain attempted to draw aside the veil of obscurity, which covers this celebrated name. “ The accounts which have been given of him,’’ says Fabricius, ^ “ are so confused and contradictory, that it would be a task of much greater labour than profit to compare them.” The uncertainty which neces¬ sarily arises from the remote antiquity of the Chaldean history has been greatly increased, in part by the absurd attempts of the Greek writers to trace a resemblance between their own learning and religion, and that of the eastern nations, and in part from the vanity of the Persians and Arabians, who have pretended to derive their religion from the Chaldean Zoroaster, and have supported the pretence by many extravagant fictions. No greater uncertainty, however, attends the history of Zoroaster than has attended that of other ancient heroes and wise men, who were the first authors of civilisation, or inventors of arts and sciences; with respect to whom it is now scarcely possible to separate the real incidents of their lives from the fables with which they are involved. For this uncertainty several causes may be assigned. These renowned benefactors of mankind lived at a period in which ignorance and barbarism universally prevailed. To raise men from this savage state to rational and civilised life ; to form them into communities ; to afford them the protection of laws and government ; and to furnish them with the conveniences and benefits arising from arts and sciences, w'ere the important objects of their labours. The ignorant and superstitious multitude, from a sense of obliga¬ tion to such benefactors, have readily admitted the claims which, for the sake of establishing their authority, they have made to supernatural powers, and, after their death, have delivered their names and actions to posterity, surrounded with all the fictitious lustre of imaginary divinity. Nor have there been wanting artful men, who have accommodated this superstitious humour in the multitude to their own benefit, or that of the state, by in¬ venting many fables concerning these illustrious men, and by passing their (a) Whate’er the mystic phrase hides from their sight, The crowd -of fools admire, with fond delight. * Lucretius, I. i. v. 642. f L. xvi. p. 509. X Hist. Nat. 1. vi. c. 26, § Dan. i. 20; ii. 2, 27; iv. 4. || Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. xxxvii. c. 10. Tf Bibl. Graec. vol. i. p. 246, 247. C 18 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. own opinions or writings upon the world under the sanction of their names. The uncertainty has been farther increased by the contention which has arisen among different nations concerning their descent, each claiming them as their own, and advancing every thing, whether true or false, which could serve to support the claim. From these causes, it has become im¬ possible to distinguish truth from fiction, in reports W’hich have flowed down to the present time through so long a channel of imposture. Many examples will occur in the course of this work which will serve to illustrate these remarks, but none more striking than that of Zoroaster. Concerning Zoroaster, it is wholly uncertain whence the name is derived, or to how many eminent men it belonged. Some have maintained that there was but one Zoroaster, and that he was a Persian.* Others have said that there were six eminent founders of philosophy of this name. Ham the son of Noah, Moses, Osiris, Mithras, and others, both gods and men, have by different writers been asserted to have been the same with Zoroaster, f Many different opinions have also been advanced concerning the time in which he flourished. Aristotle and Pliny J fix his date at so remote a period as 6000 years before the death of Plato: Hermippus says that he lived 5000 years before the Trojan war: idle tales, which are, doubtless, to be classed with the report of the Chaldeans, concerning the antiquity of their astronomical observations. According to Laertius, § he flourished 600 years before the Trojan war; according to Suidas, || 500. If, in the midst of so much uncertainty, any thing can be advanced with the appearance of probability, it seems to be this ; that there was a Zoroaster, a Perso-Median, who flourished about the time of Darius Hystaspes, and that besides him there was another Zoroaster, who lived in a much more remote period among the Babylonians, and taught them astronomy. The Greek and Arabian writers are agreed concerning the existence of the Persian Zoroaster ; and the ancients unanimously ascribe to a philosopher, whom they call Zoroaster, the origin of the Chaldean astronomy, which is certainly of much earlier date than the time of Hystaspes : it seems therefore necessary to suppose a Chaldean Zoroaster distinct from the Persian. Concerning this Zoroaster, however, nothing more is known, than that he flourished towards the beginning of the Babylonish empire, and was the father of the Chaldean astrology and magic.^ The magic which Zoroaster invented was probably nothing more than the performance of certain religious ceremonies, by means of which good demons were supposed to be prevailed upon to communicate supernatural properties and powers to herbs, stones, and other natural bodies, or to afford assistance, in other miraculous ways, to those who invoked them. ** In war, it w'as supposed that by the help of magic, the forces of an enemy might be routed, or an army struck with a general panic, as is said to have happened to Ninus in his war with the Bactrians. -j"!- In this art the kings of Chaldea and Persia were instructed, as one of the most useful instru¬ ments of government among a people whose ignorance and credulity ren¬ dered them proper subjects of imposture. For “ barbarous nations are naturally prone to superstition ; and a weak, illiterate, and fickle multitude, * Hyde de Rel. Pers. c. 24;. p. 308. Prideaux’s Connexion, vol. i. p. 318. Vid. Fabric. Bibliotli. Grsec. vol. i. p. 24;3, 246. Huet. Detn. Evang. pr. 4. c. 5. Kircher CEdip. Egypt, p. 216. J Plin. Hist. N. 1. xxx. c. 1. § Lib. i. sect. 2. || In voc. Zoroast. ^ Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. vii. c. 16. xi. 42. xxx. 1. Justin, l.i. c. 2. Recognitiones dementis, 1. iv. c. 27. ** Platon Alcib. i. Ficin in Argument. Cratyli. Bayle, Zoroast. -ft Diod. Sic. 1. ii. c. 6. Chap. 3. OF THE CHALDEANS. 19 when they are once brought under its dominion, will be more obedient to their priests than to their civil or military leaders.” * The Chaldean magic was then a very different thing from a knowledge of the real properties of bodies ; and, though some acquaintance with the motions of the heavenly bodies was necessary for astrological calculations, it cannot be inferred, either from their magical or astrological arts, that the Chaldeans were emi¬ nent masters in any branch of natural science. All the writings which have been ascribed to the Chaldean Zoroaster are unquestionably spurious. Amongst the Chaldean philosopher^ we must not omit to mention Belus and Berosus. Of Belus nothing farther is known, than that he promoted the study of astronomy among the Assyrians, probably with no other view than to encourage that faith in astrological predictions which he knew how to apply to political purposes. It is related, f that Serairamis erected a lofty tower to his memory, which the Chaldeans afterwards made use of as an astronomical observatory. After his death, Belus was honoured with a place among the divinities, and this was, probably, the origin of the fables which are found concerning him in the Grecian mythology. The history of Berosus is of later date, and is better known. He lived before Manetho, who wrote concerning the affairs of Chaldea under Ptolemy Philadelphus ; he probably flourished about the time of Alex¬ ander. I He was a Babylonian, a priest of Belus. Going into Asia Minor, he settled in the island of Cos, where he opened a school for teaching the Chaldean astrology, and obtained such reputation by his pre¬ dictions, § that his statue was erected at Athens. He published a history of the Chaldeans, which contained many memorials of ancient times ; but this work, except a few fragments preserved by other writers, || is lost. An impudent monk, Annius, of Viterbo in Tuscany, who employed him¬ self in forging books which he ascribed to the ancients, obtruded upon the world a fictitious history of the Chaldeans, under the name of Berosus, which obtained greater credit among the learned than might have been expected. Notwithstanding the obscurity with which antiquity has covered the Chaldean philosophy, it has been highly extolled not only by the Orien¬ talists and Greeks, but by Jewish and Christian writers. But if we have recourse only to such authorities as are unquestionably genuine, we shall find little, in this branch of the barbaric philosophy, deserving of notice. The following brief detail includes the most interesting particulars which 1 are known concerning the tenets, and the magical and astrological arts, of the ancient Chaldeans. It appears not only from the testimony of Diodorus, but from other , ancient authorities collected by Eusebius,** that the Chaldeans believed in God, the Lord and Parent of all, by whose providence the world is governed. And indeed, without this it is impossible to conceive how their religious rites should ever have risen ; for the immediate object of these rites was a supposed race of spiritual beings or demons, whose ex¬ istence could not have been imagined without first conceiving the idea of a Supreme Being, the source of all intelligence. Accordingly we find in fact, that not only the Chaldeans, but the Egyptians, and the whole heathen world, from the most remote times, believed in a Supreme Diety, ' * Plutarch, in Sertorio. f Died. Sic. 1. ii. p. 69. Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. vi. c. 26. + Tatianus Adv. Grtec. c. 58. p. 171. Ed. Par. Syncelli Chronicon, p. 14, 28, 40. ' ' § Vitruvius, 1. ix. c. 4. || Fabricius, Bibl. Gr. vol, xiv. p. 175. ^ Loc. cit. ** Prep. Evan. 1. iv. c. 5. 20 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. the fountain of all the divinities which they supposed to preside over the several parts of the material world. This was the true origin of all religious worship, however idolatrous, not excepting even that which consisted in paying divine honours to the memory of dead men. Besides the Supreme Being, the Chaldeans supposed spiritual beings to exist, of several orders ; gods, demons, heroes : these they probably divided into subordinate classes, as their practice of theurgy, or magic, required. The ancient eastern nations in general, and among the rest the Chaldeans, admitted the ex¬ istence of certain evil spirits, clothed in a vehicle of grosser matter ; and in subduing or counteracting these, they placed a great part of the efficacy of their religious incantations.* These doctrines were the mysteries of the Chaldean religion communi¬ cated, as was usual among the ancients, only to the initiated. Their popular religion consisted in the worship of the sun, moon, planets, and stars, as divinities ; -j- after the general practice of the East. J The religious system of the Chaldeans gave rise to two arts, for which they have long been celebrated, magic and astrology. The magic of the Chaldeans, as appears from what has already been related, is not to be confounded with witchcraft, or a supposed intercourse with evil spirits : it consisted in the performance of certain religious cere¬ monies or incantations, which were supposed, through the interposition of good demons, to produce supernatural effects. Their astrology was wholly founded upon this chimerical principle, that the stars have an in¬ fluence, either beneficial or malignant, upon the affairs of men, which may be discovered, and made the certain ground of prediction, in particular cases : the whole art consisted in supplying astronomical observations to this fanciful purpose, and, by this means, imposing upon the credulity of the vulgar. Referring the reader for farther information concerning this visionary and pernicious art to those writers who have treated upon it more at large, § we shall only add, upon this subject, the sensible reflec¬ tion of Horace : || Tu ne qusesieris (scire nefas) quem mihi, quern tibi >. Finem Dii dederint, Leuconoe, neu Babylonios Tentaris nuineros: ut melius, quidquid erit, pati! (a) Whilst the Chaldeans busied themselves in these and other arts of divi¬ nation, true science was very little indebted to their labours. We have scarcely any remains of their astronomical observations and opinions. As to the latter, the loss is not much to be regretted, if we may judge from the following specimens. According to Plutarch and Vitruvius, who quote Berosus, it was their opinion that an eclipse of the moon happened when that part of its body which is destitute of fire is turned towards the earth. ^ From the same authority Seneca ** gives it as a notion of the * Plutarch, de Defectu Orac. t Job xxxi. 27. Diod. Sic. loc. cit. Herod. 1. i. c. 181. I Selden de Diis Syriis, Prol. c. 3. § Sextus Empir. Adv. Math. 1. v. p. 339. Diod. Sic. 1. ii. p. S3. Manilius, 1. ii. ver. 456. Jamblich. de Myster. sect. 8. c. 4. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. ii. p. 494. Vossius de Theolog. Gent. 1. ii. c. 47. || L. i. Od. xi. 1. (a) Ask not — ’tis impious to inquire — what date The limit of your life is fix’d by fate : Nor vainly Babylonian numbers try; But wisely wait your lot, to live or die. ^ Pint, de Placit. Phil. 1. ii. c. 29. Comp. Euseb. Prep. 1. xv. c. 51. Vitruv. 1. ix. c. 4. ** Quaest. Nat. 1. iii. c. 29. Chap. 4. OF THE PERSIANS. 21 Chaldeans, that when all the planets shall meet in Cancer, the world will be consumed by fire, and that when they shall meet in Capricorn, it will be destroyed by an inundation. They thought the form of the earth to be that of a boat.* The sum of the Chaldaic Cosmogony, as it is given by Berosus in his Babylonica, preserved by Syncellus,-|- divested of allegory, is, that in the beginning all things consisted of darkness and water ; that Belus, or a divine power, dividing this humid mass, formed the world ; and that the human mind is an emanation from the divine nature. J CHAPTER IV. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE PERSIANS. Concerning the philosophy of the Persians, which comes next under our consideration, it is difficult to form a satisfactory judgment ; for we have no information upon this subject but from the Greeks and Arabians; and the accounts we receive from both are liable to material objections. The Greeks had, indeed, sufficient opportunities for becoming acquainted with the affairs, the religion, and the tenets of this people ; but their in¬ veterate enmity against the Persians rendered them incapable of giving a fair representation of what they saw or heard, and their partiality to their own institutions led them to speak contemptuously of those of all barbarous nations. As to the Arabians, notwithstanding the credit which has been given them by several writers of distinguished erudition, particularly by Pococke, Prideaux, Beausobre, and Hyde, it must be confessed that diffi¬ culties of still greater magnitude embarrass their testimony. Not to urge that the Arabian writers were little qualified, either by natural temper or by education, for the arduous task of examining questions which time had involved in the deepest obscurity, it is most evident, that the shameful practice which, after the time of Mahomet, prevailed amongst the Arabians, of supporting their new religion at the expense of truth, and making use of every kind of falsehood, particularly that of imposing upon the world supposititious writings, in order to reconcile Jews and Christians to their system, renders their evidence, in all doubtful cases, exceedingly liable to suspicion. That this charge against the Arabian writers is not without foundation, will fully appear in the sequel, and cannot indeed be questioned by those who have read their works without prejudice, and observed what absurd fables they have endeavoured to pass upon the world, under the sanction of ancient names, for genuine history. It must not therefore be thought surprising if, even from such eminent modern writers as those above mentioned, we receive, with some degree of hesitation, accounts of the ancient Persians which are given wholly upon the credit of the Ara¬ bians, and presume to question, whether, in reporting these accounts, • Diod. Sic. loc. cit. + Chronic, p. 28. X Vidend. Tribbechovius de Phil. Mor. inter Barbaros, c. 4. Perizon. in Orig. Bab. Rhodigin. Antiq. Lect. 16, Voss, de Scient. Math. c. xxx. sect. 5. De Theol. Gent. 1. ii. c. 47. Werenfels de Logomach. Erudit. c. vi. Buddaei Hist. Eccl. Per. v. ii. sect. 5. Patricias de Zoroast. Ursinus de Zor. &c. ed. Norimb. 1661. Hottinger, Hist. Or. p. 365. Herbelot, Bibl. Or. Voc. Zor. Kircher, Q3dip. Algypt. p. 216. Jonsius de Script. Hist. Phil. 1. ii. Schroeerus in Imp. Bab. Herbert, Relig. Gent. Pet. Fred. Arpe de Talismanibus. Anc. Univ. History, vol iv. Diss. on Zoroaster. Prideaux Connexion, b. iv. Shuckford’s Harmony, b. viii. Weidler, Hist. Astron. Naudaei, Apol. pro Viris magnis Magiae suspectis, c. viii. Burnet, Archaeol. Phil. 1. i. c. 4. 22 OF, THE PHILOSOPHY Book 1. sufficient attention has been paid to the nature of historical evidence. We perceive much occasion for this kind of suspicion in the writings of the learned Hyde, whose fondness for oriental learning seems to have led him to magnify slight conjectures and doubtful traditions into certain facts, and to have prevented him from making a judicious use of the immense mass of materials with which his erudition furnished him.* Having laid it down to ourselves as an invariable rule, not to admit any authority till we have carefully examined its foundation, we must be allowed not to give credit to modern reports, unless we find them supported by more solid evidence than that of the Arabians, and confirmed either by the concurrent testimony of the Greek writers, or by circumstances of probability derived from some other quarter. This is the only way in which we can possibly lay before our readers an impartial history of philosophy. Philosophy was introduced, or rather revived and corrected, among the Persians, by Zardusht, whom the Greek writers calledZoROAsxER. The different accounts given of Zoroaster by the Greeks, and by the Arabians and Persians, can only be reconciled by supposing, as we have done, that the Chaldean and the Persian Zoroaster were different persons, and that the latter lived at a much later period than the former. From comparing these accounts,"}- it is probable that the latter was of Persian extraction, and was born in Media. What the Arabian writers report concerning his having been early instructed by the Jews, seems to be a fiction invented to obtain credit among the Jews and Christians to the doctrines which they professed to have received from him. It is not, however, improbable, that he might have learned some things from the Israelites residing in Babylon, which might be of use to him in executing his design of correcting the doc¬ trine of the Persian Magi, though it may not be easy to specify the particulars. Several miracles are ascribed to Zoroaster, such as an artful impostor would naturally attempt, and would not perhaps find it difficult to perform. It is said, particularly, that he suffered melted metal to be poured upon his bosom, and held fire in his hand, without suffering any injury. Having by these and other artifices established his credit, it is related that he undertook the revival and improvement of the religion of the ancient Magi, which had long before this time prevailed in Media and Persia, but which, in consequence of the massacre of the Magi (who after the death of Cam- byses had usurped the government) 'had been interrupted, and almost entirely supplanted, by the worship of the stars, to which the Persians, with their king Darius, were addicted. Much is also said by the Arabian writers concerning the learning which Zoroaster acquired from the Indian Brach- mans ; concerning the influence which he obtained with Darius, and the success with which he propagated his system ; and lastly, concerning his assassination, by Argaspis, king of the Eastern Scythia, at the siege of Bactria. § But the silence of the Greeks, who were at this time well * Comp. Bayle’s Diet. Zoroaster. Works of the learned, 1701, p. 405. Mosheim’s- Eccl. Hist. S. i. p. ii. c. 1. sect. 2. Not. ad Cudworth, c. iv. sect. 16. n. 28. Baum- garten, Notes on Anc. Univ. Hist. vol. iv. n. 75. Montfaucon, Antiq. t. ii. p. ii. 1. iv. c. 6. Fabricii, Bibliogr. Ant. p. 31. A. Tierre in Monum. Vet. Antii. Renaudot, the author of Anciennes Relations des Indes et de la Chine, censures Hyde for having preferred the testimony of one obscure and enigmatical author, who wrote only 120 years before his time, to the authority of all antiquity. f Vid. Agathias 1. ii. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 304. Huet. Dem. Ev. Prep. Pr. iv, c. 5. Abulfeda apud Pococke, Spec. Hist. Arab, p, 146. Hyde, Rel. Vet. Pers. p. 293. Suidas in Zor. J Hyde, p. 311. Prid. Conn. p. 214. § Hyde, c. 24. p. 313. Prideaux, p. 221. Bayle, Zor. Pococke, Specim. Hist. Arab, p. 146, &G. Chap. 4. OF THE PERSIANS. 23 acquainted with the affairs of Persia, and after Alexander’s conquests must have become possessed of many Persian records, is a circumstance which casts a cloud of suspicion over these relations. Thus much, however, may be admitted as probable ; that there was in Persia, in the time of Darius Hystaspes, a reformer, who, assuming the ancient name of Zoroaster, brought back the Persians from the worship of the stars to their ancient worship of fire, with some innovations both in doctrine and ceremonies. Perhaps too, it may be added, that he was acquainted with astronomy, with the medical art, and with other branches of learning, as far as they were at that time advanced in the East. Both the reality and the success of this attempt are confirmed by the testimony of Lucian, who relates, that in his time the ancient religion of the Magi flourished among the Persians, the Parthians, the Bactrians, the Chorasmians, the Sacans, the Medes, and other barbarous nations.* And the reports of modern travellers give far¬ ther credit to this relation ; -i- for we learn from them, that there is still, in the province of Carinania, a sect who adhere to the doctrines of Zoroaster, and worship fire according to the institutions of the ancient Magi. To Zardusht, or the Persian Zoroaster, many writings are ascribed. One of these, called the Zend, is said to be still remaining among the fol¬ lowers of Zoroaster, and is esteemed of sacred authority. It is written in the Persian language, and consists of two parts, one of which contains their forms of devotion and order of ceremonies ; the other, the precepts of religion and morality. A portion of this book, or of a compendium of it, called the Sadder, is read to the people, on every sacred day, by their priests.;]^ There is, however, much reason to question whether this book be of such ancient date as the time of Zioroaster ; § probably it was written about the time when many Jews and Christians resided among the Per¬ sians, that is, about the fourth or fifth century. Many other works in astrology, physics, theology, &c. have been attributed to Zoroaster, but they are all lost, and it is probable that most of them were forged to serve the purposes of imposture. Fragments of a work, entitled The Oracles of Zoroaster, are still extant. A small collection of these fragments, consisting of only sixty verses, was published |1 by Pletho. Patricias afterwards made a much larger collection, containing 323 verses, with the commentaries of the Platonic philosophers.^ Several other editions of these verses have been published, and much pains has been taken by various writers to explain them. Stanley has subjoined to his account of The Lives of Philosophers a correct translation of them. They are quoted with the highest respect by philosophers of the Alexan¬ drian school as genuine remains of Chaldean udsdom. But they abound so much in the ideas and language peculiar to that school, that it is pro¬ bable they were written by some Platonist, about the beginning of the second century ; a period when nothing was more common than to attempt to support the falling credit of gentile philosophy by spurious writings.** * In Longaev. Op. tom. ii. p. 818. f See Prideaux, Connex. vol. i. p. 231. I See a Latin version of the Sadder in Hyde, Rel. Pers. p. 431, &c. § Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. i. p. 246. |1 Paris, An. 1538, 1589. Amst. 1689. ^ Published at the end of his Nova Philosophia de Universis. Ferrar. 1591. Venet. 1593. ** Compare Stanley, p. 1176. Fabric. Bib. Gr. vol. i. p. 247, 249. Mosheim. Not. ad Cudworth, p. 340. n. 54. Hyde, p. 386. Burnetii Archaeologia, p. 28. Hyde, Prideaux, and others, mention ancient books of Zoroaster, which are at this day extant among tlie Gheurl and other professors of the Zoroastrian superstition, and made use of in their sacred worship, copies from which have been brought over to England and France. A catalogue of these and other Persian MSS. lodged in the library of the 21- OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. Besides Zoroaster, we have few eminent names remaining among the ancient Persian philosophers. The prince Hystaspes has been ranked in this class ; and it is related,* that he ordered his son Darius to inscribe upon his tomb the title of Master of the Magi. It is probable that, after the usual manner of kings in ancient times, he united in himself the two characters of high priest and sovereign prince. Hostanes is also mentioned by Eusebius -f- as an eminent Persian philosopher, who borrowed his learning from the Egyptians ; but it is, not without reason, suspected by Scaliger and Bochart, that the passage is surreptitious, and was inserted by Panodorus, a monk, in order to give the sanction of antiquity to the art of alchymy. Though our information concerning the history of philosophy among the Persians, in the ages prior to the time of Zoroaster, is very imperfect, it is certain, from the united testimony of the Greeks and Arabians, that long before that time the Magi existed as a body, and were the official guardians of religion and learning. The religion which they taught con¬ sisted in the worship of the sun or fire ; a practice which prevailed among the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and many other eastern nations.^ The name under which the Persians worshipped the sun, or rather the invisible Deity, whom they supposed to be, in a peculiar manner, resident in this luminary, was Mithras. Both Herodotus § and Strabo || relate, that the Persians worshipped none of the gods but the sun ; and it appears from comparing the inscriptions on several ancient Persian monuments yet remaining, that Mithras was the name of this divinity. Among these are the following : ^ Deo Soli invicto Mithrce ; and, Omnipotenti deo Mithrce. The historians just cited add, that the Persians sacrificed horses to the sun ; a circumstance to which Ovid alludes when he says — ** Placat equo Persis radiis Hyperiona cinctum, Ne detur celeri victima tarda Deo. (a) It may be conjectured that, in a more remote period, some eminent hero, or public benefactor, whose name was Mithras, had after his death been deified ; for, in certain ancient Persian monuments, Mithras is re¬ presented as a mighty hunter, armed with a sword, having a tiara on his head, and riding a bull.j-j- Perhaps the Persians might conceive the soul of this hero to be resident in the sun, and might afterwards transfer their worship to the sun itself, under the name of Mithras ; but, whatever be thought of this conjecture, it can scarcely be doubted that the sun, under this name, was an object of worship among the Persians. king of France, was published by M. Anquetil du Perron, in his travels, and is copied in the Journal de Savans for July, 1762. But these books, written partly in the Zendic or sacred, and partly in the vulger Persian language, are, for the most part, a narrative of miracles and revelations, by which Zoroaster is said to have established his religion, or a collection of precepts for religious ceremonies. Some of them indeed treat of fun¬ damental doctrines of theology, taught among the worshippers of fire : but it is probable, from the tenets contained in these books, many of which seem to have been borrowed from the Jews and Mahometans, from the entire silence of Greek authors who wrote after the time of Alexander concerning these books, and from other considerations, that they were written at a later period, for the purpose of appeasing the resentment of their Mahometan persecutors. * Ammianus Marcell. 1. xxiii. c. 6. -f- Chron. 1. i. p. 4.3. X Vossius de Theol. Gent. 1. ii. c. 2. Selden de Diis Syriis. pass. Herbert de Rel. Gent. c. 4. § L.i. c. 131. 1| L. xv. ^ Spanhemius ad Jul. Caes. p. 144. Van Dale, Diss. ix. ad ant. Marm. p. 16. ** Faster 1. i. v. 383. (a) The horse, renown’d for speed, the Persians slay, A welcome victim to the God of day. ft Van Dale, Mann, ant- Diss. i. Chap. 4. OF THE PERSIANS. 25 It has been disputed, whether the Persians worshipped the sun as im¬ mediately the supreme divinity, or considered him as the visible represen¬ tation of a higher invisible power. The passages above referred to have been urged in proof of the former opinion : in support of the latter, are adduced the testimonies of Herodotus* and Xenophon,']- who say, that the Persians looked upon lightnings as the ensigns of the supreme divinity ; and of Strabo,;]; who relates, that they called the whole circuit of the heavens God. The true solution of this difficulty probably is, that the vulgar paid their worship immediately to the sun, as the visible fountain of light and heat, whilst the more enlightened, conceiving of the Deity as the soul of the world, diffused through the whole circuit of the universe, imagined the sun to be the chief seat of this divine principle, and paid homage to that luminary as the representative of the invisible power. Whilst the multitude were contented with a sensible object of devotion, the Magi, and those whom they instructed in the mysteries of religion, considered the sun and fire merely as visible symbols of the animating principle of the universe. Besides Mithras, the Persians worshipped, under opposite characters, Oromasdes and Arimanius, the former as the author of all good, the latter as the author of all evil. Perhaps these divinities were originally, like Mithras, merely human beings ; the one, a good prince, who had dis¬ tinguished himself by rendering important services, military or civil, to his countrymen ; the other, a tyrant, who had been the cause of grievous public calamities. § Arimanius was not called by the Persians a god, but an evil demon, and they always wrote his name with the letters inverted. || This rude and vulgar superstition, which had no other object than individual men, was afterwards corrected and improved by philosophy, till it was changed into the worship of two spiritual beings, the one the author of good, the other of evil. The system which supposes two such principles in nature seems to have been held by the Persian Magi before the time of Zoroaster ; but how far they supposed them dependent upon the supreme divinity does not appear. Zoroaster, however, certainly taught the doc¬ trine of their inferiority to the first parent of all things,^ and introduced many alterations into the religious system and ceremonies of the Magi, which are intimately connected with the history of philosophy. The sacred fire, which the Persians had hitherto worshipped upon altars erected in the open air, Zoroaster appointed to be enclosed in temples, the care of which was committed to an order of Magi, or priests.** These Magi were divided into three classes. The first consisted of the inferior priests, who conducted the ordinary ceremonies of religion ; the second presided over the sacred fire ; the third was the archimagus, or high- priest, who possessed supreme authority over the whole order. They had three kinds of temples ; first, common oratories, in which the people per¬ formed their devotions, and where the sacred fire was kept only in lamps ; next, public temples, with altars, on which the fire was kept continually burning, where the higher order of the Magi directed the public devotions, and the people assembled to perform magical incantations, hear interpre¬ tations of dreams, and practise other superstitions and lastly, the grand seat of the archimagus, which was visted by the people at certain seasons * L. i. c. 131. f Cyrop. 1. i. p. 65. J Lib. xv. § Leibnitz, Theodicee, p. ii. sect. 138. Mosheitn. ad Cudworth, p. 328. II Hyde, 1. c. ^ Plutarch, 1. c. ** Hyde, c. 28, 29, 30. tf Cic. de Divin. lib. i. c. 4. Allian, 1. ii. c. 17. Valerius Max. 1. i. c. 6. Strabo, 1. xvi. Plin. Nat. Hist. 1. xxiv. c. 6. 26 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. with peculiar solemnity, and to which it was deemed an indispensable duty for every one to repair, at least once in his life. This principal temple was erected by Zoroaster, in the city of Balch, and remained till the seventh century, when, the followers of Zoroaster being driven by the Mahometans into Carmania, another building of the same kind was raised, to which those who still adhered to the ancient Persian religion resorted. They were divided into several sects ; but this division probably rather respected the mode of conducting the offices of religion than religious tenets. The kings of Persia were not allowed to take possession of their government till they had been instructed in the mysteries of religion, and enrolled among the Magi.* No images or statues were permitted in the Persian worship. Hence, when Xerxes found idols in the Grecian temples, he, by the advice of the Magi, set them on fire, saying that the gods, to whom all things are open, are not to be confined within the walls of a temple. The account which Diogenes Laertius ■j- gives of the Persian Magi is this : “ They are employed in worshipping the gods by prayers and sacri¬ fices, as if their worship alone would be accepted ; they teach their doctrine concerning the nature and origin of the gods, whom they think to be fire, earth, and water ; they reject the use of pictures and images, and reprobate the opinion that the gods are male and female ; they discourse to the people concerning justice ; they think it impious to consume dead bodies with fire ; J they allow of marriage between mother and son ; they practise divination and prophecy, pretending that the gods appear to them ; they forbid the use of ornaments in dress ; they clothe themselves in a white robe ; they make use of the ground as their bed, of herbs, cheese, and bread for food, and of a reed for their staff.” And Strabo relates, § that there were in Cappadocia a great number of Magi, who were called Pyrethi, or worshippers of fire, and many temples of the Persian gods, in the midst of which were altars, attended by priests, who daily renewed the sacred fire, accompanying the ceremony with music. The religious system of the Magi was materially improved by Zoroaster. Plutarch, speaking of his doctrine, says : || “ Some maintain, that neither is the world governed by blind chance without intelligence, nor is there one mind alone at the head of the universe ; but, since good and evil are blended, and nature produces nothing unmixed, we are to conceive, not that there is one storekeeper, who, after the manner of an host, dispenses adulterated liquors to his guests, but that there are in nature two opposite powers, counteracting each other’s operations, the one accomplishing good designs, the other evil. To the better power Zoroaster gave the name of Oromasdes ; to the worse that of Arimanius ; and affirmed, that, of sensible objects, the former most resembled light, the latter darkness. He also taught, that Mithras was a divinity who acted as moderator between them ; whence he was called by the Persians the Mediator.” After relating several fabulous tales concerning the contests between the good and evil demon, Plutarch, still reciting the doctrines of Zoroaster, proceeds ; “ The fated time is approaching, in which Arimanius himself shall be utterly destroyed ; in which the surface of the earth shall become a perfect plain, and all men shall speak one language, and live happily together in one society.” He adds, on the authority of Theopompus: “It is the opinion of the Magi that each of these gods shall subdue and be subdued by turns * Hyde, p. 12(i. Pococke, ib. p. 146. f L. i. sect. 6 — 9. % Conf. Dioscorid. Aiithol.l. iii. c. 4. § Lib. xv. |1 lsi.s et Osiris, tom. ii. p. 155. Chap. 4. OF THE PERSIANS. 27 for six thousand years ; but that, at last, the evil principle shall perish, and men shall live in happiness, neither needing food, nor yielding a shadow ; the God who directs these things taking his repose for a time, which, though it may seem long to man, is but short.” Diogenes Laertius,* after Hecateus, gives it as the doctrine of Zoroaster, that the gods (meaning, doubtless, those of whom he last speaks, Oromasdes and Arimanius) were derived beings. Sharistan, an Arabian writer, gives the following account of the doctrine of Zerdusht, or Zoroaster : “ Zerdusht affirmed light and darkness, Yezdan and Ahreman, to be two contrary principles, which were the origin of every thing subsisting in the world, the forms of nature being produced from the combination of these principles ; but maintained that the existence of darkness is not to be referred to the one Supreme Deity, who is without companion or equal, but must be considered as the un¬ avoidable consequence of his determination to create the world, in which light can no more subsist without darkness, than a visible body can exist without its shadow.” To these accounts we may add that of the Nestorian Bishop, Theodorus Mopsuestenus, who, in his book concerning the Magian religion of the Persians, says, J that according to their doctrine, Zarva, or the chief of all the gods, produced Hormisda and Satana.§ If these authorities be carefully compared, it will appear probable that Zoroaster, adopting the principle commonly held by the ancients, that from nothing nothing can be produced, conceived light, or those spiritual substances which partake of the’active nature of fire ; and darkness, or the impenetrable, opaque, and passive mass of matter, to be emanations from one eternal source ; that to the derived substances he gave the names already applied by the Magi to the causes of good and evil, Oromasdes and Arimanius ; and that the first fountain of being, or the supreme divinity, he called Mithras. These active and passive principles he con¬ ceived to be perpetually at variance ; the former tending to produce good, the latter evil; but that, through the mediation or intervention of the Supreme Being, the contest would at last terminate in favour of the good principle. According to Zoroaster, various orders of spiritual beings, gods, or demons, have proceeded from the Deity, which are more or less perfect, as they are at a greater or less distance, in the course of emanation, from the eternal fountain of intelligence ; among which, the human soul is a particle of divine light, which will return to its source, and partake of its immortality ; and matter is the last or most distant emanation from the first source of being, which, on account of its distance from the fountain of light, becomes opaque and inert, and whilst it remains in this state is the cause of evil ; but, being gradually refined, it will at length return to the fountain whence it fiowed. This doctrine of emanation afterwards pro¬ duced many fanciful opinions in theology. || * Loc. cit. f Apud Hyde, p. 299. J Apud Photium, Cod. 81. § Compare Pococke, p. 147. Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vol. xiv. p. 137. II Vidend. Mosheim de causis suppos. Libr. Huet. Dem. Ev. Prop. iv. c. 5. Buddaei Eccl. Hist. tom. ii. Kircher, (Edip. Aig. tom. ii. p. ii. Mopsuestenus de Mag. Pers. apud Photium. Solini Poly. c. 55. Rhodigin. Ant. Lect. xiii. Selden de Diis Syr. Proleg. et Synt. ii. c. 8. Van Dale, Diss. i. ix. ad Ant. Marm. Montfaucon, Diar. Ital. c. 14. Fabric. Bibl. Ant. c. viii. x. Fab. Bib. Gr. vol. xiv. p. 137. J. Firmic. de Error, p. 414. Voss, de Grig. Idol. 1. ii. r. 9. Beausobre de Manich. tom. i. Anc. Univ. Hist. vol. iv. and notes. Bayer, Hist. Regni Bactr. Leibnitzii Theodic5e, prsef. 28 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. CHAPTER V. OP THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE INDIANS. From whatever quarter India, the country which, as adjacent to Persia, next comes under our notice, received its wisdom, there can be no doubt that its wise men very early obtained a high degree of reputation. We find that it was visited, for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, by Pythagoras, Anaxarchus, Pyrrho, and others, who afterwards became eminent philosophers in Greece. It is not, however, easy to collect satisfactory information concerning the ancient philosophical history of these remote countries. Modern ravellers, either from the want of an accurate acquaintance with the lan¬ guage of the country, and a ready access to the interior regions, or from the changes which have happened in the tenets and customs of these nations since they have been under the dominion of the Moguls, or on account of the poetical and allegorical dress in which the history of India is clothed, or lastly, through the suspicion of fraud which hangs upon their sacred books, have been able to furnish little assistance to those who are desirous of searching into the antiquities of India. Our chief reliance, in this part of our work, must be upon the ancients, and particularly those who wrote after the time when Alexander extended his conquests into this country. At that time, much information was gained concerning the religion, the tenets, and the manners of the Indians, which was afterwards committed to writing, and is preserved in the geography of the accurate Strabo, in the works of Plutarch, and Arrian, and afterwards in those of Porphyry, Philostratus, and others. But even these writers must be read, upon this subject, with some degree of distrust ; for their accounts are given wholly upon the reports of unknown persons, who themselves visited only the exterior parts of the country ; and they are written under the strong bias of a disposition to judge of the oriental philosophy by comparing it with the Grecian. In the most ancient times, we find among the Indians a race of wise men, who are sometimes called Gymnosophists, from their custom of appearing with the greater part of the body naked, and sometimes Brach- mans ; but this latter is properly the name of only one class of these philosophers, who were divided into several sects.* The Brachmans were all of one tribe. From the time of their birth they were put under guardians, and, as they grew up, had a succession of instructors. They were in a state of pupilage till thirty-six years of age ; after which they were allowed to live more at large, to wear fine linen and gold rings, to live upon the flesh of animals not employed in labour, and to marry as many wives as they pleased. Others submitted, through their whole lives, to a stricter discipline, and passed their days upon the banks of the Ganges, with no other food than fruits, herbs, and milk. The Saman mans were a society formed of those who voluntarily devoted them¬ selves to the study of divine wisdom. They gave up all private property, and committed their children to the care of the state, and their wives to * Strabo, 1. xv. p. 822. Conf. Schmidii Diss. de Gymnos. and Bayle. Porpbyr. de Abst. 1. iv. sect. 17. Laert. 1. i. sect. 1. Plin. Nat. Hist. 1. vii. c. 2. Chap. 5. OF THE INDIANS. 29 the protection of their relations. They were supported at the public ex¬ pense, and spent their time in contemplation, in conversation on divine subjects, or in acts of religion. A wonderful circumstance is related con¬ cerning these philosophers ; that frequently, without any apparent reason from ill health or misfortunes, they formed a resolution to quit the world, and, when they had communicated their intention to their friends, im¬ mediately, without any expressions of regret on the one side, or of apprehension on the other, threw themselves into a fire which they had themselves prepared for the occasion. There was another sect, called the Hylobeans, who lived entirely in forests, upon leaves and wild fruits, wore no other clothing than the bark of trees, and practised the severest abstinence of every kind.* From this account of the Indian Gymnosophists, it is easy to perceive that they were more distinguished by severity of manners than by the cultivation of science, and that they more resembled modern monks than ancient philosophers. Some of them, indeed, allowed themselves a greater latitude of manners than others ; but their general characters were rigid abstinence, indolence, and the pride of independence. Of their high spirit Strabo relates the following example : when Onesicritus was com¬ missioned by Alexander to invite a body of these philosophers to visit him, they refused to go, saying, that, if Alexander had any business with the Brachmans, he might come to them. The rigours which have been, and are to this day practised among the Indians, are such as could not be credited but upon the best authority. Pliny relates, -j- that some have stood with their eyes stedfastly fixed upon the sun from morning till night ; and that others have remained, in one painful posture, upon the burning sands, for whole days; stories which are confirmed by the reports of modern travellers J concerning the volun¬ tary severities, and even tortures, which are commonly practised upon themselves by the Indian Bramins. Such examples of abstinence and hardy endurance could not fail to make a strong impression upon the minds of the multitude, and to give the Gymnosophists great influence, in an age of ignorance and super¬ stition. In order to preserve and increase their power, they made use of two expedients. The first was, the keeping among themselves the whole business of foretelling future events. “ The wise men alone,” says Arrian, § “were skilled in the arts of divination, or permitted to practise them. They only predicted the changes of the seasons or public calami¬ ties, thinking it a degradation of themselves, or their art, to employ it upon trifling occasions.” They doubtless made use of this precaution in order to render themselves the more necessary to the ruling powers, who would easily perceive the value of such an instrument of superstition. The other expedient, by means of which they maintained their authority, was the appropriating to themselves the regulation of religious concerns. To establish their reputation for sanctity, they spent the greater part both of the day and the night in performing acts of worship, which were chiefly addressed to the sun. || By these means, they made themselves of conse¬ quence to the ruling powers, and became objects of veneration to the people ; so that they could easily gain access wherever they pleased, and obtain whatever they wished. ^ Many tales are related concerning these * Megasthenes ap. Strabon. 1. c. Pococke’s Travels. f Hist. Nat. 1. vii. c. 2, , I Bernier’s Travels, vol. ii. p. 127. Kempfer’s Hist, of Japan, vol. i. p. 30. § In Indicis and Exped. Alex. 1. vii. 11 Porphyr. 1. c. et Philostrat. 1. iii. c. 13. n Strabo, 1. c. 30 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. Gymnosophists, which are too strongly marked with the characters of fiction to merit a place in the history of philosophy.* Among the few Indian philosophers whose names have been preserved to the present times, the most celebrated is Buddas. Little is known concerning him, more than that he was a religious impostor, who, by pretending to a divine original and miraculous birth, obtained credit and authority whilst he lived, and after his death was honoured with divine worship. St. Jerom relates, that he boasted of having been brought forth from the side of a virgin, -f- This impostor is probably the same who is at present honoured in Siam, China, and Japan, under the names of Somonacodom, Xeko, and Fohi. Among those Brachmans who are mentioned with respect by the Greek writers who treat of the time when Alexander visited India, are Dandamis and Calanus.J Dandamis is celebrated for the boldness with which he censured the intemperance and licentiousness of Alexander and his army in a conferenee which he held with Onesicritus. Calanus, when he saw Alexander’s messengers clothed with fine linen garments, and elegantly adorned, laughed at their effeminacy, and requested them, if they wished to hold any conference with the Brachmans, to lay aside their ornaments, and, like them, recline naked upon the rocks. It is also related, that when he found the infirmities of age coming upon him, he devoted himself to voluntary death, and ascending the funeral pile, said, § “ Happy hour of departure from life, in which, as it happened to Hercules, after the mortal body is burned, the soul shall go forth into light ! ” The doctrines of the ancient Indians, as far as they are at present known, may be arranged under three classes, — Divine, Natural, and Moral. The sum of their doctrine concerning Divine Subjects is as follows : God is light, not such as is seen, like the sun or fire, but intelligence and reason ; || that principle through whose agency the mysteries of knowledge are understood by the wise. He never produced evil, but light, and lifb, and souls, of which he is the sole Lord. The former and governor of the universe pervades it, and is invested with it, as with a garment : he is immortal, and sees all things ; the stars, the moon, and the sun, are his eyes. He is beneficent, and preserves, directs, and provides for all. The human mind is of celestial origin, and has a near relation to God. When it departs from the body, it returns to its parent, who expects to receive back the souls which he has sent forth. Besides the Supreme Divinity, inferior deities, proceeding from him, are to be worshipped ; not with the sacrifice of harmless animals, nor in temples, and upon altars adorned with gold and gems, but with eyes lifted up towards heaven, and with minds free from criminal passions. ^ The notions which the ancient Indians seem to have had of God, ap¬ proach so near to the tenets of the Persian Zoroaster on this subject, that it is very probable that his doctrine passed over to India, and was, in part at least, received among them. In speaking of the universe as the garment of God, their idea seems to have been, that the intellectual prin¬ ciple, which animates all things, is contained within the sphere of the universe. They conceive God to be the soul of the world, a rational and intellectual light, whence all good is produced, and the chief seat of • Apuleii Florid. 1. ii. Alex. ab. Alex. 1. v. c. 21. Hieron. contra Jovinian. sect. 22. Clem. Alex. Strom, p. 305. •}■ Contra. Jovin 1. c. J Strabo, 1. c. Arrian, 1. c. § Cic. de Divin. c. 23. Val. Max. 1. i. c. 8. || ASyos. ^ Pseudo- Origenis Philosophum, c. 24. Palladius de Gent. Ind. p. 22, 31, 168. Cle¬ ment. Alex. Stromat. 1. hi. p. 451. Ciiap. 6. OF THE ARABIANS, 31 whose divinity is the sun. Their notion of divine providence, deduced from that of the soul of the world, probably extended no farther, than that this principle is necessarily the first spring of all motion, life, and enjoy¬ ment, and fell far short of that wise, and gracious voluntary superintend¬ ence, which is the Christian idea of providence. The human soul they represented as of divine original, because, with all the other Eastern nations, they conceived it to be a particle, or an emanation, of that in¬ tellectual fire by which they believed the universe to be animated. Their doctrine of the return of the soul to God, which some have confounded with the Christian doctrine of the resurrection, seems to have meant nothing more, than that the soul, after being disengaged from the grosser material body, would be re-united to the fountain of all being, the soul of the world. It is an opinion still found among the Indians, and probably of very ancient date, that there is in nature a periodical restitution of all things ; when, after the return of all derived beings to their source, they are again set forth, and the whole course of things is renewed. Inferior divinities were, doubtless, worshipped among them as emanations from the first spring of life. Some of the doctrines of the Greeks concerning Nature are said to have been derived from the Indians ; * but there is little reason to doubt that these accounts are the mere fictions of Grecian ingenuity and vanity. Natural science was probably no farther advanced among them, than merely to furnish them with instruments of imposture in the arts of as¬ trology and divination. Many extravagant assertions have been advanced concerning their moral system. It has been said, that the fables of Pilpay, which have been translated from the Indian tongue into the Persian, and have passed from these into European languages, were written by an ancient Indian philo¬ sopher 2000 years before Christ. But the work contains many internal proofs that it was written at a much later period : probably it was the production of some ingenious Persian, who, to give it the greater credit, passed it upon the world as a relic of the ancient Indian philosophy. All that can be certainly known concerning the morality of the Indians must be inferred from the manners of the Brachmans ; whence we conclude, that it chiefly consisted in voluntary acts of abstinence and mortification, and in a contempt of death, f CHAPTER VI. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ARABIANS. Although the Greek writers have been entirely silent concerning the philosophy of the ancient Arabians, and even the Saracens themselves have confessed, that before the rise of Mahometanism, their country was * Megasthenes apud Strabon. 1. xv. Philostr. I. iii, c. 34. •f- Vidend. Paladius de Gent. Ind. et Brachm. Ambros. de Mor. Brachm. Bisse on the Brachmans, London. 1665. Burnet, Arch. c. iii. Heurn. Ant. Ph. Barb. 1. ii. Horn. Hist Ph. 1. ii. Schmidii Diss. de Gymnosoph. Rhodog. Lect. xiii. MafFseus de Rebus Ind. 1. i. Beausob. de Man. tom. i. Thomasius de Manetis Dogmata. Hist. Sap. tom. i. Herbelot, Bibl. Or. p. 118, 206, 456. Starckii Specimen Sap. Ind. Vet. Berol. 1697. Anc. Univ. vol. iv. ix. OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. in a low state of civilisation ; yet some modern writers have taken much pains to maintain, that Arabia was very early distinguished by wisdom. In support of this opinion it has been said, that Pythagoras acquired a great part of his knowledge from the Arabians ; that Moses fled out of Egypt into this country, and carried with him the wisdom of the Egyptians ; that the queen of the East, who visited Solomon, was of Sabea, a region in Arabia; and that the wise men, who visited Jesus, were from this coun¬ try.* * * § But the whole story concerning Pythagoras’s journey to Arabia is, as we shall afterwards see, extremely uncertain ; and if it were not, nothing more could be fairly inferred from this circumstance, than that he learned from the Arabians the arts of divination, with which it is not improbable that, like the rest of the eastern nations, they were well acquainted : and with respect to the remaining arguments, if they be allowed their utmost force, they will give the A.rabians a very small share of the credit arising from the ancient philosophy of the East. It has been said,t that there was in Arabia, at a very remote period, a sect of philosophers called the Zabians. But of this sect no mention is made by Greek or Roman writers. We owe all our information concern¬ ing them to the Arabians, from whom Maimonides, J the Jew, borrowed his account. The probable truth concerning them is, that they were a mixed body of Gentiles and Jews, who, to give the sanction of antiquity to their institutions, pretended to derive them from Sabi the son of Seth. Their religion consisted in the worship of the sun, the stars, and planets, and resembled the ancient Chaldean superstition ; which is not at all surprising, considering how extensively the Chaldean tenets were spread through the East. Their system of opinions was an heterogeneous mass, which must have been the produce of a period much later than that of which we are now treating. § The sum of our knowledge of the ancient Arabians, as far as respects our subject, is, that they were not unacquainted with astronomy, and that they were famous for their ingenuity in solving enigmatical questions, and for their skill in the arts of divination. § Like the neighbouring Chaldeans and Persians, they seem to have had their wise men, by whom their knowledge, such as they had, was taught, and their religious ceremonies and superstitious arts were practised. Pliny |1 mentions the Arabian Magi, and speaks of Hippocus, an Arabian, as belonging to this order. It can scarcely be supposed that the Arabians, who cultivated poetry, were unacquainted with moral wisdom. But none of their moral writings are remaining, unless we allow the fables of Lokmann (translated from Arabic into Latin by Erpenius to be of as ancient date as some have conceived. It is however wholly uncertain at what period the supposed author of these fables lived; and the work seems rather to be a collection of ancient fables, than the production of any one writer. From the simi¬ larity of many of these fables to those of .^sop, some have inferred that Lokmann and ^Esop were only different names for the same person. But it is more likely that the compiler of these fables had seen those of vEsop, and chose to insert some of them in his collection. Whoever was the wri¬ ter, the fables afford no inelegant specimen of the moral doctrine of the • Ludwig. Diss. de Phil. Turc. Hal. 1691. Porphyr. Vit. Pyth. sect. 2. Grot. in. Matt. ii. + Hyde, Rel. Pers. c. 3. Pococke, Hist. East. B. i. c. 8. Spencer de Legibus Heb. 1. ii. c. 1. I Moreh Nebb. p. iii. c. 29. § Abulfarius, Dynast, ix. p. 184. Porpbyr. Vet. Pyth. sect. 2. Pococke, p. 147. II Hist. Nat. 1. XXX. c. 1. 'll Lugd. Bat. 1615, 1656. Vid. Fabr. Bibl. Gr. vol. i. p. 400. Chap. 7. OF THE PHCENICIANS. 33 Arabians ; better adapted, however, to popular instruction than to the improvement of philosophy, which the Arabians do not appear to have cultivated till the period when their government passed into the family of the Abbasidae.* CHAPTER VII. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE PHCENICIANS. Among the Asiatic nations who come under the general denomination of barbaric, in the sense before explained, the Phoenicians are the only people whose philosophical history still remains to be considered. The commercial celebrity of this people has induced some writers to allow them great credit for wisdom. It has been maintained that their philosophers taught sounder principles of natural science than those of any other eastern nation. Situated as they were upon the borders of the Mediterranean ; obliged, by the narrow limits of their territory, frequently to send forth colonies into distant regions ; and led, by their mercantile connexions, into an extensive acquaintance with foreigners, they enjoyed, it has been said, peculiar advantages for dispersing abroad their native stock of knowledge, and for possessing themselves, in return, of the learn¬ ing and wisdom of other countries. A nation of merchants would, it is urged, carry on a traffic, not only in the natural productions of the earth and in manufactures, but in arts and sciences. But the experience of modern times, in which navigation and commerce are so much more extensively pursued than formerly, is by no means favourable to these hypothetical conclusions. Mariners and merchants have seldom leisure to attend to the improvement of science. There can, indeed, be little reason to doubt that the Phcenicians were acquainted with those arts which, at that time, admitted of an easy application to the pur¬ poses of gain. As far as they found a knowledge of the celestial phenomena to be useful in navigation, they were astronomers ; and as far as experience taught them the utility of numbers in mercantile affairs, they were mathe¬ maticians, f But it is not likely that they should have much leisure or inclination for prosecuting scientific researches beyond the line of practical ‘ application ; and such a degree of knowledge as their commerce would ; require could hardly entitle them to the appellation of philosophers. Among the ancient Phoenicians we, however, meet with some individuals I who, on account of the inventions which have been ascribed to them, I claim attention. Moschus, or Mochus, the most ancient name remaining on the list of I Phoenician philosophers, was a native of Sidon. If we are to credit Jam- t blichus,;]; he lived before the time of Pythagoras. After Posidonius, many writers § ascribe to him a system of philosophy, which afterwards rose into * Vidend. Ursinus de Zor. Sect. vol. i. Horn. Hist. Ph. 1. v. P. de Ludwig, Diss. de Hist. Ph. ap. Turcas. Hal. 1691. Bochart, Geog. Sac. p. i. 1. ii. c. 27. Le Moyne, Var. .Sac. p. 685. Spencer de Leg. Heb. 1. ii. c. 1. Hottinger, Hist. Or. p. 165. Stoll. Hist. Ph. Mor. sect. 9. Cliadin, Voy. de Pers. p. iii. p. 227. f Lucian in Toxari. Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. v. c. 12. Porphyr. Vit. Pyth. sect. 6. p. 9. Strabo, 1. xvi. p. 158. I J Vita Pythag. c. 3. sect. 14. ' ' § Strabo, 1. xvi. p. 718. Sext. Empiric, adv. Phys. 1. i. p. 621. Laert. 1. viii. sect. 140. Cudworth, Iiit. Syst. c. l.sect. 9. 34 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. great celebrity under the Grecian philosophers Leusippus and Epicurus, called the Atomic. It is urged in defence of this opinion that the monads of Pythagoras were the same with the atoms of Moschus, with which Pythagoras became acquainted during his residence in Phoenicia ; and that from Pythagoras this doctrine passed to Empedocles and Anaxagoras, and afterwards to Leusippus and Epicurus.* * * § To this it may be replied, that the single evidence of Posidonius, the Stoic, who lived so many ages after the time of Moschus, to whom Cicero allows little credit, and of whose authority even Strabo and Sextus Empi¬ ricus, who refer to him, intimate some suspicion, is too feeble to support the whole weight of this opinion. But the circumstance which most of all invalidates it, is, that the method of philosophising by hypothesis or system which was followed by the Greek philosophers, was inconsistent with the genius and character of the barbaric philosophy, which consisted in simple assertion, and relied entirely upon traditional authority.-j- The argument drawn from the history and doctrine of Pythagoras will after¬ wards be fully refuted, when it is shown that this part of the history of Pythagoras has been involved in obscurity by the later Platonists, and that neither the doctrine of monads, nor any of those systems which are said to have been derived from Moschus, are the same with the atomic doctrine of Epicurus. We therefore conclude, that, whatever credit the corpuscular system may derive from other sources, it has no claim to be considered as the ancient doctrine of the Phoenicians. Cadmus, so celebrated in Grecian history, was a native of Sidon, who on the settlement of a Phoenician colony at Thebes, formed the Greek alphabet on the foundation of the Phoenician.:}; But, though this fact seems to be well ascertained, it affords little ground for ranking Cadmus in the class of philosophers ; for the characters which he introduced into Greece were not the invention of his own ingenuity, but were merely conveyed by him from Phoenicia, (where, as well as in other eastern countries, they ' had long been in use,) and accommodated to the Greek language. What has been advanced by some modern writers to prove that Cadmus insti¬ tuted schools of philosophy at Thebes, being grounded merely on con¬ jecture, can deserve no attention. The only remnants of antiquity which treat of the philosophy of the Phoenicians are sundry fragments of the Cosmogony of Sanchoniathon, preserved by Eusebius and Theodoret. Eusebius, § on the authority of Porphyry, speaks of Sanchoniathon as an accurate and faithful historian, who wrote of the affairs of Phoenicia before the Trojan war, about the time of Semiramis; and adds, that his work, which was translated by Philo-Biblius from the Phoenician into the Greek language, contains many things relating to the history of the Jews which deserve great credit, both because they agree with the Jewish writers, and because Sanchoniathon received these particulars from Hierombalus, a priest of the god Jao. Theodoret, II on the same authority, confirms Eusebius’s account of the historical ability and fidelity of Sanchoniathon, and says, that he applied himself diligently to the examination of ancient records, and particularly took pains to collect authentic materials for the history of Taaut or Thoth, called by the Greeks, Hermes, and by the Romans, IMercury. * Stobaei Eel. Phys. 1. i. c. 13. Arist. Metaph. 1. xiii. c. 6. f Burnet, Archaeol. Phil. c. vi. J Bochart, p. i. 1. iv. c. 31?. Montfaucon, Palseogr. 1. i. c. 23. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. V. i. p. 117. § Prep. Evang. 1. i. c. 9. || De Curanrl. Grace. AfTeet. Serm. ii. Chap. 7. OF THE PH(ENICIANS. 35 Upon these authorities, or rather upon the mere testimony of Porphyry, many learned men have concluded that the genuine writings of Sancho- niathon were translated by Philo-Biblius, and that Sanchoniathon derived a great part of his information from the books of Moses ; nay, some have supposed that Thoth was only another name for Moses.* But the incon¬ sistencies, chiefly chronological, which the learned have detected in these accounts, and especially the silence of the ancients concerning this histo¬ rian, who, if he had deserved the character given him by Porphyry, could not have been entirely overlooked, create a just ground of suspicion, either against Porphyry or Philo-Biblius. It seems most probable that Philo- Biblius fabricated the work from the ancient cosmogonies, pretending to have translated it from the Phoenician, in order to provide the Gentiles with an account of the origin of the world, which might be set in opposition to that of Moses. Eusebius and Theodoret, indeed, who, like the rest of the fathers, were too credulous in matters of this kind, and after them some eminent modern writers,-]- have imagined that they have discovered a resemblance between Sanchoniathon’s account of the formation of the world and that of Moses. But an accurate examination of the doctrine of Sanchoniathon, as it appears in the fragment preserved by Eusebius, will convince the unprejudiced reader that the Phoenician philosophy, if indeed it be Phoenician, is directly opposite to the Mosaic. Sanchoniathon teaches, that, from the necessary energy of an eternal principle, active but without intelligence, upon an eternal passive chaotic mass, or mot, arose the visible world ; a doctrine, of which there are some appearances in the ancient cosmogonies, and which was not without its patrons among the Greeks. It is therefore not unreasonable to conjecture that the work was forged in opposition to the Jewish cosmogony, and that this was the cir¬ cumstance which rendered it so acceptable to Porphyry. But, though little credit seems due to the fragments 'of Sanchoniathon, of which, as well as of their author, nothing is known but from Porphyry or Suidas, it will be readily allowed that the Phoenicians, like the other eastern nations, philosophised in the barbaric manner concerning the origin of the world. Strabo mentions several Phoenician philosophers : but they flourished after the Greeks had introduced their systematic mode of [ philosophising ; a period which must not be confounded with the age of I barbaric philosophy.^; * Bochart, Geog. S. p. ii. 1. ii. c. 17. Huet. Ev. Prep. 1. iv. p. 50 and 70. f Grotius de Verit. Chr. Rel. 1. i. sect. 16. Huet. 1. c. Compare Cumberland’s Cosmogony of Sanchoniathon. Introd. to Anc. Univ. History. X Vidend. Bochart, Geog. Sac. p. ii. 1. i. c. 2. 1. iv. c. 34. Bayer de Phcen. Stud, et j Invent. Diss. Jen. 1709. SchefiPer de Phil. Ital. c. v. Mosheim ad Cudw. c. i. sect, j 6 — 10. Le Clerc, Bibl. Choisee, tom. i. p. 75. Burnet, Arch. c. vi. Fabr. Bibl. Gr. i V. i. p. 147; Montfaucon, Paleogr. Gr. 1. i. c. 23. Ursin. de Zor. Trismeg. et Sancho- I niathone, Ex. 3. Van. Dale ap. Diss. super Aristea. Dodwell’s Two Letters on San- j chon. Voss. Hist. Gr. 1. i. c. 1. Simon, Bib. Grit. tom. i. c. 9. Stillingfleet’s Grig. I Sac. 1. i. c. 2. Shuckford’s Harm. v. ii. p. 12. Banier, Mythol. 1. ii. c. 1. OF THE PHILOSOPHY 3f; Book L CHAPTER VIIL OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE EGYPTIANS. Having taken a survey of the state of barbaric philosophy in the eastern nations, the first country wliich calls for our notice, as we pass southward, is Egypt ; a country which has claimed the honour of being the first seat of learning, and the fountain whence the streams of philosophy flowed to Chaldea, and other Asiatic nations, till it reached the remotest borders of India. Though there seems to be no sufficient ground for ad¬ mitting these high pretensions, Egypt is unquestionably to be ranked among the most ancient civilised countries, and was very early famous for wisdom. Many eminent philosophers among the Greeks, such as Orpheus, Thales, Pythagoras, Democritus, and Plato, visited Egypt in search of knowledge; and the illustrious legislator of the Hebrews was “ learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians.” Nevertheless, it must be owned that the history of Egyptian learning and philosophy, after all the pains which have been taken to elucidate the subject, still remains involved in thick clouds of uncertainty. The causes of this uncertainty it is easier to enumerate than to overcome. To mention them may, however, be of use in enabling us to judge how far we may expect satisfaction, and where it will be necessary, for want of suffieient information, to suspend our judgment. The history of the Egyptian philosophy looks backwards, beyond the period in which men first began to commit the great transactions of society to writing, into the infant state of the world, when arts and sciences, as far as they were known, were only taught by oral instruction, concerning which nothing remains but obscure fables and doubtful conjectures. From the numerous natural and political changes which, in a long succession of ages, have taken place in Egypt, its customs and tenets have undergone various alterations and corruptions; whence it has happened, that authors who have written of the philosophy of Egypt at difterent periods, not adverting to these changes, have given different and even contradictory relations. Knowledge was communicated by the Egyptian priests under the concealment of symbolical characters or hieroglyphics, the key of which was at first intrusted only to the initiated, and has since been irre¬ coverably lost ; a circumstance which has afforded subsequent theorists an opportunity of accommodating their representations of the doctrines of the Egyptians to their own system. Even at the time when Egyptian wisdom first flourished, different dogmas were taught in the different schools at Thebes, Memphis, and other places, which has occasioned great diversity in the accounts given of the Egyptians by Herodotus, Diodorus Siculus, and Plutarch. At a later period, when Alexandria became the common resort of learned men from every part of the world, the combination of their opinions with those of the native Egyptians gave philosophy and religion a form till then unknown. The state of opinions in Egypt was at all times subject to alteration, from the dependence of the priests, who were the chief depositories of knowledge, upon the civil power, and their' consequent inclination to suit the doctrines of religion to the taste of the feigning prince, and to accommodate them to the purposes of policy; a Chap. 8. OF THE EGYPTIANS. 37 design which might easily be elFected by means of hieroglyphical charac¬ ters. Farther difficulties arise from the vanity of the Greek writers, our chief authorities on this subject, who have everywhere confounded the gods of tlie Egyptians, and their theogony, with their own mythology, and, upon the ground of the slightest resemblances, have concluded Osiris to be Jupiter, Typhon to be Pluto, and other Egyptian and Grecian gods to be the same divinities under different names ; hereby involving the mytho¬ logical history of both countries in endless confusion. Nor must we expect much assistance, in clearing our way through this thorny path, from modern interpreters of Egyptian learning ; for we find them perpetually wandering in the mazes of conjecture, and amusing themselves and their readers with unsatisfactory and inconsistent explanations of Egyptian, mysteries. Of this we have a memorable example in the fanciful conjectures which have been offered concerning the Isiac Marble, one of the remains of Egyptian hieroglyphics, which was found by a common workman, and presented to Vincent Duke of Mantua, in the year 1630. In this tablet Kircher discovered sundry religious mysteries favourable to Christianity, and Pignonus found precepts of moral and political wisdom : another critic was of opinion that it was a Runic calendar ; while a fourth attempted to persuade the learned world that these characters described the properties and use of the magnet, and of the mariner’s compass. What assistance can the cautious inquirer expect from remains of antiquity which afford such ample scope for the exercise of the imagination ? Lastly, it is a circumstance which greatly embarrasses every attempt to trace out the ancient philosophy of Egypt, that we have few remains of ancient writings which treat directly upon this subject. Of Chseremon, Manetho, and other Egyptian writers, we have only a few fragments preserved in other authors ; their works probably perished in the destruction so fatal to literature, of the Alexandrian Library. The book De Hieroglyphicis, under the name of Horus Apollo, is spurious.* In the midst of such numerous causes of uncertainty, it will not be thought surprising that it is only in our power to lay before our readers the following particulars, as a probable state of facts respecting the ancient Egyptian philosophy. Theut or Thoth, called by the Phoenicians Taaut, by the Greeks Hermes, and by the Romans Mercury, is generally spoken of by ancient writers as the iirst author of the Egyptian learning ; but little is known . concerning him. Cicero mentions j- five Mercuries, three of whom were Greeks; the fourth, the son of Nilus, whom the Egyptians thought it unlawful to name ; and the fifth, him whom the Phaneatag worshipped, i who is said to have slain Argus, and by that means to have possessed him- i self of the government of Egypt. The Egyptians called him Thoth, and ; named the first month of the year after him. In this account Cicero con¬ founds the Egyptian with the Arcadian Mercury. j; Thoth, according to Diodorus Siculus, § was chief minister to Osiris, and assisted him by his counsel : the historian adds, that he improved language, invented letters, instituted religious rites, and taught astronomy, music, and other arts. Other writers also assert that he invented letters : || and the assertion may be credited, if by letters we understand symbolical characters, whence alphabetical letters were afterwards formed. • * Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 88. f De Nat. Deo. 1. iii. t Marsham, Cbron. sect. 1. p. 35. § L. i. ■ II jElian. Hist. 1. xiv. c. .34. Plin. Hist. N. 1. vii. c. 36. ! 38 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book L Nondum flumineas Memphis, contexere biblos Noverat, et saxis tantum volucresque ferseque Sculptaque servabant raagicas animalia linguas.* The Egyptian Mercury, or Thoth, was probably some man of superior genius, who, before the age of Moses (for among the Egyptians knowledge was in his time considerably advanced) had invented useful arts, and taught the first rudiments of science, and who caused his instructions to be engraved in emblematical figures -f- upon tables or columns of stone, which he dispersed over the country, for the purpose of enlightening the ignorant multitude. One of the principal uses to which these symbolical inscrip¬ tions was applied, doubtless, was to teach the doctrines of religion and maxims of 'political and moral wisdom. Some writers have, fancifully enough, conjectured this Thoth, or Mercury, to have been the same with Adam, or Enoch, or Joseph. Others have, with more plausibility, main¬ tained that he was the Jewish legislator ; but the circumstances of resem¬ blance between Thoth and Moses were such as might easily be supposed to have occurred between any other eminent founders of states. J Besides this Hermes or Mercury, there was another, who, at a later period, was equally celebrated. Manetho distinguishes him from the first, and says of him, § that from engraved tables of stone, which had been buried in the earth, he translated the sacred characters written by the first Mercury, and wrote the explanation in books, which were deposited in the Egyptian temples. He calls him the son of Agathodaemon ; and adds, that to him are ascribed the restoration of the wisdom taught by the first Mercury, and the revival of geometry, arithmetic, and the arts, among the Egyptians. He was also called Trismegistus. The written monuments of the first Hermes having been lost or neglected, in certain civil revolutions or natural calamities, the second Hermes recovered || them, and made use of them as a means of establishing his authority. By an ingenious interpretation of the symbols inscribed upon the ancient columns, he impressed the sacred sanction of antiquity upon his own insti¬ tutions ; and to perpetuate their influence upon the minds of the people, he committed the columns, with his own interpretations, to the care of the priesthood. Hence he obtained a high degree of respect among the people, and was long revered as the restorer of learning. From the tables of the first Hermes he is said to have written, as commentaries and explana¬ tions, an incredible number of books. It has been asserted that he was the author of more than 20,000 volumes which treated of universal principles, of the nature and orders of celestial beings, of astrology, medicine, and other topics.^ But many of the subjects upon which these writings are said to have treated were unknown in the early period of the Egyptian philo¬ sophy. There can be little doubt, therefore, that they were the forgeries * Lucan,!, iii. v. 222. Then Memphis, ere the reedy leaf was known, Engraved her precepts and her arts on stone ; While animals, in various order placed, Tlie learn’d hieroglyphic column graced. Rowe. f Herodot. 1. ii. c. 37. Diodor. 1. i. J Huef. Dem. Evang. Pr. iv. c. 4. Heumanni Acta Phil. t. ii. p. 687. § Ap. Syncellum, p. 40. ;| Herodot. 1. ii. c. 82. Marsham, Chron. p. 241. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. v. p. 242. ^ Jamblichus de Myst. Algypt. sect. viii. c. I, 2. Julius Firmicus, I. ii. Mathes. Fabricii Bibl. Gr. v. i. p. 7,6. Cliap. 8. OF THE EGYPTIANS. 39 of a later age, when it became one of the common artifices of imposture to give the sanction of antiquity to fiction.* From these first authors of Egyptian wisdom all learning was transmitted to posterity by means of the priesthood, — a sacred order probably insti¬ tuted by the second Hermes. The Egyptian priests had the reputation of extraordinary sanctity, and were even supposed to participate of divinity. Hence they obtained great sway over the people, and possessed no small share of influence in civil affairs. At several fixed hours of the day they celebrated the pi’aises of the gods in hymns : the rest of their time they employed in mathematical studies, in astronomical observations, or in other scientific pursuits. They observed a great degree of gravity in their dress and external deportment. They were exceedingly attentive to personal cleanliness ; and, for this purpose, they made use of frequent ablutions, and of circumcision. They held it unlawful to eat fish or beans. This latter superstition was adopted by the Pythagoreans.-j- These priests concealed the mysteries of religion and philosophy from the vulgar by means of written characters, which none but the initiated could understand. These were of two kinds — hieroglyphical, and alpha¬ betical. The former were those symbolical characters, which were in¬ scribed by the first Hermes on pillars or tables of stone, and which were afterwards copied and interpreted by the priests. The latter was the. method of writing invented, or adopted, for the sake of explaining the hieroglyphic records, but made use of only by the priests, and for religious purposes. Hence these characters were called Sacerdotal, or Sacred. Besides these, there was a third Jtind of character in common use among the people, called the Epistolary. J Many attempts have been made to explain the hieroglyphic mode of writing, from the few specimens, and the imperfect accounts, which remain from antiquity. But it would be surprising if the sagacity of modern criticism were able to decipher characters, which do not appear to have been always perfectly understood by the Egyptian priests themselves, and which were, if not at their first introduction, certainly in their subsequent application, made use of for the purpose of concealment. § The sacerdotal writings were deposited in the ininost recesses of temples : none but priests of the higher orders were commonly permitted to examine them ; no stranger could obtain a sight of them without an express order from the king, or without subhiitting to several troublesome ceremonies, par¬ ticularly that of circumcision. II Pythagoras seems to have been the only man who ever chose to gratify his curiosity on these hard conditions. From this regular system of concealment, it may reasonably be inferred * Jablonski, the author of Pantheon Mgyptiorum, is of opinion that the first Hermes, or Thoth, was not a man, but the sacerdotal divinity, from whom the priests were sup¬ posed to have derived all their wisdom and authority, and who presided over the ffr-fiKai, or columns, on which the ancient learning of the country was inscribed. This divinity, who, as the god of the columns, was called Thoth, he maintains to have been the same with Phthas (called by the Greeks Vulcan), that is, the supreme Deity.(a) Butit seems more consonant to the general voice of antiquity to suppose that the first inventor of the inscriptions upon the columns was conceived to have been inspired by some divinity; and that afterwards, upon the recovery of the sacred columns, the second Hermes, who undertook to explain them, pretended to derive his descent from Thoth, and to partake of that divine inspiration which had dictated the ancient wisdom inscribed upon these pillars. {a) Pantheon JEg. 1. v. c. 5. t Herod. l»ii. c. 37. Strabo, 1. xvii. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. iii. p. 303. vR p. 933. Vid. Jablonski Pantheon jTlgyptiorum, Proleg. c. 3. X Clem. Alex. Stromat. 1. v. p. 555. Porphyr. Vit. Pythag. p. 15. Shaw’s Travels, v. ii. c. 5. § Origen contra Celsum, 1. i. p. 11. 11 Jamblic. 1. c. 40 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. that the Egyptian theology and philosophy were chiefly contrived to pre¬ serve and increase the authority of the priesthood, and to aid the designs of government.* At the same time, it is very evident, that we can have little hope, at this distant period, of being able to draw aside the veil which has so long concealed the Egyptian mysteries. What kind of claim the Egyptians had to the character of philosophers will, however, in part appear, if we proceed to inquire into the state of knowledge among them, respecting particular sciences and arts. Geometry, whether invented by the Egyptians or not (a question which it is notour province particularly to examine), was certainly known amongst them.-j- But, to suppose that they were acquainted with the higher and more abstruse parts of this science is a mistake. The necessity they were under of annually settling the boundaries of their lands, which were broken up by the overflowing of the Nile, taught them the art of mensuration ; but we have no proof that they possessed more mathematical knowledge than this art required. The elementary discoveries, which were made by Pytha'goras and Thales after their return from Egypt, sufficiently prove that this science must have been in a very imperfect state in that country at the time when they visited it for the purpose of acquiring knowledge. It may therefore be certainly concluded that we are indebted to Greece, and not to Egypt, for the advanced state in which the mathematical sciences have been transmitted from ancient to modern times. The case was nearly similar with respect to astronomy. Some writers have made the Egyptians, and others the Babylonians, the original authors of this science. But it is probable that the first elements of astronomy were discovered by different nations, whose habits of life led them to the frequent observation of the heavens. Thus Cicero says,;]; “ The Egyptians and Babylonians, dwelling in open plains, where nothing intercepted the view of the heavenly bodies, devoted themselves to the study of astro¬ nomy.” If, however, the honour of inventing this science be given to the Egyptians, it must be allowed that their knowledge of the subject was neither sufficiently extensive nor profound to entitle them to the character of astronomical philosophers. They observed the rising and setting of the stars, the order of the signs in the Zodiac, and the aspects of the planets ; but it was merely to enable them to practise astrological arts : they re¬ marked the equinoctial and solstitial points ; but it was only to ascertain the length of the year : they noticed the varieties of weather, and imagined them connected with the appearance or situation of the heavenly bodies ; but they had no other object in view than to regulate the labours of the husbandman. It was in the Pythagorean school that Eudoxus first applied mathematical principles to the explanation of the celestial motions ; and it was Thales, a Grecian, who first predicted an eclipse. § The invention of Music is also ascribed to the Egyptians : but this can only relate to the first elements of melody ; for the proportion of harmonic sounds was discovered, as we shall afterwards learn, by Pythagoras. The origin of the Medical Art was referred by the Egyptians to their demigods. It is chiefly on this account that the names of Isis, and her son Horus, or Apollo, are so highly celebrated among the Egyptian divinities. Whence Ovid, speaking of Apollo, says, || * Jabtensk. Panth. J3g. tom. ii. p. 183, 253. Orig. adv. Cels. 1. i. p. 11. Clem. .41ex. Strom, p. 533. . t Vossius de Scientiis Matth. c. xiii. p. 48. Burnet, Archaeol. c. viii. D. Laert. 1. i. sect. 11. t De Divinat. l.i. § Plin. 1. ii. c. 13. Cic, Div. 1. i. || Metam. 1. i. v. 521. Chap. 8. OF THE EGYPTIANS. 41 Inventum medicina meum est, opiferque per orbem Dicor, et herbarum subjecta potentia nobis.(a) The name of Esculapius, or Serapis,* has also, for the same reason, a distinguished place in the Egyptian mythology. But the history of these inventors of medicine is too obscure to afford any other conclusion, than this simple fact, that there were, in the most remote period of the Egyp¬ tian history, celebrated men, who devoted themselves to the benevolent office of healing diseases, and who were afterwards, by their grateful, but ignorant and superstitious countrymen, ranked among the gods. Homer indeed speaks of Egypt as fertile in drugs rf - ■K\eiffTa (pepft ^dSwpos apovcra ^apfiuKa - (b) But the particulars which are preserved respecting the Egyptian method of practice will scarcely permit us to rank the Egyptian physicians among philosophers. Herodotus relates,:}; that, in his time, there were distinct physicians for different diseases, which they classed according to their seat in the human body. From Diodorus Siculus, we learn,§ that instead of prescribing medicines according to the judgment and experience of the practitioner, every physician was obliged to follow a written code ; and if, in adhering to this, he proved unsuccessful, he was free from blame ; but, if he ventured to depart from the prescribed forms, though the patient recovered, the physician was to lose his life. In administering medicines, they called in the aid of magical incantations, and pretended that super¬ natural virtues were, by means of these, communicated to certain plants.}} In short, from every circumstance which is known concerning medical practice among the Egyptians, it appears that it was entirely empirical, and that it was artfully connected with superstition, to serve the purposes of priestcraft. The art of alchymy has been said to have been known by the ancient Egyptians ; and, from the founder of the Egyptian philosophy, it has been called the Hermetic art. But we find no certain account of any attempt to effect the. transmutation of metals, earlier than the time of Constantine. In the fictitious sciences of astrology and magic ^ there can be no doubt that the Egyptians were adepts. Their priests were not negligent in cul¬ tivating arts, which would give them such an irresistible sway over an ignorant and superstitious populace. Diodorus Siculus** relates that the Chaldeans learned these arts from the Egyptians, which he could not have asserted, had there not been at least a general tradition that they were prac • tised from the earliest times in Egypt. One of the most ancient sects of the Magi, as the Mosaic history informs us,j'j" was among the Egyptians. These Magi made use of small images, of various forms, with which they pretended to perform many wonders, and particularly to cure diseases. The image of Harpocrates, an astronomical divinity, who seems to have personified the return of the sun at the winter solstice, and who was repre- * sented in the form of a young infant, was hung from the neck, or worn in a ring upon the finger, as an amulet.§§ (а) Med’cine is mine, what herbs and simples grow In fields and forests, all their powers I know ; -And am the great ]|5hysician called below. Dryden. • Tacit. Hist. 1. iv. c. 84. Apuleius, 1. x. f Odyss. 1. iv. v. 229. (б) - Where prolific Nile With various simples clothes the fatten’d soil. Pope. ]: L. ii. § L. i. c. 28. 1| Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. xxx. c. 2. ^ Ib. c. i. ** Lib. i. p. 51. tt Exod. iv. Pet. Arpe de Talism. p. 7. Gaulmin de Vit. Mosis, I. i. c. 11. §§ Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. xxxiii. c. 2. Jablonsk. Panth. .(Egypt p. i. c. 6. 42 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. Before we attempt to approach the mysteries of the Egyptian theology, or philosophy (for, in speaking of ancient times, these cannot be separated), we must remark that it was of two kinds ; the one exoteric, addressed to the vulgar; the other esoteric, confined to a select number of the priests, and to those who possessed, or were to possess, the regal power.* The mysterious nature of their concealed doctrine was symbolically expressed by images of sphinxes placed at the entrance of their temples. It must also be recollected, that in different cities of Egypt, and in different colleges of priests, different tenets prevailed. Of this Juvenal furnishes an example, in his account of a quarrel between the inhabitants of Tentyra and Ombri, two neighbouring districts in Egypt, concerning the crocodile ; the Tentyriteans being accustomed to worship this formidable animal, and the Ombrians to kill it wherever they found it.-j- - Summus utrinque Inde furor vulgo, quod numina vicinorum Odit uterque locus, quem solus credat habendos Esse Deos, quos ipse colit.(a) That these disputes were not confined to the popular superstitions, appears from the different and contradictory accounts, which were given by the Egyptian priests themselves;]; of the origin and history of their divinities. The exoteric religion of the Egyptians is universally known to have con¬ sisted in the grossest and most irrational superstitions. It could only be on account of the strictness with which the populace adhered to these that Herodotus speaks of them as the most religious of men.§ Besides gods, heroes, and eminent men, they worshipped various kinds of animals and plants. Their superstitious character is thus ridiculed by Juvenal :]] Quis nescit, Volusi Bythinice, qualia demens jEgyptus portenta colat ? Crocodilon adorat Pars haec ; ilia pavet saturam serpentibus Ibin. Effigies sacri nitet aurea Cercopitheci, Dimidio magicae resonant ubi Memnone cbordae, Atque vetus Thebe centum jacet obruta portis. Illic caeruleos, bic piscem fluminis, illic Oppida tota canem venerantur, nemo Dianam ; Porrum et cepe nefas violare, ac frangere morsu. O sanctus gentes, quibus haec nascuntur in hortis Numina ! (b) * Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. v. p. 566. Plutarch de Isid. et Osir. f Sat. xv, v. 34. (a) - Hence ruthless rancour springs ; Each hates his neighbour’s gods, and each believes The power alone divine which he adores. 1: Herodot. 1. ii. c. 42. Plutarch de Is. et Os. § L. ii. c. 37. |1 Sat. xv. v. 1. &c. (6) Who knows not, that there’s nothing vile or odd. Which brain-sick Egypt turns not to a god ? , Some of her fools the crocodile adore, The ibis cramm’d with snakes as many more. A long-tailed ape the suppliants most admire, Where a half Memnon tunes his magic lyre ; Where Thebes, once for her hundred gates renown’d. An awful heap of ruins strews the ground : Whole towns, in one place, »river fish revere. To sea-fish some as piously adhere : In some a dog’s high deity is seen ; But none mind Dian, tho’ of dogs the queen : Nay, vegetables here take rank divine ; On leeks and onions ’tis profane to dine. Oh holy nation ! where the gardens bear A crop of gods through all the live-long year I Owen. OF THE EGYPTIANS. 43 Chap. 8. At Rome, the Egyptian superstitions were thought so pernicious, that, under the consulship of Piso and Gabinius, the public worship of their gods was prohibited,* and in the reign of Tiberius the observance of Egyptian rites was suppressed, and those who were infected with this superstition were required to burn their sacred vestments, and other articles employed in their ceremonies.-|- The most probable account of the origin of the i Egyptian superstitions is, that those natural bodies, which were at first \ introduced into their religious rites merely as emblems, or symbols, of in- | visible divinities, became themselves, in process of time, objects of worship. ! Concerning the esoteric, or philosophical doctrine of the Egyptians, it seems evident, in the first place, that they conceived matter to be the first principle of things, and that before the regular forms of nature arose, an eternal chaos had existed, which contained, in a state of darkness and con¬ fusion, all the materials of future beings. This Chaos, which was also called Night, was, in the most ancient times, worshipped as one of the superior divinities. Aristotle speaks of Chaos and Night as one and the same, and as the first principle, from which, in the ancient cosmogonies, all things are derived. j; It is probable that the Egyptians worshipped the material principle. Chaos, or Night, under the name ofAthor; a word which, in the Coptic language, signifies night.^ This divinity the Grecian mythologists, after their usual manner, confounded with Venus. Hesychius refers to a temple in Egypt dedicated to the nocturnal Venus : ’A^poBiTTje (TicoTiaQ 'Upov.\\ Aud Herodotus relates,^ that in the city of Atarbechis was a temple sacred to Venus: whence it may be inferred, that long before the time of Herodotus, Athor, or the Egyptian Venus, denoting the material principle, was an object of worship. Of this divinity the sym¬ bol which, after their usual manner, the Egyptians placed in her temple, was a cow.** That the passive principle in nature was thus admitted to a primary place in the philosophy and theology of the Egyptians is confirmed by Diogenes Laertius ; who says, that the Egyptians taught that matter is the first principle, and that from this the four elements are separated, and certain animals produced. j''{- Besides the material principle, it seems capable of satisfactory proof that the Egyptians admitted an active principle, or intelligent power, eternally united with the chaotic mass, by whose energy the elements were separated, and bodies were formed, and who continually presides over the universe, and is the efficient cause of all effects. For this we have not only the authority of Plutarch, who may be suspected of having exhibited the Egyptian philosophy in a Grecian dress, but the united testimony of many writers, who give such accounts of the Egyptian gods, Phthas or Vulcan, and Cneph or Agathodaemon, as render it probable that these were only diffe¬ rent names expressing different attributes of the Supreme Divinity. “ The Egyptians,” says Eusebius, §§ “ call the Maker of the universe by the name of Cneph, and relate, that he sent forth an egg from his mouth ; which, in their symbolical language, denotes that he produced the universe.” Dio¬ dorus Siculus II 11 speaks of the Egyptian Vulcan as first king asnong the gods; and Manetho^^ ascribes to him unlimited duration, and perpetual splendour. The name itself, Phthas, in the Coptic language, denotes one by whom events are ordained. When the Egyptians meant to represent the * Tertull. Apol. c. 6. f Sueton. Tib. Plut. Is. et Osir. X Metapbys. 1. xii. c. 6. § Jablonsk. Pantb. Aigypt. 1. i. c. I. sect. 7. || In verb. a-Korla. ^ L. ii. c. 41. ** iElian. de Anim. 1. xi. c. 27. Jabl. ib. sect. 15. Strabo, 1. xvii. p. 552. ft Proem, sect. 10. J]; Isis and Osiris. §§ L. iii. c. 11. |{|| L. i. p. 13. A pud Syncellum, p. 51. 44 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book L Ruler of the world as good, they called him by the appellation Cneph ; a word which denotes a good genius. They represented him under the symbol of a serpent.* Upon a temple dedicated to Neitha, at Sais, the chief town in Lower Egypt, was this inscription : “ I am whatever is, or has been, or will be, and no mortal has hitherto drawn aside my veil ; my offspring is the sun.” Both Plutarch and Proclus mention this inscription, though with some difference of language ;')■ and it is so consonant to the mythological spirit of the Egyptians, that notwithstanding the silence of more ancient writers who treat of their theology, its authenticity may be easily admitted. If this be allowed, and if at the same time it be granted (as the learned Jablonski maintains:!:) that Neitha and Phthas were only different names for the same divinity, this inscription will be a strong con¬ firmation of the opinion, that the Egyptians acknowledged the existence of an active intelligence, the cause of all things, whose nature is incomprehen¬ sible. On the whole, notwithstanding what has been advanced in support of the contrary opinion by Porphyry § and others, it appears highly pro¬ bable that the ancient Egyptians acknowledged an active as well as a passive principle in nature, and as Plutarch asserts, worshipped rJ Trpwrw Gt J the Supreme Deity. The doctrine of an ethereal intelligence pervading and animating the material world, appears, among the Egyptians, to have been from the earliest time accompanied with a belief in inferior divinities. Conceiving emana¬ tions from the Divinity to be resident in various parts of nature, when they saw life, motion, and enjoyment communicated to the inhabitants of the earth from the sun, and, as they supposed, from other heavenly bodies, they ascribe these effects to the influence of certain divinities, derived from the first deity, which they supposed to inhabit these bodies. Hence arose their worship of the sun, under the names of Osiris, Ammon, and Horus ; of the moon, under those of Isis, Bubastis, and Buto ; of the Cabiri, or planets ; of Sothis, or the Dog-star ; and of other celestial divini¬ ties, j] The Cabiri were called by the Egyptian priests sons of Phthas, or Vulcan, that is, of the Supreme Being.^ When the Egyptians worshipped the divinity under the notion of an offended sovereign, they called him Tithrarabo, that is, according to the Greeks, Hecate ; and the evil prin¬ ciple, from which they conceived themselves liable to misfortune, they deprecated as an object of terror, 'under the name of Typhon.** From the same source it may be easily conceived that, among the Egyptians as well as in other nations, would arise the worship of deified men. When they saw their illustrious heroes or legislators protecting their country by their prowess, or improving human life by useful inventions and institutions, they concluded that a large portion of that divinity, which animates all things, resided in them, and supposed that after their death the good demon that animated them passed into the society of the divini¬ ties. In this manner it may be conceived that the worship of heroes would spring up together with that of the heavenly bodies. But whether the former did, in fact, prevail among the Egyptians, is a question which has been much disputed, and which, after all that has been advanced upon it, still remains undecided.-j-j- * Euseb. Pr. Ev. 1. i. c. 10. 1. iii. c. 11. Plut. Amat. Lamprid. c. 28. f Plut. Is. et Osir. Prod, in Tim. p. 30. Pantheon jEgypt. § Vid. Jambl. Myst. JEg. Praef. Ed. Galsei. II Jablonsk. 1. ii. c. 1, 2, 4. 1. iii. c. 1, 2, 3, 4. Proleg. c. i. sect. 26. ^ Herod. 1. iii. c. 37. ** Jabl. 1. i. c. 5. 1. v. c. 2. tf See on this question, Euseb. Pr. 1. i. c. 9. Diod. Sic. 1. i. c. 8. Univ. Hist. v. 1 sect. 510. Shuckford, v. 1. p. 208. Jablonski Proleg. c. 2. Chap. 8. OF THE EGYPTIANS. 45 The opinion of the Egyptians concerning the human soul, is very differ¬ ently represented by different writers. It is indeed universally agreed that they believed it to be immortal. Herodotus asserts, though perhaps with¬ out sufficient ground, that they were the first people who taught this doctrine;* and Diodorus Siculus relates, f that the Egyptians, instead of lamenting the death of good men, rejoiced in their felicity, conceiving that, in the invisible world, they would live for ever among the pious. To the same purport is the account which he gives of the custom of bringing the characters of the deceased under a public trial, and offering up prayers to the gods on behalf of those who were adjudged to have lived virtuously, that they might be admitted into the society of good men. But it has been a subject of debate, into what place, according to the Egyptian doc¬ trine, the souls of men passed after death. Plutarch speaks j; of the Amenthes of the Egyptians, corresponding to the Hades of the Greeks, a subterraneous region, to which the souls of great men were conveyed. Witli this agrees the account given by Diodorus Siculus of the funeral customs of the Egyptians. It is also confirmed by a fact, related by Por- phyry,§ upon the authority of Euphantus, that the Egyptians at their funerals, offered up this prayer, in the name of the deceased ; “ Thou sun, who rulest all things, and ye other powers who give life to man, receive me, and grant me an abode among the immortal gods.” Herodotus, on the contrary, gives it as the opinion of the Egyptians, || that, when the body decays, the soul passes into some other animal, which is then born; and that after it has made the circuit of beasts, birds, and fishes, through a period of three thousand years, it again becomes an inhabitant of a human body. Diogenes Laertius, after Hecateus, relates,^ that according to the tenets of the Egyptians, the soul after death continues to live, and passes into other bodies. These different notions concerning the state of the soul after death, were probably held by different colleges of priests, some of whom were advo¬ cates for the doctrine of transmigration ; while others held, that the souls of good men, after wandering for a time among the stars, were permitted to return to the society of the gods ; or the seeming inconsistency of these opinions may be reconciled by means of a conjecture, which naturally arises from the doctrine that God is the soul of the world, from which all things came, and to which they will return. According to this doctrine it may be conceived, that all souls, being portions of the universal mind, 1 must return to the Divinity ; but that since different minds, by their union with the body, are stained with different degrees of impurity, it becomes ! necessary that, before their return, they should pass through different ' degrees of purgation, which might be supposed to be accomplished by j means of successive transmigrations. According to this system, bad men 1 would undergo this metempsychosis for a longer, good men for a shorter ; period ; and the Amenthes, or Hades, may be conceived to have been the region in which departed souls, immediately after death, received their ' respective designations. ■ As the Egyptians held that the world was produced from chaos by the energy of an intelligent principle, so they conceived that there is in nature ; a continual tendency towards dissolution. In Plato’s Timaeus, an Egyptian I priest is introduced, describing the destruction of the world, and asserting 1 that it will be effected by means of water and; fire. . They conceived that I * L. ii. c. 123. f L. i. e. 12. X Lis et Osiris. § De Abstinentia, 1. iv. sect. 10. ! II L. ii. c. 123. ^ L. i. sect. 10. I I 46 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. the universe undergoes a periodical conflagration, after which all things are restored to their original form, to pass again through a similar suc¬ cession of changes.* * * § Of perceptive doctrine the Egyptians had two kinds, the one sacred, the other vulgar. The former, which respected the ceremonies of religion, and the duties of the priests, was doubtless written in the sacred books of Hermes, but was too carefully concealed to pass down to posterity. The latter consisted of maxims and rules of virtue, prudence, or policy. Dio¬ dorus Siculus relates many particulars concerning the laws, customs, and manners of the Egyptians, whence it appears that superstition mingled with, and corrupted their notions of morals. It is in vain to look for accurate principles of ethics among an ignorant and superstitious people : and that the ancient Egyptians merited this character, is sutiiciently evi¬ dent from this single circumstance, that they suffered themselves to be deceived by impostors, particularly by the professors of the fanciful art of astrology ; concerning whom Sextus Empiricus justly remarks,-]- that they have done much mischief in the world, by enslaving men to superstition, which will not suffer them to follow the dictates of right reason, j; CHAPTER IX. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ETHIOPIANS. The country of Ethiopia, which, in the more confined use of the name, nearly corresponds to the modern Abyssinia, was, at a very remote period, inhabited by a people, whose opinions and customs nearly resembled those of the Egyptians. Many of their divinities were the same ; they had the same orders of priesthood, and religious ceremonies ; they made use of the same character? in writing ; their mode of dress was similar ; and the regal sceptre made use of in both countries was in the form of a plough. § Whence it is evident, either that the Egyptians received their religion and learning from the Ethiopians, as Lucian asserts, || or, which the great an¬ tiquity and celebrity of the Egyptian nation renders much more probable, that the Ethiopians were instructed by the Egyptians. Ethiopia seems to have been colonised from Egypt, and to have received its institutions from the parent country. Little can be advanced with certainty concerning the philosophy of the Ethiopians. Their wise men, like those of the Indians, were called Gym- * Diod. Sic. 1. i. c. 1. Laert. 1. i. sect. 10. Orig. contra Cels. I. v. p. 252. Macrob. Sat. 1. ii. c. 6. f Adv. Math. 1. v. I Vidend. Jablonski Pantheon jEgyptiorum, passim. Herm. Conringius de Hermet. jEgypt. Witsii Aigyptiaca. Mosheim. Not. ad Cudworth, c. iv. Voss, de Hist. Gr. 1. ii. 3. Gyrald. Hist. Deor. 1. ix. Natal. Comes Mythol. 1. v. c. 5. Voss, de Idol. 1. ii. Reland. Diss. de Diis Cabiris, tom. i. Ursin. de Zor. Merc, et Sancli. Basnage, Hist, des Juifs. tom. iii. c. 18, sect 20. Heuman. Act. Phil. v. i. p. 222, &c. Voss, de Scient. Math. c. 13. Burnet, Arch. c. viii. Pignorus in Mens. Isiac. Le Clerc, Bibl. Univ. t. iii. Horns Apollo in Hieroglyph. 1. i. Banier, Diss. sur le Typhon, ap. Hist. Anc. Inscrip, t. vi. Joach. Operinus de Immort. Mortalium. Liv. Galantes. Compar. Theol. Plat. p. 237, &c. Dickinson, Phys. Vet. et Ver. c. xii. Perizonii Agypt. in- vestigat. Stillingfleet, Orig. Sac. 1. i. c. 2. Reimann. Antiq Liter. Agypt. Diss. de Ann. Mg. Misc. Berolin. t. iv. Wachter, Concord. Ration, et Script. 1. iii. Warburton, Div. Leg. 1. iv. sect. 2, &c. Anc. Univ. Hist. v. i. Banier sur la Mythol. /Egypt. § Diod. Sic. 1. ii. Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. vi. c. 29. Strabo, 1. xvii. p. 779. II De Astrolog. Chap. 9. OF THE ETHIOPIANS. 47 nosophists, from their custom of wearing little clothing. They discharged the sacred functions after the manner of the Egyptian priests ; had dis¬ tinct colleges, and classes of disciples, and taught their dogmas in obscure and mythological language. They were remarkable for their contempt of death.* Strabo speaks of the Southern Ethiopians as atheists ;f but we must understand by this character, not that they were destitute of all belief in a supreme power, but that they did not worship the same gods, or make use of the same ceremonies with their neighbours, j; In another place, § the same historian says, that they acknowledged two gods, one immortal and the other mortal ; that the immortal god was always the same, the first cause of all things, but that the mortal god was uncertain, and without a name. Perhaps this mortal god was the principle of evil, which the Egyptians acknowledged under the name of Typhon, who being at length to be overcome by the good principle, might properly be said to be mortal. However this may be, it is certain that the Ethiopians were scrupulously exact in their religious worship, and therefore could by no means deserve the charge of atheism. Homer says, || Ztvs yap €7r’ 'ClKeavov fier' dfixip-ovas AidioTrrjas Xdi^os fSt] p-erd Salra' 6eol 5’ dpa ■jrdt'TfS enovTO. (a) Lucian^ ascribes the invention of astronomy and astrology to the Ethi¬ opians. But it is not probable that the observation and knowledge of the celestial phenomena were originally confined to any one country. The Babylonians, Egyptians, Ethiopians, and other nations, who, from their climate and manner of life, had frequent occasion to observe the motions of the stars, may be supposed, independently of each other, to have made many discoveries respecting the celestial phenomena. But though there is no sufficient reason for ascribing to the Ethiopians the exclusive honour of inventing astronomy, the story of Atlas makes it very probable that this science was early studied among them. The fable of his bearing the heavens upon his shoulders perhaps only means, that Atlas was a diligent observer of the heavenly bodies, and taught his countrymen astronomy.** He is said to have had seven daughters, called the Pleiades, who (perhaps because they had pursued the study of astronomy under their father) were advanced to an honourable station in the heavens, and gave name to a well-known constellation.-j'-j- His residence was probably near those lofty mountains, which to this day bear the name of Atlas, and which Virgil so beautifully describes : Oceani finem juxta, solemque cadentem, Ultimus jEthiopum locus est, ubi maximus Atlas Axem humero torquet stellis ardentibus aptum. (6) Many other particulars are related concerning the philosophy of the • Diod. Sic. 1. c. Lucian, de Astrol. Laert. 1. i. sect. 6. f Loc. cit. X Vossius de Idolot. Gent. 1. i. c. 2. § P. 822. Conf. Stobaei Serm. 42. II II. 1. i. v. 423. (a) The sire of gods, and all th’ ethereal train, On the warm limits of the farthest main, Now mix with mortals, nor disdain to grace The feasts of ^Ethiopia’s blameless race. Poi’E. ^ Loc. cit. •* Virg. ^neid, 1. i. v. 745. ft Natalis Comes Mythol. 1. iv. c. 7. Xt !• ir. ver. 480. (J) Near Ocean’s utmost bound a region lies, Where mighty Atlas props the starry skies. Pitt. 48 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. Ethiopians, by Philostratus, in his life of Apollonius Tyanaeus ; but this, as we shall afterwards see, is a work, on many accounts, of doubtful credit. The morality of the Ethiopians, according to Laertius,* consisted in worshipping the gods, doing no evil, exercising fortitude, and despising death. CHAPTER X. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CELTS, INCLUDING THE GAULS, BRITONS, GERMANS, AND NORTHERN NATIONS. Having traced the ancient history of barbaric philosophy through Asia and Africa, we now pass over into Europe, to observe the forms which it assumed in the Western and Northern regions. In this part of the world, besides the exotic Romans and the Greeks, of whom we shall afterwards treat, we find the nation of the Celts, who, from the northern extremities of Asia, sent out colonies, westward, similar to each other in their customs and institutions. Hence not only the Scythians and the Pannonians, but also the ancient inhabitants of Germany, Britain, Gaul, and Spain, come under the general denomination of Celts. The history of the Celtic nations is involved in great obscurity, not so much from the unavoidable depredations of time, as from the total want of ancient records. So far were the ancient Gauls, Germans, and Britons, from having among them any learned historians to record their institutions or opinions, that they industriously discouraged every attempt to commit things of this kind to writing. Julius Caesar, who was well acquainted with the state of Gaul, says, that though, in almost all their public and private records, the Gauls made use of Greek letters, they did not commit their doctrines to writing r-j- but he is to be understood as only speaking of his own times ; for, at a more remote period, the Gauls were strangers to the art of writing. According to Strabo, J they were first instructed in letters by a Greek colony which settled at Marseilles about the year of Rome 165. The Germans became acquainted with this art much later: Tacitus § intimates, that it was not in common use among them even in his time. These nations had no other records of public transactions than the songs of their bards. || It is not to be supposed that they who received the oral instructions of wise men under an injunction of secrecy, as seems to have been the general practice among the Celtic nations, would communicate them to strangers. The reports of the Greek and Roman historians on this subject must, therefore, have had no better foundation than vulgar rumour, gathered up by foreigners in accidental conversation. Julius Caesar himself, though the conquerer of Gaul, and a curious observer of the nations whom he * L. i. sect. 6. Vidend. Scheffer de Phil. Ital. c. 4. Witsii ^Egypt. 1. ii. Voss, de Idol. 1. i. c. 1. Marsham, Can. Chron. sect. xiii. Bochart, Geog. Sac. p. i. 1. ii. c. 13. Lambecii Prodrom. Hist. Lit. p. 133. Natal. Comes Myth. 1. iv. c. 7. Ludolph. Hist. iEthiop. Anc. Univ. Hist. v. 16. t Bell. G. vi. 13. J L. iv. p. 181. II Strabo, 1. vi. p. 190. Athaen. 1. vi. p. 154. § Mor. Germ. c. 19. Chap, 10. OF THE CELTS. 49 conquered, found little to relate concerning the opinions of the Gauls, No wonder that other writers have filled their accounts of the Celtic theology with idle tales and extravagant fables. From the imperfect reports concerning these nations which remain, it is, however, desirable that we should frame the best idea we are able of their philosophy ; for, though their wisdom was of a very different cha-- racter from that of the Greeks and Romans, they were not so destitute of knowledge as not to have their schools of instruction and their phi¬ losophers. The Druids (so called from Deru, a Celtic word which signifies an oak, still used in that sense in the Erse language*) are spoken of by the ancient writers as an order existing, in the remotest period, among all nations. Diogenes Laertius, -I- on the authority of Aristotle and Sotion, ranks the Druids of the Celtae and Galatas with the Magi of the Persians, the Chal¬ deans of Babylonia, and the Gymnosophists of the Indians. In what Celtic nation this order was first instituted is uncertain ; J but there can be no doubt that before the time of Julius Caesar it was generally established in Britain, Gaul, and Germany. The office and character of the Gallic Druids, the causes of their authority, their manner of teaching, and other circumstances, are clearly explained in the Commentaries of Caesar. The chief particulars of his account are the following : § “The Druids preside in religious concerns, direct the public and private sacrifices, and interpret the will of the gods. Young men are sent to them for education, by vvhora they are held in great honour. The decision of almost all controversies, both public and private, is referred to them ; and if any crime be com¬ mitted, if any murder be perpetrated, or if any dispute arise concerning an inheritance, or the boundaries of lands, — in all such cases they pro¬ nounce sentence, and decree rewards or punishments ; and if any one, whether in a private or public station, refuse to submit to their decree, they interdict him the sacrifices, which is the severest penalty they can inflict. — The Druids are under one elective chief. They never go to war, are exempted from taxes and military services, and enjoy every kind of immunity.” These particulars concerning the Druids prove, that like the Magi, and other priests of the East, they had great power in the state, and supported their influence and authority by the aid of superstition. They were divided } into three classes ; the Bards, who celebrated the praises of eminent men in songs accompanied with the lyre ; the Eubages, who performed the rites of religion and divination ; and the Druids, in the more limited sense of the appellation, who had in their hands the direction of public affairs, the administration of justice, and the education of youth. || They clothed their dogmas in an allegorical dress, and delivered them in verse, that they might be the more easily remembered. They instructed their disciples in retired groves, nr in caverns, and forbade them, under the severest penalties, to divulge the secret doctrines which they were taught, or to commit them to writing. ^ Hence the doctrines of the Druids must have been very imperfectly known, except among those who were admitted into their interior mysteries. On this subject Lucan says * Toland’s Letters on the Druids. f L, i. sect. 2. X Cses. Bel. G. ]. vi. c. 14. Tacit. Agric. Vit. c. xi. Plin. Hist. N. 1. xxx. c. 1. § Bell. Gall. 1. vi. c. 13. II Diod. Sic, 1. V. p. 308. Strabo, 1. iv. p. 302. Diog. Laert. i. c. 2. Ammian. Mar- cell. 1. XV. c. 9. Laert. 1. i. sect. 6. Pomp. Mela, 1. iii. c. 2. ** Pharsal. 1. i. v. 427, E 50 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. Solis nosse deos, et cceli numiiia vobis Aut solis iiescire datum : nemora alta remotis Incolitis lucis. («) If this account of the Druids be compared with what has been already- related concerning the wise men and priests of other ancient nations, it will be sufficiently manifest that their mode of education was rather adapted to the support of fraud and imposture, than to the propagation of know¬ ledge. How far they were from being humanised by cultivation may be inferred from the barbarous rites which they practised. Ancient writers attest that they offered human sacrifices to their gods. Thus Lucan : * - Et quibus immitis placatur sanguine diro Teutates, horrensque feris altaribus Hesus, Et Taranis Scythicae non mitior ora Djanse.(6) So offensive was their savage customs to the Romans, that Augustus prohibited the use of their religious ceremonies in Gaul, and Tiberius and Claudius issued edicts for the abolition of the Druidical order. -f- The Germans, Danes, Swedes, and other northern nations derived from the Celtic stock, had customs similar to those of the Gauls and Britons, and, particularly, had among them Bards or Scaldi, and priests, whose character was the same with that of the Gaulic and British Druids. Taci¬ tus, in his account of the manners of the Germans, says : “ None but the priests are permitted to chastise delinquents, or to inflict bonds or stripes, that it may appear, not as a punishment inflicted by order of the chieftain, but as the consequence of a command from the divinity, whom they sup¬ pose to be present with warriors. They conduct the public omens, and in assemblies of the people have authority to command silence.” Strabo and other writers confirm this account. We must therefore suppose that Caesar, who says§ that the Germans had neither Druids nor sacrifices, was, in this instance, imposed upon by reports to which he had given too hasty credit. It was one of the offices of the Celtic priests, or Druids, to explain to their disciples the meaning of the fables under which their religious tenets were concealed. These fables, or allegories, were similar to those of the Asiatics, and were delivered in verse, after their manner ; a circumstance which confirms the conjecture that these nations arose from colonies which came out of the northern regions of Asia, and which brought with them the tenets which, in the remotest periods, had prevailed amongst the Per¬ sians, Scythians, and other Asiatic nations. Indeed, it is probable that the Celts and Sarmatians in Europe, and the Medes and Persians in Asia, were derived from one common stock, the Asiatic Scythians ; for, on the one hand, it appears || that the name of Scythians, which long remained in the northern parts of Asia, passed overwith the Scythian colonies into Europe, (a) ■ Who haunt the lonely coverts of the grove : To these, and these of all mankind alone, The gods are sure reveal’d, or sure unknown. Rowe. * Pharsal. 1. i. v. 444. (6) And you, where Hesus’ horrid altar stands. Where dire Teutates human blood demands ; Where Taranis by wretches is obey’d. And vies in slaughter with the Scythian maid. Rowe. f Sueton. et Victor, in Claud. Seneca in Apocolocynthosi. Plin. Hist. N. 1. xxx.c. 4. : C. 7. 10, 11. Conf.Tac. Hist. 1. iv. c. 54. j, § Bell. Gal!. 1. vi. c. 21. II Plin. Hist. N. 1. iv. c. 12. Chap. 10. OF THE CELTS. 51 where it was gradually lost in those of Sannatians and Germans ; and, on the other, authorities are not wanting to prove that the Medes and Persians were descended from the Scythians. * The same religious tenets which the Persians had received from the Scythians, were probably also embraced by the Celts, and by them transmitted, in their emigrations, through Germany, Gaul, and Spain. An allegorical and poetical representation of the tenets of the ancient northern nations concerning God, the origin of the world, the condition of man after death, and other philosophical subjects, is contained in an ancient book, written in the Runic language, called the Edda, whence the Rhythmists of Iceland chiefly borrow their fictions. It was compiled from records or traditions, which were probably of Asiatic original, -j- by Sae- mundus Sigfusonius, an Icelander, about the year 1114, and is certainly the most ancient account which is extant of the mythology of the northern nations. This work becoming obscure from the neglect of the Runic language, and other causes, another Edda, or mythological collection was made, in 1215, by Snorro, a native of Iceland, and written in the language of the country. An edition of both these curious works, with a Latin translation, was published at Copenhagen in the year 1665. From the imperfect accounts which remain of the opinions of the ancient Gauls, Germans, Britons, and other northern nations, it is extremely diffi¬ cult to frame a tolerably distinct view of the Celtic philosophy. With respect to religion, the Celts, like other ancient nations, had their public and vulgar, and their concealed and more philosophical doctrine. Their theology supposed the universe to be animated by a divinity, por¬ tions of which reside in different parts of nature. This opinion seems to have been the ground of their worship of the sun and moon, and of the reverence which they expressed for groves, rocks, and caverns. That they imagined the magnificent and gloomy scenes of nature to be inhabited by demons, fully appears from the Edda. Nor can any other reason be assigned for the superstitious notions which prevailed among them, than that these scenes were frequently the seat of oracular communications. J The practice of divination prevailed in all the Celtic nations. Many women, both in Gaul and Germany, obtained great credit and influence under the character of prophetesses, some of whom were known by the name of Samnitae.§ Of the Germans, Tacitus says, that no people were more addicted to the method of divining by omens and lots : he relates ^ that they supposed somewhat of peculiar sanctity and prescience to be ; inherent in the female sex, and therefore neither despised their counsels, nor disregarded their responses. 1| The savage manner in which the Cimbrian women performed their divinations is thus described by Strabo “ The 1 women who follow the Cimbri to war are accompanied by grey-haired pro¬ phetesses in white vestments, with canvass mantles fastened by clasps, a 1 brazen girdle, and naked feet. These go with drawn swords through the camp, and striking down the prisoners they meet, drag them to a brazen .kettle. This has a kind of stage above it, on which the priestess ascending I cuts the throat of the victim; and from the manner in which the blood flows into the vessel she judges of the future event. Others tear open the bodies of the captives thus butchered, and from inspection of the entrails * Herodot. 1. v. c. 9. Ammian. Marcell. 1. xxxi. c. 3. Pelloutierii Celtarum Hist, tom. i. p. 19. not. n. ’ I Arnkiel. Relig. Gent. Cimbr. c. ii. sect. 13. Conf. Rudbeckius in Atlantide. ' X Keysler, de Antiquit. Celt. p. 18 — 21. p. 297, &c. § Keysler, I. c. . II DeMor. Germ. c. 8. 10. ^ L. vii. i K 2 1 52 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. presage victory to their own party.” These and other similar superstitions doubtless arose from a general belief that the divinities who resided in the groves, and among the rocks, communicated to the priests and priestesses the knowledge of future events. And this belief was confirmed by the doctrine, which universally prevailed in the Celtic nations, that all events arise according to the unalterable laws of destiny, known only to the gods, and to those favoured mortals to whom they unfold the book of fate. The Celtic nations had many divinities, which they supposed to preside over different parts of nature, and which they worshipped under various names, such as Odin, Thor, Tuisco, &c. No divinity was more generally worshipped, both among the Celts and Scythians, than The Earth. The account which Tacitus gives* * * § of the worship of this goddess exhibits a beautiful picture of the simplicity of ancient manners. “The Reudigni, Aviones, Angli, Eudoses, Suardones, and Nithuones/’ says he, “ unite in the worship of Hertha, or Mother Earth, and suppose her to interfere in the affairs of men, and visit the different nations. In an island -j- of the ocean stands a sacred and unviolated grove, in which is a consecrated chariot, covered with a veil, which the priest alone is permitted to touch. He perceives when the goddess enters this secret recess, and with pro¬ found veneration attends the vehicle, which is drawn by yoked cows. At this season all is joy, and everyplace which the goddess deigns to visit is a scene of festivity. No wars are undertaken ; arms are untouched, and every hostile weapon is laid aside. Peace and repose are then only known, then only loved ; till, at length, the same priest reconducts the goddess, satisfied with mortal intercourse, to her temple. The chariot, with its covering, and, if we may believe it, the goddess herself, then undergo ablution in a secret lake. This office is performed by slaves, whom the lake instantly swallows up. Hence proceeds a mysterious horror, and a holy ignorance of what that can be which is beheld only by those who are about to perish.” — This memorable narrative not only shows that the earth was worshipped with mysterious reverence by the northern nations, but affords a striking example of the ingenuity with which their priests clothed the mysteries of religion, in order to guard them from the imper¬ tinent intrusion of vulgar curiosity. The rest of the Celtic divinities were worshipped with similar rites, in which there can be no doubt that human sacrifices were frequently introduced.;}; Before the Celtic nations were visited by the Romans, they appear to have had no other gods than those which they supposed resident in natural bodies. Czesar expressly asserts, that in his time they reckoned those alone among the number of the gods by whose attributes they were visi¬ bly benefited; as the sun, the moon, and fire. Afterwards they received, at least nominally, several of the Roman divinities ; but they continued to worship them with their ancient rites, in groves, or on open plains, and upon altars, composed of vast masses of stone, of which there are still many remains. “ They conceive it,” says Tacitus, § “to be unworthy of the grandeur of celestial beings to confine them within walls, or to repre¬ sent them under a human form : woods and groves are their temples, and they affix names of divinities to that secret power, which they behold with the eye of adoration alone — deorum nominibus appellant Secretum illud, quod sold reverentid vident. Of the same kind is the account which this * Mor. Germ. c. 40. Supposed to be Heilegelaiid (Holy Island) near the mouth of the Elbe. J J Tac. Mor. Ger. c. 9. 39. Lucan, loc. cit. Caesar. Bell. G. 1. vi. c. 15. § Germ. c. 9. Chap. 10. OF the celts. 53 judicious historian gives of the Semnones, a German nation who inhabited the banks of the Oder. After relating some particulars of their religious ceremonies, and mentioning the reverence which they paid to the groves in which they were performed, he adds:* “The whole of their superstition has this import, that there is the God who is supreme governor of all, and that every thing else is subject and subordinate to him : — ibi reg- nator omnium Deus, cetera subjecta atque parentia. The result of these accounts is, that the Celtic nations had an idea of a supreme deity, the fountain of all other divinities, and the animating and ruling principle of the universe. They seem to have worshipped him under the name of Odin, j- whom they call the Father of all. The Edda J contains many passages from which it may be clearly in¬ ferred that the northern nations had an idea of an eternal deity, prior to the formation of the material world, and that by his energy on the chaotic mass, which they called the Deep, the sun, moon, and stars, and all other material bodies, were produced. Mane erat saeculorum, cum Ymerus habitavit, Erat nec arena, nec mare, nec refrigerantes aurulm ; Terra reperta est nusquam, nec in alto coelum : Hiatus ingens erat spatii, et gramen nullibi. (a) This ancient record also speaks of human nature under the name of Mannus, as the joint production of several subordinate divinities, and as formed male and female ( Askus and Emla) before they were endued with the vital principle. Askum et Emlam omni conatu destitutes Animam nec possidebant, rationem nec habebant, Nec sanguinem, nec sermonem, nec faciem venustam, Animam dedit Odinus, rationem indidit Hcenerus, Laidur sanguinem addidit et faciem venustam. (6 ) Hence it appears that these northern nations conceived the human soul as of divine original, rational and immortal. And that this was the uni¬ versal doctrine of the Celts, whether Gauls, Britons, Germans, or other nations, is unanimously attested by the Greek and Roman writers, and by the remains of northern antiquities. Caesar relates, § that the first doctrine of the Gallic Druids was, that the soul of man is immortal ; and Pompo- nius Mela, II that one of their doctrines, which is divulged among the people in order to inspire them with martial courage, is, that the soul is immortal. This account is confirmed by Valerius Maximus,^ Strabo,** and other historians, j-j- And the fables every w4iere received among the Celts concerning a future state, leave no room to doubt that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul was generally received among them. * Germ. c. 39. f Pelloutier, p. 65, &c. J Bartholin. Antiq. Dan. 1. ii. c. 1. Solin. Polybistor. c. 16. (o) In the beginning, ere the world hath birth, While yet nor sea, nor shore, nor cooling breeze, Nor the green earth, nor azure sky, was form’d. In the vast void Ymerus lived alone. (6) Without or breath, or reasoning powers, or speech, Or vital blood, or the fair human face, Askus and Emla lay ; till Odin bade Them live, Hcenerus kindled in their breast The lamp of Mind, and Laedur through their veins Pour’d forth the purple stream ; then man arose, ^ Graceful in youth, an animated form. § Bell. G. 1. vi. c. 14. jj L. iii. c. 2. ^ L. ii. c. 6. ** L. iv. ft Vid. Pelloutierii Hist. Celt. JX Keysler, Antiq. p. 129. Schuzius de Statu Anim. c. 2. p. 75. .54 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. Such was the actual effect which this doctrine had upon the minds oi the Celts, that we find no people superior to them in the magnanimous contempt of death. Valerius Maximus extols the brave and hardy spirit of the Cimbrians and Celtiberians, who, in the midst of the hazards of battle, exulted in the expectation of going to a more glorious and happy life.* He also speaks of a Thracian people, with whom it was a custom to celebrate the birth of a man with tears, but his funeral with joy ; be¬ cause the end of life is better than the beginning. Of the Hispani, who were a Celtic colony, Silius Italicus j* says : Prodiga gens animse, et properare facillima mortem ; Namque ubi transcendit florentes viribus annos, Impatiens sevi spernet novisse senectam, Et fati modus in dextra est. (a) The history of all the northern nations abounds with facts, which prove their contempt of death to have originated from an expectation of im¬ mortality. What kind of immortality these nations expected is not clearly ascer¬ tained. According to Caesar j; and Diodorus Siculus, § they thought that the soul, at death, passes from one body to another. This doctrine of transmigration is also ascribed to them by Lucan : 1| Vobis auctoribus, umbrae Non tacitas Erebi sedes, Ditisque profundi ) Pallida regna petunt : regit idem spiritus artus Orbe alio: longae, cauitis si cognita, vitae Mors media est, (b) On the contrary, Pomponius Mela ^ represents the Celts as expecting to pass, after death, into the invisible world. And this notion best agrees with the authorities already cited on this subject, and with the accounts whicii are given by various writers, of the funeral ceremonies practised in the northern nations, particularly that of committing to the funeral pile, or to the sepulchre, whatever had been dear to the deceased.** It is also most consonant to the mythological language of the ancient Edda, which every where represents the future life as an assembly of good or bad men in a state of reward or punishment, and only speaks of a return to life for the purpose of reuniting the soul and body, after the soul has passed through a necessary course of purification, previously to its admission into the regions of the happy. From this state of purgation none were to be excused, except those who had voluntarily exposed themselves to death in battle : and hence it wts, that they who fell in war were deemed to have * L. ii. c. 6. t L. i (a) This hardy race, still lavish of their breath, The flow’r of youth once past, rush on to death ; Scorning life’s path with tott’ring steps to tread, With their own hand they cut the fatal thread. J L iv. c, 14. § L. V. !1 Phars. 1. i. v. 454. (6) If dying mortals doom they sing aright, No ghosts descend to dwell in dreadful night ; No parting souls to grisly Pluto go, Nor seek the dreary silent shades below : But forth they fly, immortal in their kind. And other bodies in new worlds they find. Thus life for ever runs its endless race. And, like a line, death but divides the space. Rowe. Loc. cit. ** Caesar Bell. G. 1. ii, c. 6. Pom. Mela, 1. vi. c. 2. Ilerodot. 1. iv. c. 9-3. Tacit. Germ. c. 27. Val. Max. loc. cit. Chap. 11. OF THE CEETS. made a glorious and happy exit from life, whilst they who died by sickness were thought to have perished shamefully and wretchedly.* To those brave spirits who died in battle the gates of the palace of Odin were im¬ mediately opened, and they were to live in his hall (Valhalla) in the full enjoyment of every thing which delighted them on earth. Others, who had lived a pious, just, and temperate life, and at last died by sickness, were to be admitted, after the necessary purification, into Gimle, a bright and happy mansion, where they should live for ever ; whilst they who had, in this life, been guilty of great crimes (among which perjury, adultery, and assassination, were reckoned the most heinous) were to be consigned to Hela, where they should remain in punishment till the twilight of the gods ; a term by which is denoted a general restitution of all things, when, after the burning of the world, f a new period of existence would commence. The similarity of the Celtic doctrines to those of the eastern nations already considered, favours the conjecture that the northern mythology is derived from oriental traditions, which accompanied the migrations of the Scythians towards the northern and western parts of Europe. The ancient Celts were probably little acquainted with natural philoso¬ phy. Csesar indeed says J that the Gallic Druids philosophised concerning the stars and their motions, the magnitude of the world, and the nature of things. But we have no information respecting their observations or opinions on these subjects; except that they§ reckoned time by nights, not by days, and in the observance of birth-days, new moons, and the be ¬ ginning of the year, commenced the celebration from the preceding night. This circumstance is confirmed by ancient British monuments. If the Druids practised medicine, it was rather as an instrument of superstition, than as an art founded upon science, as sufficiently appears from the won¬ derful powers which they ascribed to the mistletoe. 1| The sura of their moral doctrine as given by Laertius, «([ is to worship the gods, to do good, and to exercise fortitude. Perhaps little more was necessary among a people who were devoted to war. Their public and private virtues were, as we have seen, powerfully supported by the hope of immortality.** CHAPTER XI. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ETRURIANS AND ROMANS. Italy, in the most remote periods of its history, affords some traces of barbaric philosophy among the Etrurians and Romans. The few par¬ ticulars which remain, concerning the early philosophy of each, we shall distinctly examine. * Valer. Max. 1. ii. c. 6. sect. 11. f Strabo, I. iv. p. 302. J Bell. G. 1. vi. c. 13. § C. 16. [1 Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. xxx. sect. i. xvi. 44. xxiv. 4. xxxiv. 11. ^ L. i. sect. 10. ** Vidend. Pezronius de Antiq. Celt. Pelloutier, Lettres sur les Celts, Hague, 1740. Martin, de la Relig. des Gaul. Keysler, Ant. Sept, et Celt. G. Frickius de Druidis, Ulmae, 1731. Selden, Analect. Anglo-Brit. v. ii. Toland on the Rel. of the Celts. Rowland, Ant. Isle of Anglesey. Burnet, Arch. 1. i. c. 2. Diss. de Poesi Scald. Upsal, 1717. Koeller de Scaldis. Gundling. Hist. Ph. Mor. c. 6. Moller in Isagog. ad Hist. Chers. Cimb. Beronius de Eddis Islandicis, Upsal, 1733. Rudbeck, Atlant. Arymann. Diss. de Celt. Idol. Grig. ap. Vet. Germ. Bartholin, Ant. Dan. Obrecht, de Phil. Celt. Puffend. de Druid. Banier, Myth. t. v. 1. vi. vii. Schubert, Hist. Ph. c. 2. Schuzius, de Statu post Mortem sec. Celt. 5-6 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. The origin of the Tuscans, or Etrurians is uncertain. Some writers, who abound in conjectures and idle dreams,* have maintained that Noah colonised this country. It is more probable that the Tuscans were a Celtic" nation, who settled upon the banks of the river Po."}" This very well agrees with what is known concerning the Celtic migrations, and will account for the prevalence of opinions before the arrival of the Egyptians and Pelasgians upon this coast, similar to those of the East. Etruria, according to Diodorus Siculus,! was early distinguished by a diligent and successful study of nature. But he supports his assertion by no proofs; and the facts which are preserved by historians, respecting this ancient people, rather show a disposition towards trivial superstitions, than a useful acquaintance with natural objects. § The Etrurians are said to have been the first inventors of augury, and to have boasted that they communicated this art to the Romans. Fabulous accounts are given of Tages, II who is mentioned as the first teacher of augury ; to which Ovid alludes Indignae dixere Tagen, qui primus Etruscam Edocuit gentem casus aperire futures, (o) The superstitious character of the Etrurians is strongly marked in the story related by Pliny,** of an embassy sent from Rome to a celebrated Tuscan augur, Olerius Calenus, concerning a human skull which was found on the Tarpeian Hill. The knowledge of nature, attributed to the Etru¬ rians, appears to have extended little farther than the skilful application of natural objects and appearances to the purposes of superstition and imposture. It has, nevertheless, been asserted that this people were possessed of the purest conceptions of religion. Seneca speaks of the Tuscan augurs as employing the terrors of Jupiter’s lightning to keep in awe those who could only be restrained from wickedness by fear; and adds, that they believed the thunder of heaven to be in the hands, not of Jupiter worshipped by the Romans in the Capitol and other temples, but of a supreme intelli¬ gence, the guardian and governor of the universe, the maker and lord of this woi'ld. But he adds, j-j- “ To this deity agree the several names of Fate, Providence, Nature, or the universe sustaining itself by its own energy a doctrine which, as we shall afterwards see, was held by the Stoics. On what authority Seneca ascribed this doctrine to the Etrurians is uncertain. The truth probably is, that, with other western and northern nations of Celtic origin, they conceived the Deity as the animating principle of the world, acting upon an eternal mass to produce the visible creation. The cosmogony of an anonymous Etrurian, preserved by Suidas,j;;|; confirms this opinion. It limits the duration of the universe to a period of twelve thou¬ sand years, six thousand of which passed in the production of the visible world before the formation of man. Another doctrine, ascribed to the Etrurians, which agrees with the tenets of the Stoics, is, the entire reno¬ vation of nature after a long period, or great year, when a similar succes¬ sion of events would again commence. §§ Two ancient brazen tablets which, * Vid. Dickinson’s Dissert, on the Journey of Noah into Italy, Oxon. 1655. Fabricii Codex Pseud, vol. i. p. 248. f Pelloutier, Hist, de Celtes, tom. ii. p. 101. ! L. V. § Cic. de Div. 1. i. Senecae Quaest. Nat. 1. ii. c. 32. II Amngiau. Marcel. 1. xxi. ^ Metam. 1. xv. v. 558. (a) The natives of the place him Tages name, From whom the Tuscan arts of aug’ry came. Sewell. ** L. xxviii. c. 2. ff Quaest. Nat. l. ii, c. 41. J! Verb. Tyrrhen p. 519. §§ Plutarch. Vit. Syllae. Chap. 11. OF THE ANCIENT ROMANS. 57 from the figures and inscriptions, appear to represent the Egyptian divi¬ nities Isis and Osiris,* have been found in Tuscany. These afford some ground for conjecturing that, at the time when Egypt sent out colonies westward, the knowledge of their theology passed into Etruria. In this manner, it is not improbable that the Etrurians might acquire the same notions concerning God, and the origin of things, which had been long before entertained in Egypt and the East. The Romans, so illustrious in the annals of civil history, afford, at the early period of which we are now treating, few materials for the history of barbaric philosophy. The only name which, at this period, has any pretension to be admitted into the list of philosophers, is that of Numa, the second king of Rome. His excellent institutions of civil policy, introduced in the infancy of a state which owed its existence to the force of arms, unquestionably prove him to have been a wise legislator. It has been strenuously maintained that his wisdom was borrowed from the great founder of one of the Grecian schools of philosophy, Pythagoras. But the arguments urged in support of this opinion are drawn from resemblances between the institutions of Numa and those of Pythagoras, which are either merely imaginary, or may easily be supposed to have happened, without design, from a similarity of situation. Besides, there is little doubt that Pythagoras the Samian lived more than a century after the time of Numa. And the supposition that Numa was instructed by another Pythagoras, a Lacedemonian, who distinguished himself at the Olympic Games, in the sixteenth Olympiad, in the third year of which -j- Numa was chosen king of Rome, is a mere conjecture. It is therefore most reasonable to conclude that, excepting the assistance he may be supposed to have derived from his countrymen, the Sabines, his plan of civilisation, both with respect to religion and policy, was the product of his own abilities. Livy on this subject says,;}; “ Numa possessed a mind deeply tinctured with virtue, and well furnished with good principles, not so much from foreign instruction as from the early habits of strict discipline which he had acquired among the Sabines.” It will be readily acknowledged that Numa was a great man, and a wise legislator ; perhaps, as Plutarch says, superior even to the Spartan Lycurgus. But practical wisdom is not to be confounded with philosophy. The form of government established by Numa was rather the work of natural good sense, directed by virtuous principle, than the result of philosophical speculation. § The wise discipline which Numa introduced was ill suited to the genius of the Roman people, who were more inclined to pursue the glory of con¬ quest than to cultivate the arts of peace. So prevalent, at this time, was the military character among them, that it rendered them averse to all improvements in science, and led them to discourage every approach of philosophy, as tending to enfeeble the spirit and corrupt the manners of their youth. || * Montfaucon, tom. i. p. i. p. 105. tab. 53. f Before Christ 714. X Hist. 1. i. c. 8. 18. § Plat. Vit. Numae. II Vidend. Lampredus de Phil. Ant. Etruscorum, Florence, 1756. Dempster ad Rosin. Ant. Rom. 1. iii. c. 8. Cudworth’s Intell. Syst. c. iv. sect. 25.' Spon. Misc. Ant. p. 89. Montfaucon, t. i. p. i. p. 105. Spanheim. de Vest. etPrytan. Graec. t. v. Thes. Graev. Herbert, Relig. Gent. c. x. Hist. Critiq. de la Phil. tom. iii. p. 7. J. Owen, Theol. 1. iii. Burnet, Arch. 1. i. c. 2. Univers. Hist. Etrusc. 58 OF THE FHILO, SOPHY I CHAPTER XII. OF THE PPIILOSOPHY OF THE SCYTHIANS, INCLUHING THE THRACIANS AND GETA:. In our inquiry into the state of barbaric philosophy, the only country which now remains to be considered is Scythia ; a general name, which formerly included all the northern parts of Asia and Europe, but which, after the Celts became a distinct people from the Scythians, was chiefly made use of to denote those northern regions which lie upon the eastern extremity of Europe, and the west of Asia. This is the country which now comes under our notice. It is universally attested by the ancients that the Scythians, though rude and illiterate, were honest and virtuous. “ No crime,” says an elegant Roman historian,* “is esteemed among the Scythians more heinous than theft ; for if any indulgence were given to this crime among a people, whose flocks and herds are necessarily left unguarded in the open fields, no one’s property would be secure ; they do not, like the rest of the world, covet gold and silver ; they are contented to live upon milk and honey, and not¬ withstanding the rigours of their climate, make use of no other clothing than the undressed skins of beasts.” Other writers confirm this account of the Scythians.-j- The innocenee of their manners can, however, only be ascribed to their want of the means of luxury and excess. Their virtues were the natural effects of their situation, and not the fruits of cultivation and philosophy. As the writer just quoted judiciously observes, “ What the Greeks could not acquire by all the learning of their wise men, and all the precepts of philosophy, was given to these barbarians by nature : of so much more efficacy, among the latter was the ignorance of vice, than among the former the knowledge of virtue.” They were not, however, free from the vices of savage life : they conducted their wars with great cruelty, and they admitted human sacrifices into their religious rites. But, what¬ ever be thought of the manners of the Scythians, to give them the appella¬ tion of philosophers would be to call a block of marble a statue. The uncivilised state of this nation, and their roving manner of life, have permitted few particulars, either respecting their transactions or opinions, to pass down to posterity. But there can be little doubt that, like the Celtic nations who migrated from them, they acknowledged the existence of a Supreme Divinity and the immortality of the soul. Of the former, the conversation of Anacharsis, given by Plutarch, is a sufficient proof. Of the latter, the Emperor Julian, on the testimony of Trajan, gives the fol¬ lowing account : § “ The Getae are a most warlike people, not only through their natural strength and courage, but through the influence of an opinion taught them by Zamolxis, that after death they should be removed to other habitations. With this persuasion, they leave the world with as little con¬ cern as they would undertake a journey. Herodotus || relates, that they expected after death to go to Zamolxis. Pomponius Mela says; ^ “the * Justin, 1. ii. c. 2. f Herod. 1. iv. Strabo,!, vii. Q. Curtius, I. vii. c. 8. Arrian, l.iv. Lucian in Toxari. X Vit. Solon. § In Caesaribiis. || L. iv. p. 280. ^ L. ii. c. 1. Chap. 12. OF THE SCYTHIANS AND THRACIANS. 59 Getae are a hardy race, always ready to meet death ; but this effect is pro¬ duced by different opinions : some think that the souls of the dead return to life ; others, that though they do not return, they are not extinct, but pass to a happier state ; whilst others have no other opinion concerning death, than that it is better than life.” Hence the contempt of death, and the funeral exultations, which were common among the Thracians and Getaj.* Several Greek writers take particular notice of the Scythian Abaris. Jamblichus, among other idle tales, with which his life of Pythagoras abounds, mentions -|- Abaris as a disciple of that philosopher, and relates many wonders which he performed by means of an arrow which he re¬ ceived from Apollo. He also gives the particulars of a conversation which he had with Pythagoras whilst the latter was detained prisoner by Phalaris, the tyrant. But the narration is filled with so many marvellous circum¬ stances, and chronological errors, that it deserves little credit. Of the latter we shall mention one example. It is said that, in the time of a general plague, J Abaris was sent from the Scythians on an embassy to the Athenians. This plague happened in the third § Olympiad, [j Now it appears, from a learned contest between Bentley on one side, and Boyle, Dodwell, and Wotton on the other, that Phalaris (in whose presence Abaris is said to have disputed with Pythagoras) did not exercise his tyranny, at the most, longer than twenty-eight years, and that his death happened not earlier than the fourth year of the fifty-seventh Olympiad,^ which is the opinion of Bentley, nor later than the first year of the sixty-ninth Olympiad,** which is the date fixed by Dodwell. Whence it is evident that Abaris could not have lived, both at the time of the general plague men¬ tioned above, and during the tyranny of Phalaris.-|”|' The time when Abaris flourished may, with some degree of probability, be fixed about the third Olympiad; and there seems little reason to doubt that, like Empedocles, Epimenides, Pythagoras, and others, he went from place to place impos¬ ing upon the vulgar by false pretensions to supernatural powers. He passed through Greece, Italy, and many other countries, giving forth ora¬ cular predictions, pretending to heal diseases by incantation, and practising other arts of imposture. Hence the fabulous tales concerning Abaris grew up into an entire history, written by Heraclides.§§ Some of the later Platonists, in their zeal against Christianity, collected these and other fables, and exhibited them, not without large additions from their own fertile imaginations, in opposition to the miracles of Christ. On the whole, it may be confidently concluded concerning Abaris, that he has a better title to a place among impostors than among philosophers. Very different from this was the character of Anacharsis. * He was of that race of Scythians who from their wandering life are called Nomadiei. He was the brother of a Scythian prince. Having been early instructed by his mother, a native of Greece, in the Greek language, and preferring the pursuits of wisdom to those of ambition, he left his native country, in the first year of the forty- seventh Olympiad, and visited Athens. || || Here he met with Toxaris, his countryman, who conducted him to the house of Solon, the famous Athenian legislator. When he came to the house, he desired one of the attendants to inform his master that Anacharsis, a * Val. Max. 1. ii. c. 6. f P. 116. 138. 148. J Suidas et Harpocratio in Abarid. § B. C. 768. II Harpoc. et. Suid. in Xlpo-npoaia. ^ B. C. 549. ** B. C. 504. tt Conf. Bayle in Abarid. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. i. p. 405. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. Apollon. Mirab. Hist. c. 4. Plato in Charmide. Bayle in Abar. §§ Pint. Aud. Poet. |||| Laert. 1. i. sect. 102. Suidas, Conf. Lucian. Anach. 60 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book I. Scythian, was at the door, and requested to be received into the house as his guest and friend.* To this message Solon’s answer was, that “ friend¬ ships are best formed at home.” To which Anacharsis replied, “ Then let Solon, who is at home, make me his friend, and receive me into his house.” Solon struck with the smartness of the reply, admitted him as his guest, and finding him, on account of his good sense and probity, worthy of his confidence, allowed him to share his friendship. Anacharsis, on his part, became such an admirer of Solon, that he constantly associated with him till he made himself master of all the knowledge which that wise man pos¬ sessed. During his residence in Athens, he was honoured with the pri¬ vilege of citizenship, an honour never before conferred upon a barbarian. -j- After the death of Solon, Anacharsis travelled through a great part of the world in search of wisdom, and at last returned into his own country, probably with the hope of communicating to his countrymen the wisdom he had acquired in Greece. But they were too much attached to their old opinions and customs to endure with patience the bold attempts which he made to introduce among them the institutions and manners of the Greeks. As he was one day hunting, an arrow, sent, some say, from the hand of his brother, put an end to his life. He lamented with his last breath the jealousy and folly of his countrymen, who would not suffer one wiser than themselves to live among them. Anacharsis was famous for a manly and nervous kind of language, which was called, from his country, Scythian eloquence. He is said to have in¬ vented the anchor and the potter’s wheel ; but these instruments were known before his time ; perhaps he first introduced the use of them among the Scythians, j; Among many other ingenious sayings, ascribed by Laertius to Anacharsis, are the following : Being asked by what means a man addicted to intemperance might be taught sobriety, he replied, by placing before his eyes a drunken man. The vine, he said, bears three kinds of fruit ; the first, pleasure ; the second, intoxication ; the third, remorse. An Athenian of infamous character upbraiding him with being a Scythian, he. said; “My country is indeed a disgrace to me, but you are a disgrace to your country.” The epistles which bear his name were probably produced at a later period in the school of the Sophists. At the same time with Anacharsis flourished Toxaris, who, from an impatient thirst after knowledge, left his wife and children in Scythia, and went to reside at Athens. Here he became acquainted with Solon, and other wise men, and made himself master of all the learning which the times would afford. He studied the art of medicine, and for many years prac¬ tised it with great reputation in Athens, where he ended his days. His desire of wisdom, his candid temper, and the sobriety of his manners, procured him general esteem. After his death he was honoured with a sepulchral monument and statue ; and superstition ascribed a healing virtue even to his tomb. § But the most celebrated name among the Scythians was Zamolxis, whom many represent, not only as the father of wisdom with respect to the Scythians, but as the teacher of the doctrines of immortality and trans¬ migration to the Celtic Druids, and to Pythagoras. || Others suppose him to have been a servant of Pythagoras, who, after having attended him into Egypt, obtained his manumission, and taught his master’s doctrine among. * Plutarch. Vit. Solon, init. f Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 308. I Laert. Suidas, Anach. Strabo,!, vii. Senec. Ep. 90. § Lucian, in Toxari ; Scyth. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. vol. xiii. p. 438. , II Origen, Philos, c. 25. p. 170. Suidas, Zamoix. Strabo, 1. vii. Chap. 12. OF THE SCYTHIANS AND THRACIANS. 61 the Getae. But there can be no doubt that the doctrine of immortality was known to the northern nations long before the time of Pythagoras ; and Herodotus, mentioning a common tradition, that Zamolxis was a Pythagorean, expressly says * * * § that he flourished at a much earlier period than Pythagoras. The whole story of the connexion of Zamolxis with Pythagoras seems to have been invented by the Pythagoreans to advance the fame of their master. From the general testimony of the ancients it appears, that Zamolxis was a Thracian, who in a very remote period taught the Scythians the doctrine of the immortality of the soul ; whose name they, after his death, enrolled among the divinities, and with whom they assured themselves that they should dwell in the invisible world. Hero¬ dotus relates, that on certain festal solemnities, they chose by lot several persons, who were to be sent as messengers to Zamolxis, and that they put them to death, by throwing them up into the air, and catch . ..g them, as they fell, upon the points of their spears ; a story which is the more credible, as it is well known that the practice of offering human sacrifices prevailed among the Scythians and Thracians.-j- These particulars concerning the Scythians are sufficient to prove that their wisdom was rather practical than speculative, consistent with rude manners, and adapted to the military character. From all that we have been able to collect concerning the state of knowledge in the several nations which have passed under our notice, we must conclude that the barbaric philosophy was very different, in its lead¬ ing characters, from the philosophy afterwards studied and taught among the Greeks. It was indeed employed upon important subjects, both divine and human ; but instead of investigating truth from clear principles, and by legitimate methods of reasoning, it relied chiefly upon tradition, and gave its simple and easy assent to doctrines and fables transmitted to posterity by the priests. In the midst of every appearance of ignorance, superstition, and im¬ posture, it is, however, an important fact, that the doctrines of a Supreme Deity, and the immortality of the soul, were universally received. “Who does not admire (says .®lian j:) the wisdom of the barbarians, nonp of whom ever fell into the atheistical absurdities of Eumerus, Diagoras, Epicurus, and other philosophers ? No Indian, Celt, or Egyptian, ever questioned whether there were gods, or whether they concerned them¬ selves in the affairs of men.§ ” * L. iv. c. 95. f Laert. 1. viii. sect. 2. Julian in Csesaribus. Jambl. Vit. Pyth. p. 146. X Var. Hist. 1. ii. c. 31. § Vidend. Rudbeck in Atlantid. p. 62. Voss, de Sect. Phil. c. 3. sect. 1. Jornandes de Rebus Geticis. Cluverius, Germ. Ant. 1. i. c. 32. Burnet. Arch. 1. i. c. 2. 62 OF THE FABULOUS PHILOSOPHY Book II. BOOK II. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE GREEKS. CHAPTER I. OF THE FABULOUS PHILOSOPHY OF THE GREEKS. From the barbaric nations, we now pass on to the Greeks ; a people distinguished, almost from the infancy of their civilisation, by the pursuit of wisdom and learning ; among whom, after they had received the elements of knowledge from barbarians, philosophy found a settled habi¬ tation. Greece was first civilised by colonies from Egypt, Phoenicia, Thrace, and other countries. These were under the government of wise men, who not only subdued the ferocity of an ignorant populace by civil institutions, but cast about them the strong chain of religion, and the fear of the gods. Whatever dogmas they had been taught, in their respective countries, concerning things divine and human, they delivered to these new-formed societies, with the design of bringing them under the restraint of virtuous discipline. Hence the aspect of sacred philosophy was very different in different parts of Greece. Phoroneus and Cecrops being Egyptians,* Cadmus a Phoenician, and Orpheus a Thracian, -f- each of these would, of course, bring into Greece, with their several colonies, the religious and philosophical tenets of their respective nations, and thus lay the founda¬ tion of diversity of opinion. The practice of delivering the doctrines of religion to the people under the disguise of fable, which universally prevailed in Egypt, and was not unknown to the Phoenicians, Thracians, and other barbarous nations, was introduced among the Greeks by the first founders of their states. They had seen the effect of this mode of instruction in countries already settled, and they judged it particularly suitable to the design of bringing new- formed states under the yoke of authority. “ It was not possible,” says Strabo,;|; “ to lead a promiscuous multitude to religion and virtue by phi¬ losophical harangues ; this could only be effected by the aid of supersti¬ tion, by prodigies and fables. The thunderbolt, the segis, the trident, the spear, torches and snakes, were the instruments made use of by the founders of states to terrify the ignorant vulgar into subjection.” That the first authors of the Grecian fables meant them as vehicles of in¬ struction, cannot be doubted.§ But it is now becoming exceedingly difficult, if not impracticable, to decipher their meaning. And it will be easily per¬ ceived that this must be the case, by any one who recollects how imperfectly we are acquainted with the history, opinions, manners, and other circum¬ stances of the times when the Grecian mythology was formed, and from what * Clem. Alex. Admon. ad Gent. p. 28. Herod. 1. ii. -Pausanias in Arcad. Euseb. in Cbron. t Aristoph, in Ranis. Eurip. in Rhseso. Nonni Collect, i. ad calc. Nazianz. I L. i. § Verulam, de Sap. Vet. Praef. Chap. 1. OF THE GREEKS, 63 a variety of sources it was derived.* Of these the two principal were the custom^ of ranking public benefactors, after their death, among the gods; and the practice J of applying allegories and fables to natural objects and appearances. The origin of the world, and the production of natural bodies, were very early clothed in fable, in the cosmogonies of the Egyp¬ tians, Phoenicians, Thracians, and other nations : and these were afterwards imitated by the Greeks. Another custom, which has very much contributed to cast a veil of obscurity over the fabulous philosophy of the Greeks, is that, which in early times prevailed among them, of giving their mythological doctrines a poetical dress. These were commonly chosen as subjects of verse, and every poet enlarged and moulded the ancient fables according to the ferti¬ lity or luxuriancy of his own fancy ; so that they were not only increased from time to time without limit, but, in many particulars, so materially altered, that their original features could scarcely be perceived. The fabulous philosophy of the Greeks being, from these and other causes, involved in great obscurity, we shall pass with all possible expedi¬ tion through this dark and unprofitable region ; leaving the solution of those mythological enigmas, which haAm so long amused the learned, to more fertile imaginations. The first of the Greeks, who is said to have taught philosophy and the arts, is Prometheus. It is unnecessary to repeat his well-known story.§ Various conjectures have been framed concerning it. Some have imagined, that in the person and fable of Prometheus they have found the history of Adam ; others have applied them tp Noah ; others to Moses: || they might, with as much appearance of probability, have applied them to the Chinese Fohi. Perhaps the truth is, that Prometheus was an Egyptian, or a Scythian, who instructed the Greeks in several necessary arts, particularly in the use of fire for the purpose of melting metals, and who afterwards suffering captivity, was rescued by Hercules.^ This account of the fable is at least as probable as those philosophical explanations, which suppose a kind of refinement, unknown at the early period when this fable was first received. Linus, who lived before the time of Homer, is celebrated among the first authors of Grecian verse, and is said to have invented Lyric poetry. He wrote a cosmogony, the beginning of which is preserved by Laertius.** He was an eminent master of music and verse, and is said to have instructed Hercules, Thamyris, and Orpheus. Orpheus, the most celebrated of all the Greeks in the fabulous ages, distinguished himself as a teacher of religion and philosophy. His name is as illustrious among the Greeks, as that of Zoroaster among the Persians, of Buddas among the Indians, or of Troth, or Hermes, among the Egyp¬ tians. But we cannot rely with certainty upon the remaining records of his life and opinions ; for it has happened to Orpheus, as to many other wise men of antiquity, that spurious writings have been ascribed to him, and modern tenets have been obtruded upon the world under the sanction * Vid. Bochart, Geogr. Sac. Clerici Not. ad Hesiodum. f Plin. Hist. Nat, 1. ii. c. 17. + Dionys. Halic. Antiq. 1. i, § Hesiod. Oper. v. 46. Theog. v. 520. Ovid, Met. 1. i. Natalis Comes Mythol. l.iv. c. 6. II Hiieti Dem. Ev. pr. iv. c. 8. sect. 7. Bochart, Geog. 1. i. c. 2. Fabricii Cod. Ps. t. i. 26 1. ^ Conf. jEschili Prometh. Vinct. Natalis Comes, p. 328. Herod. ** L. i. sect. 4. Sextus Emp. adv. Math. 1. i. sect. 204. Diod. Sic. 1. iii. p. 140. Suidas, I Pausan. in Bceoticis, p. 767. 64 OF THE FABULOUS PHILOSOPHY Book II. of his name.* It has even been questioned whether Orpheus ever existed. Cicero asserts, f on the authority of Aristotle, that there was no such per¬ son as the poet Orpheus. But no passage of this kind is at present to be found in the works of Aristotle ; and the opinion is contradicted by the general testimony of the ancients, who relate, that Orpheus was a native of Thrace, who flourished before the Trojan war, and passed the greater part of his life in Greece. J Diodorus Siculus relates, § that, “ having been instructed in the religious tenets and ceremonies of his own country, he travelled into Egypt, where he acquired a knowledge of the mysteries of religion, and became an emi¬ nent master of philosophy, poetry, and music.” Thus qualified he came among the Greeks, who were at that time a rude and unenlightened people, and by the united powers of poetry, religion, and philosophy, civilised their manners. Such were the wonderful effects produced by his genius and wisdom, that in the language of fable, his music is said to have captivated the attention of birds and beasts, and even to have commanded rocks, woods, and rivers : Quem Deum, cujus recinet jocosa Nomen imago, Aut in umbrosis Heliconis oris, Aut super Pindo, gelidove in Hsemo, Unde vocalem temere insecutse Orphea sylvae. Arte materna rapidos morantem Fluminum cursus, celeresque ventos, Blandum et auritas fidibus canoris Dueere quercus.|| (a) Orpheus is said to have improved the lyre, by increasing the number of its strings from four to seven. To him also is ascribed the invention of hexameter verse. ^ He, doubtless, excelled in poetry of various kinds, but it is justly questioned whether he committed any of his verses to writing. He possessed great skill in the art of medicine. Perhaps this circumstance may serve to explain the fable of his recalling his wife Eurydice from hell.** The particulars of his death are variously related by different writers ; but it is generally agreed that he died by violent means. j-'j' After his death he was ranked among the divinities. The instruments which Orpheus made use of, in governing and instruct¬ ing the ignorant Greeks, were poetry, music, medicine, magic, and astro- logy, which he had learned in Egypt.jij: Having been accustomed, both * Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. i. p. 110. t Pe Nat. Deor. 1. i. ♦ Died. Sic. 1. iv. c. 25. Plato de Rep. 1. x. § Ibid. J| Hor. Carm. 1. i. Od. xii. (a) - What God, whose hallow’d name The sportive image of the voice Shall through the shades of Helicon resound. On Pindus, or on Haimus ever cool, From whence the forests, in confusion wild, To vocal Orpheus urged their way ; Who by his mother’s art, harmonious muse, With soft delay could stop the falling streams. And winged winds, with strings of concert sweet. Powerful the list’ning oaks to lead. Francis. ^ Antipat. Sidonii Anthol. 1. iii. p. 388. Pausan. Eliac. p. 505. Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. XXV. c. 2. •* Virg. Georg, iv. ft Pausan. in Bceotic. p. 586. Eliac. 1. c. Ovid. Metam. 1. x. v. 83. Fabric. Bib. Gr. V. i. p. 130. Lucian. Astrol. Chap. 1. OF THE GUEEKS. 65 here and in his own country, to the allegorical mode of instruction, he communicated to them the doctrines of religion in a mythological form. He was probably the author of the Eleusinian and Panathsenean mysteries, and other religious institutions. It seems to have been owing to the cir¬ cumstance of his being a Thracian that the Grecian rites of religion were called QpTjaKsia.* There were many ancient poems which bore the name of Orpheus, but it is much disputed whether they were really his. Aristotle -f- speaks doubt- ingly of these poems, as commonly ascribed to Orpheus. Plesiod and Homer are called by Herodotus the oldest Greek poets. Cicero and some other writers expressly ascribe them to some philosophers of the Pythago¬ rean school.;]; On the other side, Plato § cites verses from Orpheus, and even Cicero || speaks of Orpheus as one of the ancient poets. Diodorus Siculus^ affirms Orpheus to have been the author of an excellent poem ; and several Christian fathers mention a work called ’lepog Ao'yoc or the Sacred Word, which was written by some follower of Pythagoras, and founded upon traditionary doctrines of Orpheus. All that can be concluded with probability is,** that before the time of Herodotus there were verses which were ascribed to Orpheus, but which were probably not written by himself, but collected after his time from traditionary remains of his doc¬ trine and poems. Of these ancient Orphic verses we have several frag¬ ments preserved in the writings of Eusebius,'i"|- Cedrenus,];]; Clemens Alexandrinus,§§ Proclus,]] || and Apuleius;^^ besides which there are others, which bear evident marks of forgery. The Orphic fragments have been collected by Eschenbach, in a treatise, entitled Z)e Pom Orphica*** As these fragments are almost the only sources of our information con¬ cerning the doctrine of Orpheus, we shall quote the following specimens. TvveKa aiiv iravrl At6s tcoKlv eVros irvxOv AlOepos evpelrjs rjS’ ovpavov ayAaor vj/os, nSvTov t’ drpvyirov, yalris r tpiKvSeos evpri' 'HKewds re fJ^lyas, Kal yefara Taprapa yairjs, Kal irora/xos, Kal ttovtos direipeTos aWa re ttovtc?, ndyrfs T dddvaroi fiaKapes 6eol, riSe dlaivai, ”0(rcra t eriv yeyaura, Kal varepov oirnoff efieWey ’Eylyero' Zrjvds 5’ hvl yacrrlpi av^ pa K€e Mundo, translated by Apuleius, we have these lines : Zei/s -irpcuTO? yevero, Zeus vcrraros dpx^Kepavvos, Zei/s K€, the middle, and the new academy, 137 SECTION II.— OF THE OLD, THE MIDDLE, AND THE NEW ACADEMY. The school of Plato long continued famous, but passed through several changes, on account of which it was successively distinguished into the old, the middle, and the new academy.* The OLD ACADEMY consisted of those followers of Plato who taught the doctrine of their master without mixture or corruption. The first of these was Speusippus,’!' an Athenian, a nephew of Plato : he occupied the chair of instruction during the term of eight years from the death of his master. Through the interest of Plato he enjoyed an intimate friendship with Dion whilst he was resident at Athens ; and it was at his instigation that Dion,j; encouraged by the promise of support from the malcontents of Syracuse, undertook his expedition against Dionysius the tyrant, by whom he had been banished. Contrary to the practice of Plato, Speusippus required from his pupils a stated gratuity. He placed statues of the Graces in the school which Plato had built. On account of his infirm state of health, he was commonly carried to and from the Academy in a vehicle. On his way thither he one day met Diogenes, and saluted him : the surly philosopher refused to return the salute, and told him, that such a feeble wretch ought to be ashamed to live ; to which Speusippus replied, that he lived not in his limbs, but in his mind.§ At length, being wholly incapacitated, by a paralytic stroke, for the duties of the chair, he resigned it to Xenocrates. He is said to have been of a violent temper, fond of pleasure, and exceed¬ ingly avaricious. Speusippus wrote many philosophical works, which are now lost, but which Aristotle thought sufficiently valuable to purchase at the expense of three talents. || From the few fragments which remain of his philosophy, it appears that he adhered very strictly to the doctrine of his master. Concerning the supreme mind he taught, Tov vouv ovre Tf ’ivi ovTE T(Sdyad(S tov avroy, lSi6(j)v 7i Se eiyai, that “it is neither the same with unity nor goodness, but of a nature peculiar to itself.” Xenocrates,^ a Chalcedonian, born in the ninety-fifth Olympiad,** at first attached himself to ^schines, but afterwards became a disciple of Plato, who took much pains in cultivating his genius, which was naturally heavy. Plato, comparing him with Aristotle, who was also one of his pupils, called the former a dull ass, who needed the spur, and the latter a mettlesome horse, who required the curb. His temper was gloomy, his aspect severe, and his manners little tinctured with urbanity. These ma¬ terial defects his master took great pains to correct ; frequently advising him to sacrifice to the Graces ; and the pupil was patient of instruction, and knew how to value the kindness of his preceptor. He compared Conring. Anc. Acad. p. 197. Blount, Cens. Cel. Vir. p. 26. Bessario contra Trapezun- tium. Voss, de Idol. 1. i. c. 4. Vavasor de Diet, ludic. c. 3. Caussin. de Eloq. t. i. c. 69 Fleury, Diss. de Plat, adject, lib. de Stud. Instit. Burnet, Arch. I. i. c. 11. Brucker. Hist, de Ideis. ed. Aug. Vind. 1723. Suppl. Amoen. Lit. t. viii. Diss. de Numeris Pyth. Am. Lit. t. 7. Puffendorf, Diss. de Theol. Plat. inter Opusc. Benii. Theol. Plat. Cudworth, c. iv. V. cum Not. Mosh. Crispus de Platone caute legendo. Trevener. Diss. de Theol. Plat, et Arist. Zimmerman, de Ath. Plat. Amoen. Lit. t. 9. 12. 13. Reimann. Hist. Ath. c. 22. Wolf, de Manich. sect. 32. Bayle, Art. Zoroast. n. E. Javelli Mor. Phil. Plat. Ven. 1536. Omeisii Ethica Plat. Altdorf. 1698. Zentgravii Spec. Doct. Plat, de Jure Nat. Souverain Platonisme devoile. * Cic. Qu. Acad, passim. f Laert. 1. iv. sect. 1. Suidas. { Plut. in Dione. § Laert. 1. c. Stobaeus, Serm. 273. p. 583. II Fabric. Bibl. Graee. v. ii. p. 230. Aid. Cell. Noct. Att. 1. iii. sect. 17. ^ Laert. 1. iv. sect. 9. 14. Atheuseus, 1. xi. p. 507. Allian, H. V. 1. xiv. c. 9. ** B. C. 400. 138 OF THE OLD, THE MIDDLE, Book !!• himself* to a vessel with a narrow orifice, which receives with difficulty, but firmly retains whatever is put into it. So afiectionately was Xenocrates i attached to his master, that when Dionysius, in a violent fit of anger, threat- 4 ened to find one who should cut off his head, he said, “ not before he ^ has cut off this ; ” pointing to his own. As long as Plato lived, Xenocrates J was one of his most esteemed disciples ; after his death he closely ad- it' hered to his doctrine ; and, in the second year of the hundred and tenth Olympiad,'!' he took the chair in the Academy, as the successor of Speu- ' sippus. Aristotle, who about this time returned from Macedonia, in ex- pectation, as it should seem, of filling the chair, was greatly disappointed ^ and chagrined at this nomination; and immediately instituted a school, in w the Lyceum, in opposition to that of the Academy, where Xenocrates con¬ tinued to preside till his death. Xenocrates was celebrated among the Athenians, not only for his wisdom but for his virtues. J So eminent was his reputation for integrity, that whei he was called upon to give evidence in a judicial transaction, in which ai oath was usually required, the judges unanimously agreed that his simple as severation should be taken, as a public testimony to his merit. Even Phili] of Macedon found it impossible to corrupt him. When he was sent, witl several others, upon an embassy to that prince, he declined all private in tercourse with him, that he might escape the temptation of a bride. Phili] afterwards said,§ that of all those who had come to him on embassies fron foreign states, Xenocrates was the only one whose friendship he had no been able to purchase. During the time of the Lamiac war,|| being sen as ambassador to the court of Antipater, for the redemption of severa Atlienian captives, he was invited by the prince to sit down with him a supper, but declined the invitation in the words of Ulysses to Circe This pertinent and ingenious application of a passage in Homer, or rathe the generous and patriotic spirit which it expressed, was so pleasing t( Antipater, that he immediately released the prisoners. It may be men tinned, as another example of moderation in Xenocrates, that when Alex ander,** to mortify Aristotle, against whom he had an accidental pique sent Xenocrates a magnificent present of fifty talents, he accepted only thirt; mincB, returning the rest to Alexander with this message ; that the large sun which Alexander had sent was more than he should have been able t( spend during his whole life. So abstemious was he with respect to food that his provision was frequently spoiled before it was consumed. Hi chastity was invincible. Lais,'|"j- a celebrated Athenian courtezan, at tempted, without success, to seduce him. Of his humanity, no other proo can be necessary than the following pathetic incident. A sparrow, whicl was pursued by a hawk, flew into his bosom : he afforded it shelter and pro tection till its enemy was out of sight, and then let it go, saying, that Ik * Plut. (le Auditione, t. iv. p. 144. + B. C. 339. J Val. Max. 1. ii. c. 10. Cic. ad Att. ii. 16. Laert. 1. iv. sect. 7. § Laert. 1. iv. sect. 8. H lb. sect. 9, 10. Plut. in Phoc. "If Odyss. 1. x. ver. 383 (a) What man, whose bosom burns with gen'rous worth, His friends enthrall’d, and banish’d from his sight, Would taste a selfish, solitary joy? ** Plut. in Alex. t. v. p. 551. Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. v. c. 22. Suidas. Val. Max. 1. iv. c. 3 Stob. Eel. 37. ft Laert. 1. iv. sect. 7. Val. Max. 1. iv. c. 3. Chap, 8. S. 2. AND THE NEW ACADEMY. 139 would never betray a suppliant.* He was fond of retirement, and was seldom seen in the city. He was discreet in the use of his time, and care¬ fully allotted a certain portion of each day to its proper business.f One of these he employed in silent meditation. He was an admirer of the mathe¬ matical sciences, |ind Avas so fully convinced of their utility, that when a young man, Avho was unacquainted with geometry and astronomy, desired admission into the Academy, he refused his request, saying, that he was not yet possessed of the handles of philosophy. In fine, Xenocrates was eminent both for the purity of his morals, and for his acquaintance Avith science, and supported the credit of the Platonic school by his lectures, his writings, and his conduct. J He lived to the first year of the hundred and sixteenth Olympiad, § or the eighty-second of his age, Avhen he lost his life by accidentally falling, in the dark, into a reservoir of water. |1 The philosophical tenets of Xenocrates Avere truly Platonic; but in his method of teaching he made use of the language of the Pythagoreans. He made Unity and Diversity principles in nature, or gods; the former of whom he represented as the father, and the latter as the mother of the universe. He taught, that the heavens are divine, and the stars celestial gods ; and that besides these divinities, there are terrestrial demons, of a middle order between the gods and man, which partake of the nature both of mind and body, and are therefore, like human beings, capable of passions, and liable to diversity of character.^ After Plato, he probably conceived the superior divinities to be the Ideas, or intelligible forms, which im¬ mediately proceeded from the Supreme Deity, and the inferior gods, or demons, to be derived from the soul of the Avorld, and therefore, like that principle, to be compounded of a simple and a divisible substance, or of that Avhich ahvays remains the same, and that Avhich is liable to change.** The direction of the Academy, after the death of Xenocrates, devolved upon PoLEMO,'j''i' an Athenian of distinction, Avho in his youth had been addicted to infamous pleasures. The manner in Avhich he was reclaimed from his licentious course of life, and brought under the discipline of phi¬ losophy, affords a memorable example of the poAver of eloquence when it is employed in the cause of virtue. As he Avas one morning, about the rising of the sun, returning home from the revels of the night, clad in a loose robe, croAvned Avith garlands, strongly perfumed, and intoxicated Avith Avine, he passed by the school of Xenocrates, and saAv him surrounded with his disciples. Unable to resist so fortunate an opportunity of indulging his •sportive humour, he rushed, without ceremony, into the school, and took his place among the philosophers. The whole assembly was astonished at this rude and indecent intrusion, and all but Xenocrates discovered signs of resentment. Xenocrates, however, preserved the perfect command of his countenance, and, with great presence of mind, turned his discourse from the subject on which he was treating to the topics of temperance and mo¬ desty, Avhich he recommended Avith such strength of argument, and energy of language, that Polemo Avas constrained to yield to the force of conviction. Instead of turning the philosopher and his doctrine to ridicule, as he at first intended, he became sensible of the folly of his former conduct, Avas heartily ashamed of the contemptible figure Avhich he made in so respectable an assembly, took his garland from his head, concealed his naked arm under his cloak, assumed a sedate and thoughtful aspect, and, in short, resolved • ^lian, I. xiii. c. 31. f Laert. J Pint, de Virt. Mor. t. ii. p. 399. § B. C. 316. I II Laert. ^ Laert. Stob. Eel. Phys. 1. i. c. 3. Plut. de Is. et Osir. t. ii. p. 157. ** Plut. de Anim. Gen. t. iii. p. 75. Cic. de Nat. D. 1. i. c. 13. Laert. tt Laert. 1. iv. sect. 16. Suidas. 140 OF THE OLD, THE MIDDLE, Book II. from that hour to relinquish his licentious pleasures, and devote himself to j the pursuit of wisdom. Thus was this young man, by the powerful energy f of truth and eloquence, in an instant converted from an infamous libertine to a respectable philosopher.* In such a sudden change of character it is difficult to avoid passing from one extreme to another. Polemo, after his reformation, in order to brace up his mind to the tone of rigid virtue, con¬ stantly practised the severest austerity and most hardy fortitude. From the thirtieth year of his age till his death he drank nothing but water. When he suffered violent pain, he showed no external sign of anguish. In order to preserve his mind undisturbed by passion, he habituated himself to speak in an uniform tone of voice, without elevation or depression. The austerity of his manners was, however, tempered with urbanity and generosity. He was fond of solitude, and passed much of his time in a garden near his school. He died at an advanced age, of a consumption. -j" Of his tenets little is said by the ancients, because he strictly adhered to the doctrine of j Plato. He is said to have taught that the world is God but this was, doubtless, according to the Platonic system, which made the Soul of the World an inferior divinity. Polemo was succeeded by Crates, § an Athenian, to whom he had long ! been attached by a similarity of dispositions and pursuits. While they I lived, their friendship continued inviolate, and they were both buried in the same grave. The last celebrated name in the Old Academy is Grantor, || who! studied under Xenocrates and Polemo. He adhered to the Platonic sys¬ tem, and was the first who wrote commentaries on the works of Plato, butj as he died before Polemo and Crates, he could not succeed them in the Academic chair. He was highly celebrated for the purity of his moral! doctrine, as may be inferred from the praises which are bestowed by the] ancients upon his discourse “On Grief,” which Cicero^ calls “a small] but golden piece, adapted to heal the wounds of the mind, not by en-l couraging stoical insensibility, but by suggesting arguments drawn from] the purest fountains of philosophy.” That Grantor acquired great repu-| tation as a moral preceptor Horace** also intimates : Qui quid sit pulchrum, quid turpe, quid utile, quid non, Plenius et melius Chrysippo et Crantore dicit. (a) Hitherto the pure doctrine of Plato continued to be taught in his school.^ But after the death of Crates a new tribe of philosophers arose, who onl account of certain innovations in their manner of philosophising, which ini some measure receded from the Platonic system without entirely desert-j ing it, have been distinguished by the name of the Middle Academy. The first preceptor who appears in this class is Arcesilaus,-]''|' a native] of Aiolis, who was born in the first year of the hundred and sixteenth! Olympiad He was early initiated in mathematical science and politeYjl literature, and was intended by his elder brother, who had the charge off his education, for the profession of the law, but chose rather to devote] himself to the study of philosophy. He first attended upon Theophrastus,] * Val. Max. 1. vi. c. 9. Lucian in bis accusato, t. ii. p. 677. Cic. de Fin. 1. iv. c. 6.| f Laert. Athenaeus, 1. ii. p. 44. X Stob. Eel. Phys. 1. i. c. 3. § Laert. 1. iv. sect. 21. H Laert. ib. ^ Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 44. Tusc. Qu. 1. iii. c. 6.] ** Ep. 1. i. ep. 2. V. 3. (a) Who better taught fair virtue’s sacred rules Than Grantor or Cratippus in the schools. ft Laert. 1. iv. sect. 28, &c. Euseb. Praep. 1. xiv. c. 9. JJ B. C. 316. Chap. 8. S. 2. AND THE NEW ACADEMY. 141 then upon Aristotle, and afterwards became a disciple of Polemo. Among his intimate friends and fellow-disciples, were Grantor the moralist, and Zeno, the celebrated founder of the Stoic sect. After the death of Crates, Sosicrates, who had taken the Academic chair, resigned it to the superior ( abilities and learning of Arcesilaus, whose method of instruction was uni- I versally admired. He was intimately conversant with the ancient poets, particularly Homer and Pindar, and frequently in conversation quoted j pertinent passages from their works.* Though he reprehended the faults ! of his pupils with great freedom, his address was so captivating, and his powers of persuasion so commanding, that he seldom failed to conciliate their affection. He possessed a happy facility in adapting his discourses and conversation to every occasion and character, His singular accom¬ plishments, as w ell as the station which he filled in the Academy, brought him many followers. But his generosity was so far superior to his vanity, that he frequently advised his disciples to visit the schools of other mas¬ ters. When one of his pupils, a Chian youth,'j' expressed his predilection in favour of another philosopher, Hieronymus, he took him by the hand, and conducted him to his school, and requested the philosopher to treat him in a manner suitable to his merit. This action was the more generous, as Hieronymus was of the Peripatetic sect, and a violent opponent of the Academy. Arcesilaus, with extensive learning, sweetness of temper, and elegance of manners, united many moral qualities which could not fail to procure him universal esteem. In bestowing favours, he was liberal without ostentation. Visiting a sick friend, whom he observed to be in poverty, he silently conveyed a purse of gold under his pillow. When the attendant discovered it, the sick man said with a smile, “ This is one of the generous frauds of Arcesilaus.’’^ He employed a great part of the plen¬ tiful income which he received from an estate at Pitane in similar acts of liberality. The merit of his virtues was, however, contaminated by several vices. § Like Aristippus, he was fond of splendid entertainments, and a luxurious manner of living; and there is little doubt that he frequently indulged his natural propensities in a manner not very consistent with the character of a philosopher. He spent the greater part of his time in the Academy, but sometimes on festivals visited Hierocles the governor of . Munychia, and the Pyraeus, where the freedom of his manners often ex¬ posed him to danger. He died in the fourth year of the hundred and I thirty-fourth Olympiad, || at the age of seventy-five, in a delirium occa¬ sioned by excessive drinking.«[| Arcesilaus was the author of those innovations in the Platonic school on account of which it assumed the appellation of the Middle Academy. In order to obtain a clear idea of the nature and causes of this revolution, ! it will be necessary to take a retrospect of the state of opinions in the preceding period. ' From the survey which we have taken of the rise and progress of phi¬ losophical tenets, it appears, that not only the Greek, but also the barbaric , philosophers held that there can be no certain knowledge of things so ‘ variable and fluctuating as those material objects which fall under the notice of the senses. Not that human reason is supposed wholly incapable 1 of arriving at truth, or that the doctrine of universal scepticism was ad¬ mitted in the infancy of philosophy. But in excluding material objects * Laert. Fabric. Bibl. Graec. v. i. p. 354. t Laert. J Laert. Seneca de Benef. 1. ii. c. 10. § Athen. 1. vii. p. 270. 11 B, C. 241. ^ Laert. 1. iv. sect. 45. Cic. de Fin. 1. v. c. 31. 142 OF THE OLD, THE MIDDLE, Book Hi from the field of perfect science, the first philosophers discovered an in¬ clination to inquire with modesty concerning the nature of things, to divest themselves of prejudice, and to satisfy themselves with a sober assent to such truths as lay within the reach of the human intellect. It is also suffi¬ ciently clear that the earlier barbaric philosophers, and after them the Greeks, had two kinds of doctrine, the popular and the concealed ; the former of which was intended to amuse the vulgar, the latter was only discovered to those disciples who were admitted to their more retired and confidential instruction. By this expedient, they at once secured themselves from danger, and gave the authority of mysterious sanctity to their doctrine- Such was the state of philosophy when Socrates appeared. This great man did much to regulate the conduct of the human understanding. In opposition to the Sophists, who boasted that they knew every thing, he confessed that he knew nothing. By this confession, however, he did not mean to assert the universal uncertainty of human knowledge, but merely to convince his followers of the futility of those speculations, which do not rest upon the firm foundation of experience, and to teach them modesty in their inquiries, and diffidence in their assertions. Of the sects which arose from the school of Socrates the greater part soon forsook the plain path of moral discipline, and turned aside into the thorny mazes of disputation. They resumed the Sophistic manner of arguing on either side of every question, and perplexed themselves and others with trifling quibbles and idle cavillings. This was particularly the case, as we have already seen, in the Megaric, Eliac, and Eretriac schools. Plato, from natural disposition as well as education, was inclined to a stricter method of philosophising ; and whilst he disputed publicly in the Socratic manner, refuting the opinions of others, but leaving his hearers undecided concerning his own, he fully explained the principles of his philosophy, in private, to those of his pupils who were honoured with his confidence. His doctrine was, that no certain knowledge can be obtained concerning the varying forms of natural bodies, and that Ideas are the only objects of science. This doctrine was universally taught in the Old Academy ; but before the time of Arcesilaus it was never denied that useful opinions may be drawn from the senses.* About this time two new sects arose; one founded by Pyrrho, which held the doctrine of universal scepticism ; the other under Zeno, which maintained the certainty of human knowledge, and taught, with great confidence, a system and doctrine essentially different from that of Plato. These sects, especially the latter, became so popular, as to threaten the destruction of the Platonic system. In this situation, Arcesilaus thought it necessary to exercise a cautious reserve with respect to the doctrine of his master, concealing his opinions from the vulgar, under the appearance of doubt and uncertainty. -j- His maxim was, that it was safer to unteach those who had been ill instructed, than to teach those who were not well inclined to receive instruction. He was more desirous to prevent the progress of other innovators,''than to become himself the author of a new sect. He therefore professed to derive his doctrine concerning the uncertainty of knowledge from Socrates, Plato, and other philosophers. J The doctrine of Arcesilaus was, that although there is a real certainty in the nature of things, every thing is uncertain to the human understand* * Cic. Acad, Qu. 1. i. c. 8. 32. f Laert. 1. iv. sect. 28. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. hi. 18. iv. c. 6. De Fin. 1. ii. c. 1. contr. Acad. 1. hi. c. 17. t. i. p. 219. + Piut. adv. Colot. August. Chap. 8. S. 2. AND THE NEW ACADEMY. 143 ing, and consequently that all confident assertions are unreasonable. He thought it disgraceful to assent to any proposition, the truth of which is not fully established, and maintained that in all questions opposite opinions may be supported by arguments of equal weight. He disputed against the testimony of the senses, and the authority of reason ; but at the same time acknowledged that they are capable of furnishing probable opinions sufficient for the conduct of life.* In all this, his secret design seems to have been to establish the doctrine of Plato, that every kind of knowledge derived from sensible objects is uncertain, and that the only true science is that which is employed upon the immutable objects of intelligence, or ideas. During the interval between the death of Arcesilaus and the appearance of Carneades in the Academic chair, the Platonic school was successively under the care off Lacidas, Evander, and Egesinus, none of whom were sufficiently distinguished to merit particular notice. Lacidas assumed his office in the fourth year of the hundred and thirty-fourth Olympiad. He is said to have been the founder of a new school, not because he introduced any new doctrine, but because he changed the place of instruction, and held his school in the garden of Attains, still however within the limits of the Academic grove. In the second year of the hundred and forty-first Olympiad he died of a palsy, into which he had fallen by excessive drinking.f Arcesilaus, in the violence of his opposition to the Stoic, and other dog¬ matical philosophers, carried his doctrine of uncertainty to such an height as to alarm not only the general body of philosophers, but even the gover¬ nors of the state; § the former treating him as a common enemy to philo¬ sophy, and the latter beginning to apprehend that his tenets would produce the dissolution of all the bonds of social virtue and of religion. Hence his successors found it difficult to support the credit of the Academy ; and Carneades, one of the disciples of this school, thought it expedient to relin¬ quish, in words at least, some of the more obnoxious tenets of Arcesilaus. From this period the Platonic school took the appellation of the New Academy. Carneades, II one of the most illustrious ornaments of the Academy, was an African, a native of Cyrene. The time of his birth has been a subject of much debate : it is probable that he was born in the third year of the hundred and forty-first Olympiad.^ Fie received his first knowledge of the art of reasoning from Diogenes the Stoic ; whence he used some¬ times to say, in the course of a debate, “ If I have reasoned right I have gained my point ; if not, let Diogenes return me my mirKB,”** meaning the price he had paid him for his instruction. Afterwards, becoming a mem¬ ber of the Academy, he attended upon the lectures of Hegesinus, and by assiduous study became an eminent master of the method of disputing which Arcesilaus had introduced : he succeeded Hegesinus in the chair, and restored the declining reputation of the Academy. With Diogenes the Stoic, and Critolaus the Peripatetic, he was sent on an embassyj-l- from Athens to Rome, to complain of the severity of a fine inflicted upon the Athenians, under the authority of the Romans, by their neighbours the * Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 6. 12, &c. Laert. f Laert. 1. iv. sect. 59-61. Suidas. X Laert. ib. A21ian, 1. ii. c. 41. Athen. 1. x. p. 438. § Laert. ib. August. 1. c. 11 Laert. 1. iv. sect. 62, &c. Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. iv. c. 6. Suidas. ^ B. C. 214. ■** Cic. ib. c. 30. tf Plut. Vit. Caton. Aul. Gell. Noct. Att. 1. vii. c. 14. A21ian,War. Hist. 1. iii. c. 17. Macrob. Sat. 1, i. c. 5. 144 OF THE OLD, THE MIDDLE, Book II. Sicyonians, for having laid waste Oropus, a town in Bceotia. The Athe¬ nians would undoubtedly, upon this occasion, employ none but those in whose judgment, eloquence, and integrity, they could confide. The three philosophers whom they entrusted with their embassy, whilst the)’’ were in Rome, gave the Roman people many specimens of Grecian learning and eloquence, with which till then they had been unacquainted. Carneades excelled in the vehement and rapid, Critolaus in the correct and elegant, and Diogenes in the simple and modest kind of eloquence. Carneades particularly attracted the attention and admiration of his new auditors, by the subtlety of his reasoning, and the fluency of his language. Before Galba, and Cato the Censor, he harangued with great variety of thought, and copiousness of diction, in praise of justice.* The next day, to establish his doctrine of the uncertainty of human knowledge, he under¬ took to refute all his former arguments. Many were captivated by his eloquence ; but Cato, apprehensive lest the Roman youth should lose their military character in the pursuit of Grecian learning, persuaded the senate to send back these philosophers, without further delay, to their own schools. From this incident, of which we shall afterwards have further occasion to take notice, it sufficiently appears that Carneades was an eminent orator 1 and philosopher. He obtained such high reputation in his school, that, other philosophers, when they had dismissed their scholars, frequently | came to hear him.-i" In application to study he was indefatigable. So- intensely did he fix his thoughts upon the subject of his meditations, that' even at meals he frequently forgot to take the food which was set before ' him.J He strenuously opposed the Stoic Chrysippus, but was always' ready to do justice to his merit. He used to say, that if there were no Chrysippus, there w’ould be no Carneades; intimating, that he derived much of his reputation as a disputant from the abilities of his opponent. His voice was remarkably strong, and he had such a habit of vociferation,] that the master of the gymnastic exercises, in the public field, desired him] not to speak so loud : in return, he requested some measure to regulate his] voice ; to which the master very judiciously replied, “ You have a measure,] the number of your hearers.”§ As Carneades grew old, he discovered] strong apprehensions of dying ; and frequently lamented that the same] nature which had composed the human frame could dissolve it. He paid] the last debt to nature in the eighty-fifth, 1| or, according to Cicero^ and] Valerius Maximus,** in the ninetieth year of his age. It was the doctrine of the New Academy,-i"i- that the senses, the under¬ standing, and the imagination, frequently deceive us, and therefore cannot] be infallible judges of truth ; but that, from the impressions which we per¬ ceive to be produced on the mind, by means of the senses, we infer ap-1 pearances of truth, or probabilities. These impressions Carneades called] phantasies, or images. He maintained that they do not always correspond] to the real nature of things, and that there is no infallible method of deter-j mining when they are true or false, and consequently that they afford no] certain criterion of truth. Nevertheless, with respect to the conduct ofj life, and the pursuit of happiness, Carneades held that probable appearj ances are a sufficient guide, because it is unreasonable not to allow som^ degree of credit to those witnesses who commonly give a true reportj • Lactant, Inst. 1. v. c. 14. t Laert. 1. iv. sect. 63. ^ Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 6. ft Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. Sextus Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 153. Quint. Inst. 1. xii. c. 1. Cic. de Leg. I. i. X Val. Max. 1. viii. c. 7. § Laert. ** Loc. cit. lb? Chap. ». S. ‘2. AND THE NEW ACADEMY. 145 Probabilities he divided into three classes; simple, uncontradicted, and, confirmed by accurate examination. The lowest degree of probability takes place where the mind, in the casual occurrence of any single image, per¬ ceives in it nothing contrary to truth and nature; the second degree of probability arises when, contemplating any object in connexion with all the circumstances associated with it, we discover no appearance of inconsist¬ ency or incongruity, to lead us to suspect that our senses have given a false report ; as when we conclude, from comparing the image of any indi¬ vidual man with our remembrance of that man, that he is the person we supposed him to be. The highest degree of probability is produced when, after an accurate examination of every circumstance, which might be sup¬ posed to create uncertainty, we are able to discover no fallacy in the report of our senses. The judgments arising from this operation of the mind are, according to the doctrine of the New Academy, not science, but opinion, which is all the knowledge that the human mind is capable of attaining. This doctrine of Carneades, concerning truth, may serve to show in what sense we are to understand an assertion, which has been advanced respecting this philosopher and his sect,* that they would not allow it to be certain that things which are ecpial or similar to the same thing, arc equal or similar to one another. They did not, probably, deny this axiom, considered as an abstract truth ; but merely maintained that, in its appli¬ cation to any particular case some uncertainty must arise, from our imper¬ fect knowledge of the things which are brought into comparison, so that it is impossible to prove the absolute equality of any two things to a third, or to one another. It appears, moreover, that the chief point of difference between Arcesilaus and Carneades, or between the Middle and the New Academy was, that the latter taught the doctrine of uncertainty in less ex¬ ceptionable terms than the former. Arcesilaus, through his earnest desire of overturning all other sects, gave his opponents some pretence for charging him with having undermined the whole foundation of morals : Carneades, by leaving the human understanding in possession of probability, afforded sufficient scope for the use of practical principles of conduct. Arcesilaus was chiefly employed in opposing the doctrines of other philoso¬ phers in logic and physics, and paid little attention to ethics : Carneades, at the same time that he taught the necessity of suspense in speculative researches, prescribed rules for the direction of life and manners, j- Carneades, as Cicero J has related at large, strenuously opposed the doc- , trine of the Stoics concerning the gods ; but this he did, adds Cicero, not wdth a view to destroy the belief of superior powers, but merely to prove that the theological system of the Stoical school was unsatisfactory. He was likewise earnestly desirous of refuting their doctrine concerning fate.§ On this subject he assumed, on the ground of experience, the existence of a self-determining power in man, and hence inferred that all things did not happen, as the Stoics maintained, in a necessary series of causes and effects, and consequently, that it is impossible for the gods to predict events de¬ pendent on the will of man. As the foundation of morals, he taught that the ultimate end of life is the enjoyment of those things towards which we are directed by the principles of nature. Such is the general idea which the ancients have left us concerning the doctrine of Carneades. But after all, it must be owned that his real tenets * Bayle, Cam. note C. -j- Numenins np. Eii?el'. I. xiv. c. 7, 8. August. I. c. + De Nat. Deor. I. iii. c. 18. Sext. Emp. Adv. Matli. I. ix. sect. HO, &c. § Cic. de Fato, c. 1 k L 14-6 OF THE OLD, THE MIDDLE, AND THE NEW ACADEMY. Book II. are not certainly known. Even his immediate successor, Clitomachus, confessed that he was never able to discover them. Clitomachus* * * * was a native of Carthage. In his early years he ac¬ quired a fondness for learning, which induced him to visit Greece for the purpose of attending the schools of the philosophers.': From the time of his first arrival in Athens he attached himself to Carneades, and continued his disciple till his death, when he became his successor in the Academic chair. He studied with great industry, and made himself master of the systems of the other schools, but professed the doctrine of suspension of assent, as it had been taught by his master. Cicero relates that he wrote four hun¬ dred books upon philosophical subjects. At an advanced age he was seized with a lethargy. Recovering in some measure the use of his faculties, he said, “ The love of life shall deceive me no longer,” and laid violent hands upon himself. He entered upon the office of preceptor in the Academy immediately after the death of Carneades, and held it thirty years, that is, till the hundred and seventieth Olympiad. j- According to Cicero, he taught that there is no certain criterion by which to judge of the truth of those reports which we receive from the senses, and that therefore a wise man will either wholly suspend his assent, or decline giving a peremptory opinion ; but that, nevertheless,;!; men are strongly impelled by nature to follow probability. His moral docrine§ established a natural alliance be¬ tween pleasure and virtue. He was a professed enemy to rhetoric, and thought that no place should be allowed in society to so dangerous an art.|[ Philo of Larissa, <[[ the successor of Clitomachus, or according to some, the founder of a fourth Academy, is celebrated by Cicero for his learning and eloquence, and for the elegance of his manners. In the Mithridatic war, he took refuge at Rome, and Cicero attended, his lectures. He held, that truth in its nature is comprehensible, but not by the human faculties. Charmidas, the companion of Philo, is celebrated for the compass and fidelity of his memory, and for his moral wisdom.** * * §§ The last preceptor of the Platonic school in Greece was Antiochus of Ascalon.'f-'i- He attempted to reconcile the tenets of the different sects, and maintained that the doctrines of the Stoics were to be found in the writings of Plato. Cicero greatly admired his eloquence, and the politeness of his manners, and Lucullus took him as his companion into Asia. He resigned the Academic chair in the hundred and seventy-fifth Olympiad.!;!; After his time the professors of the Academic philosophy were dispersed by the tumults of war, and the school itself was transferred to Rome. §§ J * Laert. 1. iv. sect. 67, &c. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 31, 32. f B. C. 100. X Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. 1. i. c. 33. § Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. v. c. 30. 11 Sext. Emp. adv. Rhet. sect. 20. ^ Cic. de Orat. I. iii. c. 16. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. 1. i. c. 33. Plut. Vit. Cic. Cic. Ep. i ad Earn. I. xiii, ep. 1. 1. ix. ep. 8. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 4. 6. ’ ** Tusc. Qu. hi. Plin. hlist. Nat. 1. x. c. 16. Stobmus, Serm. 212. -j ff Sext. Emp. 1. c. Cic, Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 4. 22. 35. 43, 45. De Fin. 1. v. c. 3. 5. De' J Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 7. Plut. 1. c. IJ B. C. 80. j §§ Vidend. Meurs. de Archont. Ath. 1. iii. c. 9. Potter, Arch. 1. i. c. 10. 1. iv. c. 20. | Amoen. Lit. t. vii. p. 232. t. viii. p. 326. Reiman. Hist. Ath. c. 22. sect. 6. c. 33. sect. 5. J Cud worth, c. iv. sect. 24. Jons, de Scrip. 1. ii. c. 13, 14. Bayle. Fouchier, Diss. de J Phil. Acad. Par. 1692. Huet de la Foiblesse, &c. August, contr. Acad. Gassen. de I Log. 1. ii. c. 4. Carpzovii Diss. de Critolao. Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 147 CHAPTER IX. OF ARISTOTLE AND THE PERIPATETIC SECT. SECTION I.— OF ARISTOTLE AND HIS PHILOSOPHY. In the preceding chapter we have traced the rise and progress of tlie Ionic school, from Thales, through Socrates, and his pupil Plato, into the several forms which it assumed in the Old, Middle, and New Academy. We are next to inquire into the history of another principal branch of this school, the Peripatetic sect, founded by Aristotle ; a philosopher, whose extensive and penetrating genius has entitled him to immortal fame, and whose doctrines have been transmitted, through various channels, to the present day, and have been surprisingly interwoven with almost the whole circle of the sciences. The history of his life and opinions will require a minute and impartial discussion. Aristotle* was a native of Stagira, a town of Thrace,-]- on the bor¬ ders of the bay of Strymon, which at that time was subject to Philip of ♦ Macedon. His father was a physician, named Nicomachus ; his mother’s name was Estiada. From the place of his birth he is called the Stagirite. Ancient writers are generally agreed in fixing the time of his birth in the first year of the ninety-ninth Olympiad.^; He received the first rudiments of learning from Proxenus, of Atarna in Mysia, of whom he always retained a respectful remembrance. In gratitude for the care which he had taken of his early education, he afterwards honoured his memory with a statue, instructed his son Nicanor in the liberal sciences, and adopted him as his heir. § At the age of seventeen Aristotle went to Athens, and devoted himself to the study of philosophy in the school of Plato. 1| The uncom¬ mon acuteness of his apprehension, and his indefatigable industry, soon attracted the attention of Plato, and obtained his applause. Plato used to call him the Mind of the school ; and to say, when he was absent, “ Intel¬ lect is not here.” His acquaintance with books was extensive and accurate, as sufficiently appears from the concise abridgment of opinions, and the numerous quotations which are found in his works. According to Strabo,^ he was the first person who formed a library. Aristotle continued in the Academy till the death of Plato, that is, till the thirty-seventh year of his age. After the death of his master he erected a monument to his memory, on which he inscribed an epitaph expressive of the highest respect, of which a Latin version is preserved :** Gratus Aristoteles struit hoc altare Platoni, Quem turbse injustae vel celebrare nefas. (a) He likewise wrote an oration and elegies in praise of Plato, and gave other * Laert. 1. v. sect. 1, &c, Suidas. Ammonii Vita Arist. apud Proieg. Categ. t Herod. Polymn. p. 265. Pausan. Eliac. p. 462. J Laert. Dionys. Hal. Episi. 1. ad Ammasum. B. C. 384. § Laert. Ammon. Dion. Hal. loc. cit. || Pbilopon. de Mundi Etern. ^ L. xiii. p. 608. ** Ammon. (a) To Plato’s sacred name this tomb is rear’d, A name by Aristotle long revered ! Far hence, ye vulgar herd! nor dare to stain With impious praise this ever hallow’d fane. L 2 148 OF AKISTOTLE. Book 11. proofs of respect for his memory. Little regard is therefore due to the improbable tale related by Aristoxenus* of a quarrel between Aristotle and Plato, which terminated in a temporary exclusion of Aristotle from the Academy, and in his erection of a school in opposition to Plato during his life. We find no proof that Aristotle instituted a new system of philosophy before the death of Plato. It is certain , however, that when Speusippus, upon the death of his uncle, succeeded him in the Academy, Aristotle was so much displeased, that he left Athens, and paid a visit to Hermias, king of the Atarnenses, who had been his friend and fellow-disciple, and who received him with every ex¬ pression of regard. "j" Here he remained three years, and during this in¬ terval diligently prosecuted his philosophical researches. At the close of this term, his friend Hermias was taken prisoner by Memnon, a Rhodian, and sent to Artaxerxes, king of Persia, who put him to death. Upon this, Aristotle placed a statue of his friend in the temple at Delphos, and out of respect to his memory married his sister, whom her brother’s death had reduced to poverty and distress. J Upon the death of Hermias, Aristotle removed to Mitylene,§ but from what inducement does not appear. After he had remained there two years, Philip, king of Macedon, having heard of his extraordinary abilities and merit, made choice of him as preceptor to his son Alexander, and wrote him the following letter :§ “ Philip to Aristotle, wisheth health : “ Be informed that I have a son, and that I am thankful to the gods, not so much for his birth, as that he was born in the same age with you ; for if you will undertake the charge of his education, I assure myself that he will become worthy of his father, and of the kingdom which he will inherit.” Aristotle accepted the charge, and in the second year of the hundred and ninth Olympiad, || when Alexander was in his fifteenth year, he took up his residence in the court of Philip. He had been himself well instructed, not only in the doctrines of the schools, but in the manners of the world, and therefore was excellently qualified for the office of preceptor to the young prince. Accordingly, we find that he executed his trust so perfectly to the satisfaction of Philip and Olympia, that they admitted him to their entire confidence, and conferred upon him many acceptable tokens of esteem.^ Philip allowed him no small share of influence in his public counsels ; and it reflected great honour upon Aristotle that he made use of his interest with his prince rather for the benefit of his friends and the public than for his own emolument.** At his intercession the town of Stagira, which had fallen into decay, was rebuilt, and the inhabitants were restored to their ancient privileges. In commemoration of their obligations to their fellow-citizen, and as a testimony of respect for his merit, theyj instituted an annual Aristotelian festival. Alexander entertained such an | affection for his preceptor that he professed himself more indebted to him! than to his father; declaring that Philip had only given him life, but that^ Aristotle had taught him the art of living well. J:]; He is said not only to] have instructed his pupil in the principles of ethics and policy, but also to] have communicated to him the most abstruse and concealed doctrines ofj philosophy. But it may be questioned, whether a preceptor, who was him-] self so well trained by experience in the prudential maxims of life, would * Euseb. Praep. 1. xv. c. 2. Suidas in Aristox. Ailian, 1. iii. c. 19. ^ Strabo, 1. xiii. p. 610. Euseb. J. c. Conf. Atlien. 1. xv. p. 694. § Strabo, ib. Aul. Gell. 1. ix. c. 3. Plut. de Fort. Alex. t. ii. p. .34(5. ^ Ammonius, L c. ** Plut. 1. c. l.aert. |f Aminonius, 1. c. Pint. Alex. t. ii. p. 310. t Laert. 1. c. II B. C. 343.j^ Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 149 think of conducting a youth, who was destined to wield a sceptre, through the intricate mazes of metaphysics, or whether a pupil of Alexander’s en¬ terprising spirit would be able to bend his mind to such studies. What is related concerning the pains which Aristotle took to make his pupil acquainted with Homer, and to inspire him with a love of his writings, is much more credible ; for he certainly could not have adopted a more judicious method of enriching the mind of the young prince with noble sen¬ timents, or of inspiring him with ambition to distinguish himself by illus¬ trious actions. Immediately after the death of Philip, which happened in the first year of the hundred and eleventh Olympiad,* Alexander, whose ambitious spirit could not bear to be enclosed within the limits of his paternal kingdom, formed the design of his Asiatic expedition. It is not improbable that Aristotle, who after eight years’ daily intercourse must have been well ac¬ quainted with the character of his pupil, approved of this enterprise. For his own part, however, he preferred the enjoyment of literary leisure to t the prospect of sharing with Alexander the glory of conquest, and there- I fore determined to return to Athens.j- His nephew Callisthenes remained ! with the hero, and accompanied him in his exploits. After Aristotle had left his pupil they carried on a friendly correspond¬ ence, in which the philosopher prevailed upon Alexander to employ his , increasing power and wealth in the service of philosophy, by furnishing him, i in his retirement, with the means of enlarging his acquaintance with nature. Alexander aecordingly J employed several thousand persons in different parts of Europe and Asia to collect animals of various kinds, birds, beasts, and fishes, and send them to Aristotle, who, from the information which ! this collection afforded him, wrote fifty volumes on the history of animated i nature, only ten of which are now extant. Callisthenes, § in the course of the Asiatic expedition, incurred the displeasure of Alexander || by the freedom with which he censured his conduct : the aversion was by a na¬ tural association transferred to Aristotle ; and from that time a mutual alienation and jealousy took place between the philosopher and his prince. ; But there is no sufficient reason to believe^ that their attachment was . converted into a settled enmity, which at length led them to form designs i against each other’s life. \ Aristotle, upon his return to Athens, finding the Academy, in which he probably intended to preside, occupied by Xenocrates, resolved to acquire ! the fame of a leader in philosophy by founding a new sect in opposition to the Academy, and teaching a system of doctrines different from that of j Plato.** The place which he chose for his school was the Lyceum, j-j- a 1 grove in the suburbs of Athens, which had hitherto been made use of for , military exercises. Here he held daily conversations on subjects of phi¬ losophy with those who attended him, walking as he discoursed ; whence I his followers were called Peripatetics. i According to the long established practice of philosophers among the I Grecians, Egyptians, and other nations, Aristotle had his public and his se¬ cret doctrine, the former of which he called the Exoteric, and the latter the I Acroamatic or Esoteric. Hence §§ he divided his auditors into two classes, * B. C. 336. t Laert. &c. J Plin. Nat. Hist. 1. viii. c. 16. § Laert. 11 Q. Curtius, 1. viii. c. 6. ' ^ Plut. 1. c. Patricii Discussiones Peripateticae, Basil, 1571. ' ** Laert. 1. c. Cicero de Orat. 1. iii. c. 35. Quintil. Inst. Orat. 1. iii. c. 1. ' ft Laert. Suiclas in Lyc. Laert. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. i. c. 4. I §§ Aul. Gellius, 1. xx. c. 4. 150 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II. to one of which he taught his Exoteric doctrine, discoursing on the prin¬ cipal subjects of logic, rhetoric, and policy; the other he instructed in the Acroamatic, or concealed and subtle doctrine, concerning Being, Nature, and God. His more abstruse discourses he delivered in the morning to his select disciples, whom he required to have been previously instructed in the elements of learning, and to have discovered abilities and dispositions suited to the study of philosophy. He delivered lectures to a more pro¬ miscuous auditory in the evening, when the Lyceum was open to all young men without distinction. The former he called his Morning Walk, the latter his Evening Walk. Both were much frequented. Aristotle continued his school in the Lyceum twelve years;* for, although the superiority of his abilities, and the novelty of his doctrines created him many rivals and enemies, during the life of Alexander the friendship of , that prince protected him from insult. But after Alexander’s death, which ' happened in the first year of the hundred and fourteenth 01ympiad,'|- the fire of jealousy,^; which had long been smothered, burst into a flame of a persecution. His adversaries instigated Eurymedon, a priest, to accuse g him of holding and propagating impious tenets. What these were, we are m not expressly informed, but it is not improbable that the doctrine of Ari- 1 stotle concerning fate might be construed into a denial of the necessity of a prayers and sacrifices, and might consequently be resented as inimical to ® the public institutions of religion. This would doubtless be thought, on ft the part of the priesthood, a sufficient ground of accusation, and would ft be admitted by the judges of the Areopagus as a valid plea for treat- '1| ing him as a dangerous man. That Aristotle himself was apprehensive J of meeting with the fate of Socrates appears from the reason which he 1 gave§ his friends for leaving Athens ; “I am not willing,” says he, “to 1 give the Athenians an opportunity of committing a second offence against W philosophy.” It is certain that he retired, with a few of his disciples, to ft Chalcis, where he remained till his death. He left Athens in the second ft year of the hundred and fourteenth 01ympiad,|| and died at Chalcis the ft third year of the same Olympiad, and the sixty-third year of his age.^ ft Many idle tales are related** concerning the manner of his death. It is jft most likely that it was the effect of premature decay, in consequence of ft excessive watchfulness, and application to study. His body was conveyed a to Stagira, where his memory was honoured with an altar and a tomb. 'j Aristotle was twice married, first to Pythias, sister to his friend Hermias, and after her death to Herpilis, a native of Stagira.-j"]- By his second wife he had a son named Nichomachus, to whom he addressed his Magna Moralia, “Greater Morals,” His person was slender; he had small eyes, and a shrill voice, and when he was young hesitated in his speech. , He endeavoured to supply the defects of his natural form by an attention ; to dress, and commonly appeared in a costly habit, with his beard shaven, . and his hair cut, and with rings upon his fingers. He was subject to fre¬ quent indispositions, through a natural weakness of stomach ; but he | corrected the infirmities of his constitution by a temperate regimen. i Concerning the character of Aristotle nothing can be more contradictory than the accounts of different writers. Some of his panegyrists, not ■ Laert. 1. v. sect. 5. | B. C. 324. ) t Athen. 1. xv. p. 697. Orig. cont. Cels. 1. i. p. 52. 1. ii. p. 68. i § jElian, 1. iii. c. 36. || B. C. 323. ^ Laert. :! ** Aul. Gel!. 1. xiii.c. 5. .Just. Martyr-. Cohort, ad Graec. p. 34. Greg. Naz. Orat. iii. p. 79. Hesychiiis. Snida.s. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 166. ff Laert. Id. Cic. ad Attic. 1. iv. Ep. 9. Gronov. Thes. Graec. t. ii. Tab. 90. i m .i.t t ;i.i f Chap. 9. 3. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 151 contented with ascribing to him the virtues of a philosopher, or rather perhaps jealous of the credit which heathen philosophy might acquire from so illustrious a name, have ascribed his wisdom to divine revelation. Jews have said*^ that he gained his philosophy in Judea, and borrowed his moral doctrine from Solomon, and have even asserted that he was of the seed of Israel, and the tribe of Benjamin. Christians have assigned him a place amongst those who were supernaturally ordained to prepare the way for divine revelation, f and have acknowledged themselves indebted to the assistance of the Peripatetic philosophy for the depth and accuracy of their acquaintance with the sublime mysteries of religion, Others, who have confined their encomiums within the limits of probability, have said§ that Aristotle was an illustrious pattern of gratitude, moderation, and the love of truth; and, in confirmation of this general praise, have referred to his behaviour to his preceptor, his friends, and his countrymen, and to the celebrated apophthegm which has been commonly ascribed to him — Amicus Plato, amicus Socrates, magis tamen arnica veritas ; “ I respect Plato, and I respect Socrates, but I respect truth still more.” On the other hand, there have not been wanting writers who have represented Aristotle as the most infamous of human beings, and charged him with every kind of ; impiety and wickedness. Many of the calumnies against his memory which have been transmitted to posterity doubtless originated in thejealousy ' and envy of the rival sects which were contemporaries with the Peripatetic ' school. To this source may be fairly referred the abuse of Timaeus the ! Tauroraenite, who saysjj that Aristotle, when he was a young man, after wasting his patrimony in prodigality, opened a shop for medicine in Athens ; and that he was a pretender to learning, a vile parasite, and addicted to gluttony and debauchery. To the same origin we may ascribe the incon- i sistent and absurd cavils which have been raised against his reputation, on ' the ground of his attachment to Hermias, and the honours which he paid to his memory, and to that of his wife Pythias. If, Avithout regard to the fictions either of calumny or panegyric, the merit of Aristotle be Aveighed in the equal balance of historical truth, it Avill per¬ haps be found that neither were his virtues of that exalted kind Avhich com¬ mand admiration, nor his faults so highly criminal as not to admit of some i apology. He may perhaps be justly censured for having taught his pupil Alexander principles of morals and policy which were accommodated to the manners of a court, and which might easily be rendered subserAuent 1 to his ambitious Auews ; and it cannot be doubted that his philosophical ' * Joseph, contr. Apion, 1. i. Clem. Alex. Str. 1. i. Euseb. Praep. 1. ix. c. 5. R. Ge- 1 (lalias in Schalcheleth, p. 102. ed. Ven. Bartoloccius, Bibl. Rabb. t. i. p. 476. Basnage, Hist, des Juifs, t. iii. c. 7. sect. 14. Fabric. Bib. Gr. t. ii. p. 162. ; I It is said that Aristotle cried out, in the article of death, Causa causarum, miserere ; mei — and that he said to his attendants that Homer had well said the gods have de¬ scended upon earth for the salvation of men. (a) But these are unquestionably to be ranked among the lying tales so plentifully produced in the ages of monkish ignorance and credulity : they were probably invented by the ingenious author of the book De Porno, Sic. “Of the apple which Aristotle held in his hand just before his death, and I with the smell of which he refreshed himself, whilst he discoursed to his friends concern- 1 ing the Contempt of Death, and the Immortality of the Soul a book which Aristotle himself is said to have dictated in his last moments, in order to show that wise men need not lament their exit from their lodging of clay. About the year 1200 an Hebrew version of the Arabic translation from the supposed original was rendered into Latin by Manfred, son of the Emperor Frederic I. Vid. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 166. X Euseb. Pr. 1. xv. c. 8. § Ammonius, &c. II Suidas. Athen. 1. viii. p. .354. Euseb. Praep. 1. c. ■ (a) Ca?l. Rodigin. Ant. 1. .wiii.c. 31. Liber de Porno, ed. Losii, Giessac, 1706. 152 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II, doctrines concerning nature were not favourable to the public forms of religion. But neither his doctrine, nor his life, afford sufficient ground for condemning him as an advocate for immorality or impiety. As a writer there can be no doubt that Aristotle is entitled to the praise of deep erudition. At the same time it must be owned that he is fre¬ quently deserving of censure, for giving a partial and unfair representation of the opinons of his predecessors in philosophy, that he might the more easily refute them; and that he seems to have made it the principal object of his extensive reading to depreciate the wisdom of all preceding ages. In short, whilst in point of genius we rank Aristotle in the first class of men, and whilst we ascribe to him every attainment which, at the period n which he lived, indefatigable industry, united with superior abilities, could reach, we must add, that his reputation in philosophy is in some measure tarnished by a too daring spirit of contradiction and innovation : and in morals, by an artful conformity to the manners of the age in which he lived. A large catalogue of the writings of Aristotle is given by Laertius, Fabricius, and others, from which it appears that he wrote many books besides those which have been transmitted to the present times. Few of his works were made public during his life, and it was not long after his death before spurious productions were mixed with his genuine writings, so that it became difficult to distinguish them. Those which are at present generally received under his name may be classed under the several heads of logic, physics, metaphysics, mathematics, ethics, rhetoric, and poesy. The Logical writings of Aristotle are the “ Categories,” attributed by some to Archytas, a Pythagorean ; “ Of the Explanation of Nouns and Verbs,” a work which explains the philosophical principles of grammar; “ Analytics,” including the whole doctrine of syllogism and demonstration ; eight books of “ Topics,” or commonplaces, from which probable argu¬ ments are to be drawn; and “Sophistic Arguments,” enumerating the several species of false reasoning. These logical pieces are usually pub¬ lished in one volume under the general title of the Organon of Aristotle. His Physical writings are, “ On the Doctrine of Nature,” explaining the jirinciples and properties of natural bodies ; “ On the heavens ; ” “ On the Production and Dissolution of Natural Bodies;” “On Meteors;” “Of Animal Life;” “Physical Miscellanies;” “On the Natural History of Animals;” “ On the Anatomy of Animals;” “On Plants;” “On Colours;” “ On Sound ;” “A Collection of Wonderful Facts ; ” “ Against the Doc¬ trine of Xenophanes, Zeno, and Gorgias ; ” “On the Winds;” “On Physiognomy,” and, “ Miscellaneous Problems,” The Metaphysics of Aristotle are contained in fourteen books. Under the head of Mathe¬ matics are included a “ Book of Questions in Mechanics,” and another j “ On Incommensurable Lines.” His doctrine of Ethics is contained in ten books “To Nichomachus,” “ The Greater Morals ;” seven books “ To Eudemus,” ascribed by some to Theophrastus; a book “ On Virtue and Vice ; ” two “On CEconomics ; ” and eight “ On Government.” He treats, in three distinct books, “ On the Art of Rhetoric,” and in another “ On the Art of Poetry.” * The works of Aristotle, together with his library, passed very early through hazards which have rendered it a subject of critical inquiry how far the present volumes which bear his name are genuine.f Aristotle left I if * Of the entire works of Aristotle, the most valuable editions are those of Casaubon, j Lugd. 1590, Ki'lO, and Ou Val, Par. 1629, 1654, f Pabricii Hib. Orsec. v. ii. p. 109, &c. Strabo, 1. xiii. p. 609. Plut. in Sylla. Aminon.-^ Athen. 1. i. p. 3. Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 153 his own writings, together with his library, to his successor Theophrastus, who, doubtless, knew their value. Theophrastus, at his death, bequeathed all his books to Neleus, of Scepsis. Some of them were sold to Ptolemy Philadelphus, and shared the fate of the Alexandrian library. The heirs of Neleus, in order to secure the rest from being seized by the kings of Pergamus, under whose jurisdiction the town of Scepsis was, and who were industriously collecting a library, buried them in a subterraneous cavern, where they lay an hundred and thirty years, and suffered much injury. They were after this sold to Apellicon, a Teian, a great collector of books, who was particularly attached to the Peripatetic philosophy. Finding the manuscripts injured by time, he had them transcribed, and with injudicious industry supplied, from his own conjectures, and those of his copyists, such passages as were become illegible. It is impossible to say how many cor¬ ruptions were by this means introduced into the text. After the death of Apellicon, Sylla, at the taking of Athens, in the fourth year of the hundred and seventy-third Olympiad,* seized his library, and ordered it to be con¬ veyed to Rome. Here Tyrannio, a grammarian, obtaining permission to i make use of the manuscripts of Aristotle, employed ignorant amanuenses ; to take copies of them, which he suffered to pass out of his hands without i proper correction. These errors have been increased by the officiousness ■ of later transcribers and commentators, who have frequently introduced I variations, according to their own conjectures, into the original text. To 1 this we must add, that there is reason to believe that the ancient arrange- j ment of the books has been disturbed, so that it is now become impossible I to reduce them to their original order. I From these circumstances many errors must have crept into the writings j of Aristotle. But, besides these incidental causes of obscurity, there are I others, arising from the nature and scope of his philosophy, and the pecu- ; Parity of his diction, which it will be necessary particularly to remark. Most of the subjects on which Aristotle treats are in the highest degree abstruse, and difficult to be comprehended. Universal ideas of existence, attributes, and relations, separated from real being ; modes of reasoning considered abstractedly ; metaphysical disquisitions concerning matter, ; mind, and deity ; explanations of nature, deduced from conjectm’e rather ! than experience ; vague and indeterminate notions, which were probably never clearly conceived by the author himself ; and subtle distinctions, merely verbal, are the materials which chiefly fill up the voluminous writings of Aristotle. The obscurity necessarily arising from the nature of the subjects which the Stagirite discusses is greatly increased by the manner in which he I treats them. Aulus Gellius relates j- that when Alexander complained to i Aristotle that he had divulged in his writings his Esoteric doctrines, Ari- t stotle replied, that these doctrines were published and not published ; since i what he had written upon these subjects was intelligible only to such as i had been his hearers. The story will be easily credited by those who are . conversant with his works. No writer ever afforded more frequent exam¬ ples of the poet’s maxim. - Brevis esse laboro, Obscurus lio - (a) He afi'ects close periods and a concise diction. He often supposes things (a) f Noct. Att. I. XX. c. 5. - I strive to be concise ; I prove obscure. * B. C. 85. 154 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II. 1 to be known, which have either not been before explained, or may easily have escaped the reader’s memory. Sometimes he makes use of different terms to express the same idea, and at other times annexes different ideas to the same term. It is not an uncommon practice with him to use new words in an artificial and technical sense, which, nevertheless, he does not clearly define. His transitions are frequently so abrupt, or his progress j from his premises to his conclusions so rapid, that it is extremely difficult for the reader to perceive the train of his reasoning. Through artifice, negligence, or a change of opinion, many contradictions occur, which the ingenuity of criticism has never yet been able to reconcile. His general propositions are frequently obscure for want of examples ; and even his examples themselves, when he condescends to introduce them, are often as incomprehensible as the doctrines they are intended to elucidate. Ma¬ thematical ideas, with which he was exceedingly conversant, he some¬ times applies to subjects to which they have no natural relation, and thus incumbers with artificial difficulties disquisitions which are in themselves sufficiently obscure. Lastly, in quoting the opinions of former philoso-^ pliers, whether to examine, confirm, or confute them, betakes so little care to mark the transition from their words to his own, that the reader is frequently at a loss to determine whether Aristotle is giving his own opinion, or reporting that of some other philosopher. It will serve to account, in some measure, for the obscurity of Aristotle’s writings, if the leading design with which he formed his system of philoso-| phy be considered. There can be little doubt that an ambitious desire of distinguishing himself above all other philosophers induced him to become the founder of a new sect : and that, for the sake of increasing the lustre of his own system, he made use of every expedient to eclipse that of others, His object was to erect his own edifice upon the ruin of every other struc-] ture. As Lord Bacon has finely remarked,* “ Like a Turkish despot, he thought he could not reign secure, unless all his brethren were slain.' Innovating rather in words than in reality, and determining to oppose his new philosophy to ancient tenets, many of which were founded on truth and experience, he sometimes misrepresents the opinions of former philo¬ sophers ; sometimes selects those which were most trifling, or most easily, refuted ; and sometimes has recourse to uncertain principles and vague terms, in hopes that obscurity will be mistaken for novelty. Another circumstance in the life of Aristotle, which had no small influ-^’ j ence upon his philosophy, was, that from his childhood he had frequented^; the court of Amyntas with his father Nicomachus, and acquired the habits * and manners of high life ; and that afterwards, when he was chosen pre¬ ceptor to Alexander, he had occasion to accommodate his philosophy to the rules of the court, and to the ambition of the young prince whom he , was to educate. Deserting therefore the fanciful republic of Plato, and finding the morals of Socrates too confined for his purpose, he constructed a system of ethics for himself, which would allow full scope for the aspir- • ing views of Alexander and his friends. These remarks are not, however, intended entirely to depreciate the writings of Aristotle. Although we cannot approve of the blind veneration for antiquity, which has led many, in contempt of better guides, to extol the Aristotelian philosophy, as the highest effort of human ability ; although we are of opinion that the writings of this philosopher abound with trifles, and are in some places clouded with impenetrable obscurity ; we neverthe- De Augment. Scieut. 1. iii. c. 4. Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 155 less readily admit that many parts of his voluminous remains discover pro¬ found penetration and great strength of genius. His treatises on rhetoric and poetry have perhaps scarcely obtained applause equal to their merit. The philosophy of Aristotle, of which we now proceed to take a more particular survey, may be divided into three distinct branches. Instru¬ mental, Theoretical, and Practical. Under the first head are i included his doctrines concerning Logic ; under the second, his principles of Physics, Pneumatology, Ontology, and Mathematics ; and under the third, his system of Ethics and Policy. The sum of Aristotle’s doctrine concerning Logic is as follows : — * The end of logic is the discovery of truth, either probable or certain. ! Analytics investigate the truth by incontrovertible demonstration, Dialectics establish opinions by probable arguments. Logic, w'hether analytic or dialectic, searches after truth by means of syllogisms. Syllo- I gisms consist of propositions, and propositions of simple terms. Terms ; are of three kinds i-f- Homonymous, where a common word is. applied to ! different things ; Synonymous, or univocal, where the meaning of the word, I and the definition of the thing coincide ; and Paronymous, where the word only varies in case or termination. The Peripatetic preceptors added to these, which they called antipredicaments, analogical terms, where the same word belongs to one thing primarily, and to another secondarily and , improperly. They also premised the doctrine of Predicables, or general I modes of predicating. Aristotle having left nothing on this subject. Por¬ phyry wrote an Introduction to his works, in which he treats of the five ' predicables. Genus, Species, Difference, Property, and Accident. Univocal terms are reduced to ten classes, which are called Categories, I or Predicaments. These are, 1. Substance ; which is either primary, and ^ can neither be predicated of, nor inherent in, any other subject ; or second¬ ary, which subsists in primary substances, as genera or species. 2. Quantity, continued or discrete ; which has no contrary, and denominates things : equal or unequal. 3. Relation, expressing the manner in which one thing is affected towards another. 4. Quality, by which a thing is said to be i such as it is. 5. Action, signifying the motion of the agent. 6. Passion, I signifying the state of the patient. 7. When, denoting time. 8. Where, I denoting place. 9. Situation, expressing the external circumstance of ! local relation. 10. Habit, expressing the external circumstance of being I habited. J In order to supply the deficiencies of this arrangement five I other general heads were afterwards added. Opposition, Priority, Coinci- [ dence. Motion, and Possession. Excepting Substance, all the categories I and their supplements may be comprised under the general head of I Accident. § ( The arrangement of the Categories was borrowed from the Pythagorean I school, in which the number ten was esteemed the most perfect. It is said ! that it was first invented by Archytas of Tarentum. From him Plato I probably received it when he conversed with him in Italy ; and from Plato ‘ it would of course pass to Aristotle. Of Terms are formed enunciative Propositions, or sentences, in which something is affirmed or denied. |1 Every proposition consists of a Subject, a Predicate, and a Copula, or expresses the thing concerning which the assertion is made, the accident which is asserted or predicated of it, and * Laert. 1. v. sect. 28, &c. t De Categ. c. 1 0. II Arist. De Interpretatioiic, t. i. f Aristot. de Categ. c. i. t. i. Op. p. 8. § See Harris’s Pliilosopliical Arrangements. 156 OF ARISTOTLE. Book 11. the assertion itself. From propositions are formed Syllogisms, in which! from given premises certain conclusions are drawn. A Syllogism consists] of three propositions, of which the two former are the Premises, and the third the Conclusion, and in which three terms are variously arranged. These three terms are called the Major, the Minor, and the Middle term.] The Predicate of the Conclusion is called the Major Term, the subject the] Minor, and both together the Extremes. The Middle Term is that which] is introduced to show the connexion between the Major and Minor, and] thus bring out the conclusion. The Matter of a Syllogism is the propo-j sitions of which it consists ; the Form is the framing and disposing these' according to Figure and Mode, Figure is the proper disposition of thei Middle Term. Mode is the arrangement of the propositions according toj quantity and quality; that is, as they are universal or particular, affirma-j tive or negative.* I The figures of Syllogisms are three ; in the First, the^middle term, is the subject of the major proposition, and the predicate of the minor. It con-' tains four modes which are conclusive. In the Second the middle term is the predicate of both the extremes ; it has also four conclusive modes.' In the Third the middle term is the subject of both the extremes ; it has six modes. Every Syllogism is constituted of some one of these three figures ; but the first is the most perfect. Other forms of reasoning may easily be reduced to the Syllogistic. J On the invention and application of syllogisms Aristotle ti’eats with a degree of minuteness and subtlety, which produces obscurity. His logical dissertations would have been clearer, as well as more concise, had he' carefully distinguished between words and ideas, and confined his atten-' tion chiefly to the latter. ] * Analyt. prior. 1. i. t. i. p. 40. f Analyt. prior. 1. ii. c. 2.3. The Aristotelian doctrine of Syllogisms may be illustrated by the following ex¬ amples : — 1 The s,en\.ence, God is omnipotent, \s a Proposition, in which God is the Subject ; om¬ nipotent, the Predicate, and is, the Copula, j In the following Syllogism : — j Our Creator must be worshipped : God is our Creator; Therefore God must be worshipped : the two former propositions are the Premises ; the third, the Conclusion. The three Terms ate Worship — God — Creator. The first, the Major ; the second, the Minor; the ^ third, the Middle Term, introduced to show the connexion between the two ideas of God and Worship. Syllogism of the First Figure. Every bad man is miserable : All tyrants are bad men ; Therefore all tyrants are miserable. Syllogism of the Second Figure. No deceiver is to be credited: Every good historian is to be credited ; Therefore no good historian is a deceiver. Syllogism of the Third Figure. All honest men are beloved: All honest men have faults ,* Iherefore some who have faults are beloved. 1 I Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 157 [ Concerning demonstrative reasoning, Aristotle lays it down as a funda- I mental principle that all disquisition producing science rests upon some I previous knowledge of the subject. Demonstration can only arise from 1 principles which are true in themselves, and not referable to any prior 1" truth, which involve in them, by immediate consequence, the conclusion to be demonstrated ; and lastly, which are clearly perceived, and perfectly known. Demonstrative syllogisms respect certain truths, and therefore consist of propositions, which necessarily arise from the nature of things, ; or the definition of terms. The proper subjects of demonstration are those i common natures, or universal attributes, subsisting in individuals, which i make them to be what they are, and which may be predicated of them. It is one thing to know that a thing is so, and another to know why it is so ; hence arises two kinds of demonstration ; one rov on, which demon¬ strates the existence of the cause from its effects ; the other, rov Sion, which reasons from the nature of causes. No science can arise immediately from i the senses, which are only conversant with individual objects ; for science I is employed upon those universal natures which are discovered from the 1 induction or collection of particulars perceived by the senses.* Dialectics j- ■ deduce conclusions from probable premises ; that is from premises which appear probable to all, or at least to the most intelligent part of mankind. The art of dialectic reasoning is conjectural, and therefore does not always certainly attain its end. Dialectic propositions express Genus and Differ¬ ence, Definition, Property, or Accident ; or declare concerning any subject to what class it belongs, and wherein it differs from others ; by what terms i its nature may be explained ; what particular properties it possesses, or I what casual circumstances attend it. Refutation ’'EXey^oe,^ contradicts a I conclusion drawn by the opponent from assumed premises ; and for this I purpose either makes use of legitimate syllogisms in defending truth, or of i sophistical arts in support of error. Of these latter the principal are ; 1. By departing from the point, and proving something which seems to ' determine the question, but in reality does not. 2. By supposing what is not allowed, or taking for granted in other terms that which is to be proved. 3. By reasoning in a circle, when, in a series of arguments, the same things are mutually made use of, both as the medium of proof, and as the con¬ clusion. 4. By assigning a false cause, or making that to be the cause of any effect which either does not exist at all, or does not exist as a cause in the present question. 5. By representing a mere accident as essential to the nature of the subject. 6. By deducing an universal assertion from that which is true only in particular circumstances, and the reverse. 7. By asserting any thing in a compound sense, which is only true in a di- I vided sense ; and the reverse. 8. By an abuse of the ambiguity of words. To this latter source of fallacy several of the former may be easily reduced. § This brief sketch of the logic of Aristotle may suffice to give the rea¬ der a general idea of the first branch of his philosophy, the Instrumental. We next proceed to the second branch, the Theoretical, comprehend¬ ing his doctrine of physics, metaphysics, and mathematics. 1. Of Physics. The principles of nature are neither the Similar Parts of Anaxagoras, nor the Atoms of Leusippus and Democritus, nor the Sensible Elements of Thales, nor the Unity of Parmenides, nor the * Analytic, poster. I. i. c. 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 18. f Topic. I. i. c. 1, 3, 4, 10. t De Elencli. Sophist, t. i. p. 173. § For examples of the.se several kinds of sophisms, see Watts’s Logic, part ii, cli. 3. sect. 1. 158 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II. Numbers of Pythagoras, nor the Ideas of Plato. There must necessarily be in nature opposite principles, independent and underived, from which all things proceed. But since from two contrary principles nothing could be produced, but they would rather destroy each other, a third is necessary to the existence of natural bodies. These three principles are,* Form, Privation, and Matter ; the two former contrary to each other ; the third, the common subject of both. Matter and Form are the constituent prin¬ ciples of things ; Privation enters not into their constitution, but is acci¬ dentally associated with them. All things are produced from that which exists potentially, namely,'}' the First Matter ; not from that which exists actually, nor from pure nihility. Matter is neither produced not destroyed, but is the first infinite subject from which things are formed, and into which they are at last resolved. Form is the nature and essence of any thing, or that which makes it to be what it is. Matter cannot be separated from form and real existence. It may perhaps cast some light upon this part of Aristotle’s doctrine to remark the prior state of opinions on this subject. Before his time, all the philosophers, who had treated on natural causes, had agreed in the opinion that there is some substance from which all bodies were made, and upon which the forms of things are impressed ; and to this substance most of them gave the name of Matter. Although they could not deny the existence of this substance, they were unable to say what it was, or in what manner it received the forms of things. The common idea was, that matter consisted of indefinitely small particles which had been eternally in motion ; and it was for the most part believed, that these particles were collected and united by the agency of an intelligent principle. It was also generally supposed, that different particles of matter originally possessed different qualities ; but in explaining the nature of this difference various hypotheses were advanced. Empedocles, Thales, and others, taught that there are in matter four primary elements, which are the basis of all corporeal forms ; whilst Anaxagoras and his followers maintained that all bodies consist of indefinitely small particles, each similar in form to the whole. Plato, dissatisfied with these theories, had recourse to the doctrine of Ideas, and held that the Essential Forms of things proceeded by emanation from the Deity, had a real existence, and that in the union of these with matter consisted the formation of bodies. Aristotle had too much pene¬ tration not to see that these hypotheses were inadequate to the solution of the great question concerning the formation of nature. In hopes of suc¬ ceeding better than his predecessors, he assumed as the basis of a new system. First Matter,;]; entirely destitute of all qualities, and therefore not body, but the eternal subject on Avhich forms might be impressed, and in which they might inhere. This notion of a primary substance, without quantity or quality, form or figure, or any properties of body, that is in¬ corporeal matter, though in reality borrowed from the Pythagoreans, § Aristotle claimed as his own invention ; boasting || that he was the first who had discovered the true principle of bodies. Concerning Nature, Aristotle speaks with more than usual obscurity. He defines it to be the principle and cause of motion and of rest, wherever it exists primarily and not by accident. Nature, he says, subsists in ma¬ terial substances, and consists of two parts, matter and form ; but form has * Laert. 1. v. sect. 23. Arist. Phys. 1. i. c. 3, 4. f Phys. c. 8, 9. J Metaph. 1. i. c. 6, t. ii. p. 450 ; ). vii. c. 3, p. 708. § Tima?us Locrus de Anima Mundi. Op. Piiys. Galei, p. 554. Gic. Ac. Qu. 1. i. c. 7- 11 De Gent, et Corr. I. i. c. 2. OF ARISTOTLE. 159 I Chap. 9. S. 1. :j more of nature than matter, because it is in act.* By nature he certainly (1 does not mean, as some writers have supposed, a substance different from I material things, by which they are produced and arranged for he con- I siders nature as intimately connected and necessarily combined with mat- j; ter. J The truth seems to be, that Aristotle, in framing his system, finding himself in want of a principle by which form and matter might be united, and being determined to advance something new, conceived in his mind a , vague notion of some internal cause of motion and arrangement to which j he applied the term Nature ; and thus cut the knot which he was not able I to untie. To endeavour further to elucidate his doctrine concerning the I principle which he calls Nature, would therefore only be to add to the I number of unmeaning words which have been already thrown away upon I this subject. [ Causes are distinguished by this philosopher into four kinds ; Material, ; of which things are made ; Formal, by which a thing is that which it is, I and- nothing else ; Efficient, by the agency of which any thing is produced ; ! and, Final, or the end for which it is produced.§" i Motion, or change of any kind, is successive with respect to time, finite, : and produced by some cause, either external or internal. I Substances are of three kinds;]] two of these are natural substances; [ the first, eternal, as the heavens ; the second perishable, as animal bodies ; ji the third, is the immutable nature ; of which more hereafter, j The heavens ^ are perfect, because they are composed of perfect bodies, f and comprehend all perfection, being comprehended by nothing. Circular [' motion about a centre is peculiar to the heavenly sphere ; it has therefore |i a distinct nature from all terrestrial bodies, whose motion is rectilineal. [! From its circular motion, it appears that the heavenly sphere has neither levity nor gravity. Because it has no contrary, it is not liable to any in¬ crease, diminution, or change, and is eternal.** The natural motion of the heavenly sphere is circular ; but this motion is not of one kind through the whole heavenly region ; for there are other spheres, which move in a i direction contrary to that of the first sphere, in order to produce the vicis- 1 situdes of terrestrial things. The motion of first sphere, or Primuni j Mobile, “ that which is first moved,” is equable and uniform, without be- I ginning, middle, or end ; the Primum Mobile, and the First Mover, being ’! eternal and immutable. The stars are of the same nature with the spheres by which they are supported, but more dense ; they communicate light and ; heat to the air, and thence to the inferior world, by means of friction. 'j-j- I They are moved in consequence of the motion of the spheres in which I they are placed. The earth is a spherical body immovably fixed, and is the centre of motion to all the spheres. The first sphere revolves with the greatest velocity, and its motion is from West to East; the inferior spheres revolve from East to West. The velocities of the spheres of the seven planets are inversely as their distances from the first sphere. The world is not infinite, nor is there any infinite body beyond it ; for no body can be infinite. There cannot be more than one world, for if there were more, they would move towards each other, out of their respec¬ tive places. The world is eternal, without beginning or end.§§ Bodies are either simple or compound. Simple bodies are the elements, * Phys. 1. ii. c. 1. p. 26. f Cudworth’s Intellectual System, p. 157. J Phys. 1. ii. c. 11. § Phys. 1. ii. c. 3, p. 165. || Metaph. 1. xi. c. 1, p. 738. De Ccelo, 1. i. c. 3, 4, p. 337, 338. ** Ibid. c. 3. 12. t+ Ib. 1. ii. C..3— 11. ++ Ib. 1. ii. c. 13, 14. §§ Ib. 1. iii. c. 7, 8, 12. 160 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II. or secondary matter, produced by the union of primary matter and form. Compound bodies are those which are produced from the combination of elementary bodies. Elements being produced, and capable of dissolution, are not eternal. The elements are four ; fire, air, water, and earth. There are in elementary bodies two principles of motion, gravity and levity ; by the former, bodies descend towards the centre of the world ; by the latter, they rise towards the heavens. The element of earth has simple gravity ; that of fire simple levity ; air and water partake of both. Compound bodies descend or ascend, in proportion to the prevalence of gravity or levity in their component parts. Those elements, which by their levity are uppermost, are most perfect. They partake, with respect to the in¬ ferior elements, of the nature of forms ; for it is the property of matter to be contained, and of form to contain.* * * § In consequence of the perpetual agency of the first mover and the ce¬ lestial sphere upon matter, bodies suffer a perpetual succession of dissolu¬ tion and reproduction. Dissolution always succeeds production, because the termination of the dissolution of one body is the commencement of the production of another, the primary matter in the mean time remaining i the same. When the whole essential substance of any body is changed, j reproduction takes place ; when its accidental properties are changed, it : undergoes alteration by means of augmentation or diminution. -]' ! From the mutual contact of different bodies arises a mutual action and passion, each endeavouring to reduce the other to its own likeness. In sensible bodies there are certain primary qualities, some active and others passive, which constitute their specific difference. Of this kind are heat and cold, moisture and dryness, heaviness and lightness, hardness and soft¬ ness, roughness and smoothness, and the like. It is from the union of the two first of these pairs of primary qualities that the elements are formed. Fire from the union of heat and dryness ; air, from the union of heat and moisture ; water, from the union of cold and moisture ; earth, from the union of cold and dryness. All the elements may be reciprocally trans¬ muted : and the transmutation is made, not by dissolution, but by altera¬ tion. Mixed bodies are formed by a combination of all the elements. The causes of mixed bodies are three ; the matter, the form, and the universal efficient, the circular motion of the heavens, by means of which the sun and the stars, the immediate agents in production and dissolution, approach towards or recede from the earth. J From the general principles of production and dissolution, and from the mutual action and passion of the simple qualities, Aristotle endeavours to assign the causes of natural appearances, and to explain the nature of mixed bodies, whether perfect or imperfect. But it is unnecessary, in a general summary of his doctrine concerning nature, to pursue his conjec¬ tural theories through a tedious detail of particulars. From Aristotle’s system of Physics we pass to his doctrine concerning Being considered abstractedly, concerning Deity, and concerning the Soul. These are comprehended under the general term Metaphysics, § because they pass beyond sensible bodies to things which are perceived only by the understanding ; whence this branch of science is also called by Aristotle The First Philosophy. We shall here follow the order which Aristotle himself has pursued in his Book of Metaphysics. * De Coelo, 1. iii. c. 3, p. 372 ; 1. iv. c. 1, p. 378. De Gen. et Corr. 1. i. c. 3. p. 3S6. t De Gen. et Corr. 1. i. c. 5, p. 390. I De Gen. et Corr. 1. i. c. 6, p. 393 ; 1. ii. c. 2, 3, p. 400 ; c. 8, 9, p. 406. § Metapli. 1. i. c. I ; 1. v. c. 1 ; 1. vi. c. 1. Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 161 Of the doctrine \I3eing, considered as such, the first principle or axiom is, that it is ini) '^sible that the same thing should be, and not be, in the same subject, at the lame time, and in the same respect.*' To this universal principle all demonstration may be reduced, but it is itself inca¬ pable of demonstration, because it is a primary truth. Being is either by itself, or by accident. Of these the first is that which exists by itself, because upon this all properties or accidents depend. Of accidental being no certain knowledge can be obtained. Being may be distributed into the ten Categories, or Predicaments, before enumerated. Substance includes primary matter, or the first subject of all things, form and essence, and the compounds arising from the union of these.-f- Being may be either in power or in act. Power is either active or pas¬ sive : active power is the principle of motion, or change, acting upon another substance : passive power subssts in the subject upon which active power is exercised. These are correlatives, and cannot be separated. Power remains, when it is not exerted in action. Action takes place when a thing is otherwise than when it was in power. j; Being is either notional or real ; notional, as it is conceived in the mind ; real, as it exists in nature. Notional being is either true or false ; true, when it corresponds to the real nature of things ; false, when the concep¬ tion and the reality differ from each other. In the knowledge of things immutable the intellect cannot be deceived; mistake and. error can only arise concerning contingent and variable objects. If Being be considered with respect to numbers, unity is one of its properties. To unity are nearly related identity, equality, and similarity. Being admits of genus and species ; those things differ in genus which are not of the same primary nature : things which differ from each other, but have the same genus, are said to differ in species. § Concerning the First Cause of Motion, the sura of Aristotle’s doctrine is this : Of substances, which have been already said to be of three kinds, cor¬ ruptible, incorruptible, and immovable, the third kind is the First Mover, itself unmoved. 'I'he existence of this kind of substance may be inferred from the local motion of the heavens ; for, since it is not possible that the ' circular motion which is peculiar to the celestial sphere should have had a beginning, not only must the sphere which is the seat of this motion be an eternal substance, but there must likewise be an eternal substance which has from eternity caused this motion, which therefore remains itself im¬ movable, but is eternally communicating motion to other substances. That substance which is the cause of eternal motion must itself be simple, pure energy, void of matter, eternal, and immutable. The act of the first mover, by which it is the first efficient cause of all motion, consists in the simple energy of pure Intelligence. This influence operates independently and immediately upon inferior intelligences, or substances of the same nature r with the first mover ; and it is by their agency that the motions in the I primary subordinate spheres are produced. The intelligent powers move the heavenly spheres, not for the sake of producing inferior things, but tliat they may resemble the first power. Nevertheless, the vicissitudes of l' nature are the effect of their action upon the inferior orbs, especially upon ! |! the sun, which is the immediate cause of production and decay. The essence of the first mover is different from that of corporeal sub- ♦ * Meta{)fi. 1. iv. c. 4. ]i. C88, &c 4 L. iv. c. 7. p. 679. 1. vi. c. 3. 6. p. 693. 696. I I L. ix. c. 1 — 6. p. 7U, &c. § L. ii. c. 4. 1. iv. c. 6. 9. 162 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II. stances ; indivisible, because unity is perfect ; imra/ ole, because nothing can change itself; and eternal, because motion/ .self is eternal. This power is an incorporeal intelligence; happy in Contemplation of him¬ self ; the first cause of all motion, and in finer tke Being of beings, or God.* Upon reviewing this part of Aristotle’s metaphysical reasoning, it seems no very difficult task to discover the progress of his investigation. After he had ascended in the scale of being to the first substance, and had de¬ rived all motion from the perfect and eternal circular motion of the hea¬ vens, which he supposed to have been eternal, he found it necessary to admit into his system a First Mover. To avoid the absui’dity of an infinite series of effects without a cause, he conceived the first spring of all motion to have been itself immovable ; but in what manner the first mover pro¬ duced this motion he was at a loss to explain. It was contrary to his whole system, and to his first notions of matter and local motion, to admit (which nevertheless some writers have imputed to him) that the celestial orbs are animated bodies, which move by their own innate force. Having deprived this first mover of all quantity, matter, and motion, he perceived the necessity of assigning to it some method of communicating motion diflferent from that in which bodies act upon each other. But finding himself unable to say in what manner a simple immaterial substance, incapable of motion, could produce motion in material substances, he endeavoured to extrieate himself from his embarrassment by recurring to analogy, and sup¬ posed that the first mover acts upon the first celestial sphere to give it motion, in a manner similar to that in which the mind of man acts upon the human body. From the well-known fact that the motion of the body follows the conceptions and volition of the mind, he assumed a certain in¬ tellectual influence, exercised by the first mover, as the principle of local motion, and thus imagined that he had solved the great problem which had hitherto been found inexplicable, in what manner mind acts upon body. However, after all that Aristotle has said concerning the spring of motion in his first mover, which he describes as having intelligence, desire, and affection, it still remains an inexplicable mystery in what manner pure spirit, either human or divine, is the efficient cause of motion in material bodies. If it be inquired whether Aristotle is to be ranked in the class of theists or of atheists, the preceding view of his theology will justify us in replying, that his system does not exclude the idea of deity ; for he speaks of the first mover as a being distinct from the world ; wholly separated in his nature from matter ; of a peculiar substance ; possessing intellect, desire, and a power of communicating motion ; upon whom the universe is de¬ pendent, not as upon an animating principle, but an external moving power. This being he represents as superior to all other intelligent natures, and calls him God. At the same time it must be owned that it is impossible to reconcile Aristotle’s notion of deity with just conceptions of the Divine nature and attributes. He makes God, indeed, the cause of all motion ; but in supposing the universe to have existed from eternity, he divests him of the glory of creation, arid connects him with a world already formed by the chain of necessity, for no other purpose, than to make him the first spring of a vast machine. As, according to the doctrine of Aristotle, God is immutable, so also is * Met. 1. xi. c. 6, 7, 8. p. TiO. De Ccclo, 1. ii. c. 3. Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 163 the celestial sphere which is the region of his residence. In producing motion, the Deity acts, not voluntarily, but necessarily ; not for the sake of other beings, but for his own pleasure. Eternally employed in the con¬ templation of his own nature, he observes nothing, he cares for nothing, beyond himself. Residing in the first sphere, he possesses neither immensity nor omnipresence : far removed from the inferior parts of the universe, he is not even a spectator of what is passing among its inhabitants, and therefore cannot be a proper object of worship and reverence. He is in¬ ferior even to the deity of Epicurus, Avho, on account of his excellent nature, was Avorthy of homage. He is indeed intelligent and immaterial, but his duration is occupied in no other action than the exercise of an in¬ explicable poAver of communicating motion. Hoav far this doctrine of the First Mover falls short of the true idea of the Supreme Being, those Avho have been better instructed Avill easily perceive. Concerning intelligent natures inferior to the first mover, Aristotle taught that they are simple immaterial substances, who preside over the loAver celestial spheres. These he supposed to be dependent on the first mover ; to be employed in contemplating the first mover, as the best and most per¬ fect model ; and to be impelled to action, by a desire of receiving his influence, and of communicating, by a similar influence, motion to their respective spheres, and hence to the rest of the universe. Whether they are proper objects of religious Avorship, he has no Avay clearly determined ; but it is probable that he ranked every thing of this kind amongst the popular superstitions, and that this Avas the cause of the complaints which were brought against him by the Athenians. It may be questioned Avhether Aristotle considered the inferior intelligences as proceeding by emanation from the supreme ; for such a dogma would not be very con¬ sistent Avith the opinion that these intelligences had been eternally con¬ nected with their respective spheres. We shall conclude our vieAV of the Metaphysics of Aristotle by inquiring into his doctrine concerning the Human Mind and Animal Life. Aristotle, having undertaken to teach a neAV system of philosophy, Avas desirous of receding as far as possible from former philosophers, and par¬ ticularly from Plato ; and in treating upon any subject, on Avhich he had no new doctrine to offer, he gave old opinions the air of novelty, by cloth¬ ing them in neAV language. This latter method he adopted on the subject ; of Mind. He asserted Avith Plato that there are in man different faculties, Avhich have respectively a different organ ; but he designedly expressed his doctrine upon this head in obscure terms, which cannot be explained Avith entire perspicuity, Avithout supposing, as many writers have done, ; Avhat Aristotle ought to have taught, instead of endeavouring to discover Avhat he actually did teach. His leading tenets on this subject are these : * The soul is the first principle of action in an organised body, possessing life potentially. The soul does not move itself ; for, whatever moves, is moved by some other moving poAver. It is not a rare body, composed of elements ; for then it Avould not have perception, more than the elements Avhich compose it.'j~ The soul has three faculties, the nutritive, the sensi¬ tive, and the rational ; the superior comprehending the inferior potentially. The nutritive faculty is that by Avhich life is produced and preserved. The sensitive faculty is that by Avhich Ave perceive and feel : it does not per- * De Anima, 1. i. t. i. p. 476, &c. 1. ii. c. 1. p. 487. f De Anima, 1. ii. c, 4, .7, 6. M 2 164 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II. ceive itself nor its organs, but some external object through the interven¬ tion of its organs, which are adapted to produce the sensations of sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch. The senses receive sensible species, or forms, without matter, as wax receives the impression of a seal without receiving any part of its substance. The external senses perceive objects, but it is the common or internal sense which observes their difference.* The internal sense perceives various objects at the same instant. Percep¬ tion differs from intellect, the former being common to all animals, the latter to a few. Fancy is the perception produced in any animal by the immediate action of the senses. It is accompanied with different feelings, according to the nature of the object by which it is produced. Memoryj' is derived from fancy, and has its seat in the same power of the soul. It is the effect of some image impressed upon the soul by means of the senses. Where this image cannot be retained, through an excess of moisture or dryness in the temperature of the brain, memory ceases. Reminiscence^ is that faculty of the mind by which we search for any thing, which we wish to recollect, through a series of things nearly related to it, till at last we call to mind what we had forgotten. The intellect§ is that part of the m soul by which it understands. It is of two kinds, passive and active : li passive intellect is that faculty by which the understanding receives the I forms of things ; it is the seat of species. Active intellect is the efficient I cause of all knowledge, and is either simple, when it is employed in the ■ near apprehension of its object, or complex, when it compounds simple ■ conceptions in order to produce belief and assent. The latter is either ■ true or false, the former neither. The action of the intellect is either ■ theoretical or practical ; theoretical, when it simply considers what is true ■ or false ; and practical, when it judges whether any thing is good or evil, ■ and thereby excites the will to pursue or avoid it. The principle of local I motion is the desire, or aversion, which arises from the practical exercise ■ of the understanding. This desire, or aversion, produces either rational ■ volition, or sensitive appetite. The production of animal life arises from the union of the nutritive soul with animal heat. Life is the continuance ■ of this union, death its dissolution. || tfl The nature of the first principle of animal life, and of all perception, M intelligence, and action, Aristotle, as well as all other philosophers, was at a ■ loss to explain. Having no other way of judging concerning it, than byjj observing its operations as far as they are subjects of experience, he coidd ■ only define the mind to be that principle by which we live, perceive, and® understand. When he attempted to form an abstract conception of this® principle, he saw that there must be some substance which enjoys suchB perfection, as to be capable of performing this function; but he was wholly® ignorant of the nature of this substance, and therefore, in defining it, hew made use of a term expressive of the confused idea which he had formed « to himself from observing its operations, and called it kvTtki^tia, or Perfectm Energy; that is, if he had confessed the truth, some substance, I know®! not what, which is adapted to produce sensitive and rational life in certaiii organised bodies. This term will afford the attentive reader a striking' example of the manner in which Aristotle endeavoured to explain the prin-‘ ciples of nature by vague notions and unmeaning words. j Nothing is to be met with in the writings of Aristotle which decisively, * De An. 1. iii. c. 2, 3. p. 500, &c. •f' De Memor. 1. i. c. 1. p. 523. 1 f: lb. c. 2. § De Anim. 1. iii. c. 4 — 11. p. 502, &c. -J II De Vita et Morte, c, 17, 18. Chap. 9. S. 1. OF ARISTOTLE. 16.5 determines whether he thought the soul of man mortal or immortal ; but the former appears most probable, from his notion of the nature and origin of the human soul,* * * § which he conceived to be an intellectual power, exter¬ nally transmitted into the human body from an Etei’nal Intelligence, the common source of rationality to human beings. Aristotle does not inform his readers what he conceived this Universal Principle to be ; but there is no proof that he supposed the union of this Principle with any individual to continue after death. f The third branch of the Aristotelian philosophy, the Practical, in¬ cluded his doctrine of Ethics, Politics, and QEconomics. Aristotle, though sufficiently copious in his discourses on the subject of morals, yet, from causes which have been already hinted, affords the intel¬ ligent reader little satisfaction. Upon this branch of his philosophy, there¬ fore, a brief enumeration of some of the leading heads of his doctrine may suffice. J Moral felicity consists neither in the pleasures of the body, nor in riches ; nor in civil glory, power, and rank ; nor in the contemplation of truth ; but in the virtuous exercise of the mind. A virtuous life is in itself a source of delight. External goods, such as friends, riches, power, beauty, and the like, are instruments, by means of which illustrious deeds may be performed. Virtue is either theoretical or practical : theoretical virtue con¬ sists in the due exercise of the understanding ; practical in the pursuit of what is right and good. Practical virtue is acquired by habit and ex:ercise.§ Virtue, as far as it respects ourselves and the government of the passions, consists in preserving that mean in all things which reason and prudence prescribe : it is the middle path between two extremes, one of which is vicious through excess, the other through defect. Virtue is a spontaneous act, the effect of design and volition. It is completed by nature, habit, and reason. The first virtue is Fortitude, which is the mean between timidity and rash confidence. Temperance is the mean between the excessive pursuit and the neglect of pleasure. Liberality is the mean be¬ tween prodigality and avarice. Magnificence preserves a due decorum in great expenses, and is the mean between haughty grandeur and low parsimony. Magnanimity respects the love of applause, and the judg¬ ment a man forms of his own merit, and holds the middle place between meanness of spirit and pride. Moderation respects distinction in rank, and is the mean between ambition and the contempt of greatness. Gentleness is the due government of the irascible passions, and observes a proper medium between anger and insensibility. Affability respects the desire of pleasing in the ordinary occurrences of life, and pursues the middle path between moroseness and servility. Simplicity in the practice of virtue is the mean between arrogant pretensions to merit, and an artful concealment * De Gen. An-. 1. ii. c. 3. 1. iii. c. 11. Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 10. t In censuring Aristotle’s speculative physics, his extensive practical knowledge of nature should not be overlooked. His writings on Natural History are a continued chain of physical and anatomical facts, which appear to have been the result of accurate observation. Aristotle relied less than any of the ancient naturalists on uncertain and fabulous report. He industriously collected and examined natural bodies : he appears to have himself dissected, or to have been present at the dissection of, many animals, particularly of fishes. There are in his writings (a) references by letters to figures by which he illustrated his observations. See on this subject Haller, Method. Stud. Med. p. iv. c. 2. Borrich. de Sap. Herm. c. 10. Schulze, in Spec. Hist. Anat. v. ii. p. d. J Stobaei Eel. Phys. et Eth. 1. ii. p. IS'k § Arist. Mor. 1. i. c. 3 — d. 0, 10. 1. x. c. 6. («) Hist. Auiin. 1. i. c. 17. 1. iii. c. 1. 1. iv. c. 166 OF ARISTOTLE. Book II. of defects. Urbanity respects sports and jests, and avoids rusticity and scurrility. Modesty is a certain apprehension of incurring disgrace, and lies in the middle way between impudence and bashfulness. Justice in¬ cludes the observance of the laws for the preservation of society, and the discharge of obligations and debts between equals. Equity corrects the rigour of laws, or supplies their defects. Friendship is nearly allied to virtue ; it consists in perfect affection towards an equal. Friendships are formed for the sake of pleasure, convenience, or virtue. Friendship is cherished by mutual acts of generosity : it is begun in kindness, and pre¬ served by concord ; its end is, the pleasant enjoyment of life.* Pleasures are essentially different in kind. Disgraceful pleasures are wholly unworthy of the name. The purest and noblest pleasure is that which a good man derives from virtuous actions. Happiness which con¬ sists in a conduct conformable to virtue, is either contemplative or active. Contemplative happiness, which consists in the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom, is superior to active happiness, because the understanding is the higher part of human nature, and the objects on which it is employed are of the noblest kind. The happiness which arises from external posses¬ sions, is inferior to that which arises from virtuous actions ; but both are necessary to produce perfect felicity.-l- This may serve as a specimen of the moral philosophy, which is to be found in Aristotle’s Book of Ethics, dedicated to Nicomachus, in his Greater Morals, and his discourse On the Virtues. The truth is that, though these writings contain many useful precepts, and just observations, they are by no means to be considered as a perfect code of morals, adapted to produce genuine integrity and simplicity of manners. Aristotle’s design, in his ethical writings, seems to have been to lay down precepts for civil life, introductory to his doctrine of political wisdom. In his treatise con¬ cerning Policy, he not only insists upon the general theory of government, but enters into a distinct consideration of its particular duties. Whence it appears that Aristotle was intimately acquainted with the principles of government, as well as with those of philosophy. But for the particulars of his precepts on Policy, as well as on CEconomics, which do not admit of an easy application to the present times, we shall content ourselves with | referring our readers to his works. As the result of the brief survey which we have taken of the philosophy of Aristotle, it may be asserted, that it is rather the philosophy of Words than of Things, — and that the study of his writings tends more to perplex the understanding with subtle distinctions, than to enlighten it with real knowledge. J * Mor. 1. ii. c 5—9. 1. hi. c. 4, 5. 9—14. 1. iv. c. 1. 7. 11. 13. 15. 1. v. c. 2, 3. 8, 9. 1. vi. c. 2 — 7. 1. vii. c. 1. 1. viii. c. 1. 6. 1. ix. c. 4 — G. 12. f L. X. c. 5 — 8. Conf. Laert. 1. v. sect. 30, &c. Orig. Phil. p. 139. Stob. 1. c. Z Vidend. Ammon. Proleg. in Categ. Auct. anon. Vit. Arist. apud Vers. Lat. Op. Venet. 1496. Nunnesii Instit. Phil. Perip. Id. de Causis Obscurit. Arist. Helmestad, 1GG7. Vit. Arist. apud Menag. Comment, in Diog. Laert. p. 201. ed. Wetstein. Gaurini, Aretini, j et Gemusaei Vit. Arist. Melancthonis Orat. de Arist. t. iii. Beureri, Vit. Arist. Basil, 1 1581. Weinrichii Orat. Apol. Lips. 1611. Schotti Arist. et Demosth. Comp. Aug. Vend. 1603. Patricii Discuss. Perip. Basil, 1571. Conringii Orat. de Arist. Bayle. Basnage, j Hist, des Juifs, t. iii. c. 7. Clerici Hist. Med. p. i. 1. iv. c. 3. p. ii. 1. i. c. 2. Licetus dei Piet. Arist. Patav. 1692. Jons. deScr. His. Ph. 1. ii. c. 13. 1. ii. c. 15. Potter, Arch. Gr. )jj 1. i. c. 8. Schmid. Diss. de Gymn. Lit. Jons. Diss. de Hist. Perip. Gronov. Exerc. Acad, i de Museo Alex. t. iii. Ant. Gr. Heumanni Act. Pliil. v. ii. p. 676. Voss, de Sectis, c. xvii.i sect. 9. Horn. Hist. Phil. 1. vii. c. 9. Piccart. lutr. in Phil. Arist. c. 10. Paschiusde var.' j Mod. Trad. Mor. c. 5. Morhoff. Polyhist. t. ii. 1. i. c. 8. 11. 1. ii. c. 12. Rachelius in Phil. < Mor. Arist. Gron. Thes. Ant. t. ii. tab. xc. Buddaei Hist. Pli. Heb. sect. 32. Id. Hist.'i Chap. 9. S. 2. OF the successors of Aristotle. 167 SECTION II. -OF THE SUCCESSORS OF ARISTOTLE. • When Aristotle withdrew, as we have already stated, to Chalcis, his disciples importuned him to nominate a successor in the school of the Lyceum. In compliance with their request, he appointed to this office, in the second year of the hundred and fourteenth Olympiad,* one of his favourite pupils, Theophrastus.']' This philosopher was a native of Eresus,:]; a maritime town in Lesbos. Lie was born in the second year of the hundred and second Olympiad, § and received the first rudiments of learning under Alcippus, in his own country ; after which he was sent by his father, who was a wealthy man, to Athens, and there became a disciple of Plato, and after his death of Aristotle. Under these eminent masters, blest by nature with a genius capable of excelling in every liberal accomplishment, he made great pro¬ gress both in philosophy and eloquence. It was on account of his high attainments in the latter, that instead of Tyrtamus, his original name, he was called, as some say by his master, but more probably by his own fol¬ lowers, Theophrastus. 1 1 When he undertook the charge of the Peripatetic school he conducted it with such high reputation, that he had about two thousand scholars among whom were, Nicomachus, the son of Aristotle, whom his father entrusted by will to his charge ; Erasistratus, a celebrated physician ; and Demetrius Phalereus, who resided with him in the same house. His erudition and eloquence, united with engaging manners, re¬ commended him to the notice of Cassander and Ptolemy, who invited him to visit Egypt. So great a favourite was he among the Athenians, that when one of his enemies accused him of teaching impious doctrines, the accuser himself escaped with difficulty the punishment which he endea¬ voured to bring upon Theophrastus. Under the archonship of Xenippus, in the fourth year of the hundred and eighteenth Olympiad,** Sophocles, the son of Amphiclides, obtained a decree (upon what grounds we are not informed) making it a capital offence for any philosopher to open a public school without an express license from the senate. Upon this all the philosophers left the city. But the next year, the person who had proposed this law was himself fined five talents, and the philosophers returned with great public applause to their respective schools. Theophrastus, who had suffered, with his brethren, the persecution inflicted by this oppressive decree, shared the honour of the restoration, and continued his debates and instructions in the Lyceum.'|''|' Ecc. N. T. t. ii. p. 1973. Frederic, de Relig. Arist. Rheg. 1705. Lipsii Manud. 1. i. Diss. iv. Malbranche de Inquir. Verit. 1. ii. c. 7. Parker de Deo. Disp. i. et iv. Obs. Hal. t. viii. Obs. 10. Gaudent. Diss. de Arist. Vet. Contemptu. Par. 1640. Blount, Gens. Eel. Auct. p. 32. Magiri Eponymoleg. Grit. p. 82. Tribbochov. de Disp. Schol. p. 218. Paschal, de opt. Gen. expl. Arist. Monlor. de Util. Anal. Arist. Franc. 1591. Ludov. Vives de Cans. Cor. Art. 1. i. Gassendi Exercit. Parat. adv. Arist. Walch, Hist. Log. 1. ii. Parerg. Ac. 300. 315. Scip. Aquilianus de Plac, Phil, ante Arist. Medol. 1615. Cudwortb, Int. Syst. c. v. sect. 2. Burnet, Arch. 1. i. c. 11. Berigard, Circ. Pisan, p. i. 1. iii. iv. Balt. Jugement des S. Peres, c. 17. Euseb. Pr. Ev. 1. xv. c. 9. Launois de Var. Fort. Arist. c. 1. Oregii Arist.de Inimort. Sententia, Rom. 1633. Pererius de Cominun. Rer. Princip. 1. vi. c. 19. Soner. Metaph. 1. v. c. 6. Thomas de Exust. Mund. Stoic. Diss. p. 14. Koenigman. et Maius de Mor. Arist. Kil. 1706. Du Hamel de Conf. Vet. et Nov. Phil. 1. ii. c. 1. Hollman, Phil. Nat. Prol. sect. 7. Dreierus de Philosophia prima. * B. C. 323. t Suidas. Laert. 1 v. sect. 36, &c. J Strabo, 1. xiii. p. 618. § B. G. 371. II Cic. Orat. c. 19. 24. Plin. Prmf. 1. i. Laert. I. v. sect. 32. ^ Ib. sect. 39. ** B. C. 305. j f Laert. Athen. 1. .xiii. p. 610. 168 OF THE SUCCESSORS Book II. Theophrastus is highly celebrated for his industry, learning, and elo¬ quence, and for his generosity and public spirit.* * * § He is said to have twice freed his country from the oppression of tyrants. He contributed liberally towards defraying the expense attending the public meetings of philosophers, which were held, not for the sake of show, but for learned and ingenious conversation. In the public schools he commonly appeared, as Aristotle had done, in an elegant dress, and was very attentive to the graces of elocution. He lived to the advanced age of eighty-five. Towards the close of his life he grew exceedingly infirm, and was carried to the school on a couch. He expressed great regret on account of the short¬ ness of life, and complained that nature had given long life to stags and cows, to whom it is of so little value, and had denied it to man, who, in a longer duration, might have been able to attain the summit of science, but now, as soon as he arrives within sight of it, is taken away."!” His last ad¬ vice to his disciples was, that since it is the lot of man to die as soon as he begins to live, they would take more pains to enjoy life as it passes, than to acquire posthumous fame. His funeral was attended by a large body of Athenians. He wrote many valuable works, of which all that remain are, several treatises “ On the Natural History of Plants and Fossils “ Of Winds;” “ Of Fire,” &c., a rhetorical work entitled “ Characters,” and a few Metaphysical Fragments, Although Theophrastus held the first place among the disciples of Ari¬ stotle, he did not so implicitly follow his master as to have no peculiar tenets of his own. In several particulars he deviated from the doctrine of Ari¬ stotle, and he made some material additions to the system of the Peripatetic school. The following is a specimen of the tenets of this philosopher, where he appears to have followed his owm judgment, or at least to have used language different from that of his master. Theophrastus taught, that the Predicaments, or Categories, are as nume¬ rous as the motions and changes to which beings are liable ; and that among motions or changes are to be reckoned desires, appetites, judgments, and thoughts. In this opinion he deviated widely from Aristotle ; for, if these actions of the mind are to be referred to motion, the first mover, in con¬ templating himself, is not immovable. He maintained that all things are not produced from contraries ; but some from contraries, some from similar causes, and some from simple energy; that motion is not to be distinguished from action; and that there is one divine principle of all things, by which all things subsist. § By this divine principle Theophrastus probably meant the First Mover, without whom other things could not be moved, and there¬ fore could not subsist. To these theoretical tenets might be added several moral apophthegms, || which are ascribed to Theophrastus ; but they are too trite and general to merit particular notice, except perhaps the following : “ Respect yourself, and you will never have reason to be ashamed before others. Love is the passion of an indolent mind. Blushing is the complexion of virtue.” Theophrastus was succeeded by Strato^ of Lampsacus. He under¬ took the charge of the Peripatetic school in the third year of the hundred * Laert. A then. 1. i. p. 21. 1. v. p. 186. Pint. adv. Colot. •f Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. iii. c. 28. Seneca (de Brev. Vit. c. 1.) ascribes this reflection to ■ Aristotle; but it is inconsistent with his opinion that man lives longer than any othere animal, except the elephant. De Gen. Anim. I. v. c. 10. ;J: Laert. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. ii. p. 2-tl. His works were edited by Heinsius, Lugd. Bat. . 1631. t'ol. His C/iaracte;-s by Needham, Cantab. 1712. ^ § Conf. F. Patricii Discuss. Perip. t. i. 1. xii. p. 15 1, &c. || Laert. Stobmus, bic. ^ ^ Laert. I, v. sect. 58. Siiidas. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. ii. c. 38. > Chap. 9. S. 2. OF ARISTOTLE. 169 and twenty-third Uiyrapiad,* * * § and presided eighteen years with a high de¬ gree of reputation for learning and eloquence. Ptolemy Philadelphus made him his preceptor, and repaid his services with a royal present of eighty talents. In his doctrine f concerning matter Strato departed essentially from the system both of Plato and Aristotle. His opinions, as far as they can be collected from the brief hints which remain, were, that there is inherent in nature a principle of motion, or force, without intelligence, which is the only cause of the production and dissolution of bodies ; that the world has neither been formed by the agency of a deity, distinct from matter, nor by an intelligent animating principle, but has arisen from a force innate to matter, originally excited by accident, and since continuing to act, accord¬ ing to the peculiar qualities of natural bodies. J It does not appear that Strato expressly either denied or asserted the existence of a divine nature; but in excluding all idea of deity from the formation of the world, it can¬ not be doubted that he indirectly excluded from his system the doctrine of the existence of a Supreme Being.§ Strato also taught that the seat of the soul is in the middle of the brain, || and that it only acts by means of the senses.^ After the death of Strato, which happened about the end of the hundred and twenty-seventh Olympiad, the Peripatetic school was continued, in succession, by Lycon** * * §§ of Troas, who enjoyed the friendship of Attains and Eumenes, and tilled the chair till the hundred and thirty-eighth Olym¬ piad; by ARisTo,j'-|- of the island of Coos, whom Cicero characterises as more distinguished for the elegance of his language than the depth of his philosophy; by CRiTOLAUS,j;j; a Lydian, who with Carneades and Dioge¬ nes was deputed by the Athenians on an embassy to Rome, and who is said §§ to have held the doctrine of the eternity of the world; and by Diodorus, in wdiom the uninterrupted succession of the Peripatetic school terminated. Among the followers of Aristotle who, though not ranked with his suc¬ cessors in the chair, have been mentioned with distinction, are Dicearchus, Eumenes, and Demetrius Phalereus. Dicearchus, a Messenian, acquired a distinguished name by his phi¬ losophical disputations and historical writings. Cicero HH speaks of him as a learned and eloquent writer. His tenets were ; that there is no such thing as mind or soul, either in man or beast ; that the principle by which animals perceive and act is equally diffused through the body, is inseparable from it, and expires with it ; that the human race always existed ; that it is impossible to foretel future events; and that the knowledge of them would be an infelicity.^^ He was an eminent geographer, and took great pains * B. C. 286. f Cic. ib. et de Fin. 1. v. c. 5. Plut. adv. Colot. t. iii. p. 418. Sinipl. in Phys. 1. iv. c. 53. 1. vi. c. 23. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. Cic. de Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 13. § Cudworth’s Intel). Syst. c. 3. sect. 4. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 311. II Plut. Plac. Phil. 1. iv. c. 5. II Sext. Enip. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 350. Pyrrh. 1. iii. c. 4. ** Laert. 1. v. sect. 66. et Athen. 1. xii. p. 546. ft Laert. 1. vii. sect. 164. Strabo, 1. x. p. 658. Cit. de Fin. 1. v. c. 5. Athen. 1. x. p. 419. 1. XV. p. 674. ++ Plut. de Exit t. ii. p. 527. Cic. 1. c. Stobaeus, Eel, Phys. I. i. c. 1. §§ Philo. Mund. Incor. Op. p. 943. |||| Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 10. Suidas. ^Il Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 20. 31. 34. De Offl. ii. c. 5. Ep. ad Attic. 1. xiii. ep. 31. 39. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. Hyp. 1. ii. c. 3. adv. Math. I. vii. sect. 349. Plut. contr. Colot. Euseb. Piaep.l. xv. c. 9. Cic. de Div. 1. i. c. 3. 1. ii. c. 48. 51. OF THE SUCCESSORS OF ARISTOTLE. Book II, t 170 to measure the height of mountains, and to construct accurate maps of 1 countries.* i Eudemus of Rhodes was a pupil of Aristotle. The ethics of Aristotle | are ascribed to him, and some suppose them to have been written by him.-|- ^ Demetrius PhAlereus;;|; was an illustrious ornament of the Peripatetic 2j school. In the fourth year of the hundred and fifteenth Olympiad § he J was appointed by Cassander, king of Macedon, to the government of t Athens, He conducted the government with so much wisdom and raoder- I ation, and rendered so many essential services to the citizens, that he ac- I quired an unusual share of popularity. After he had enjoyed the supreme i power in Athens ten years, the spirit of popular jealousy, for which the J Athenians were so remarkable, was raised against him : he was condemned, 1 during his absence from the city, to forfeit his life ; his house and effects j were given up to the populace, and all his statues were thrown down. To j escape the resentment which raged against him at Athens, he ffed to | Ptolemy Soter, who afforded him protection, and admitted him to his '3 confidence. 1 1 Being consulted by the king concerning the choice of a J| successor, he advised Ptolemy to choose the son which he had by his wife a Eurydice, in preference to his son Beronices, afterwards called Phila- a delphus. The king rejected his advice, and during his life associated 'I Philadelphus with him in the government. The young prince retained a ■ settled enmity against Demetrius for the counsel he had given his father, ■ and when he assumed the throne banished him to a distant province. ■ Here Demetrius, after a short interval, unable to support the repeated fl misfortunes he had met with, put an end to his life by the bite of an asp. 9 This fact is supported by the concurrent testimony of the ancients. M Hence it has, not without reason, been questioned whether credit be due ■ to the reports of Aristobulus, Philo, Josephus, and others, that Demetrius jB Phalereus was librarian to Ptolemy Philadelphus, and that it was by hisH advice that this prince gave orders for a version of the Jewish scriptures a from the Plebrew into the Greek language. The truth is, that the whole B story of a royal mandate for this undertaking is destitute of satisfactory* proof, and probably first arose from Jewish vanity, and was afterwards J hastily adopted by the Christian fathers. It is most probable that the* Septuagint version was the private labour of the Jews who were at thisjoj time resident in Egypt.^ ^ Concerning Demetrius Phalereus we have only to add,** that though he ^|, wrote many works on philosophy, history, and rhetoric, time has destroyed them all ; for the elegant piece, j-j- De Interpretatione, On Interpretation,” j which some ascribe to him, is probably a work of later date.J j: A / > * Plin. 1. ii. c. 65. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 295. f Ib. p. 156. ' ! X Laert. I. v. sect. 70, &c. Cic. tie Leg. 1. iii. Strabo, 1. x. Plin. 1. xxxiv. c. 6. ■'V § B. C. 317. II Laert. TElian, 1. iii. c. 17. Cic. Orat. pro Rabirio. ff} Hotly de Sept. Interp. c. 9. Vossius de Hist. Gr. 1. i. c. 12. Prideaux, Conn. p. ii. ^ i 1. i. p. 19. ** Laert. ib. sect. 80. ff Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. iv. p. 423. . ■ ; Vidend. Jons, de Script. Hist. Phil. 1. i. c. 2. Schloser. Spicileg. de Stratone.* Cudw. c. iii. sect. 4 — 6, et Not. Mosh. Leibnitz, Theod, p. 428, Budd. de Spinoz. ’i p. 316. D’Argens Phil, des Bons Sens Rest. iii. Thom. Hist. Ath. c. vi. Le Clerc, d. Bibl. Ch. t. ii. art. 1. sect. 7. Parker de Deo. Diss. vi. Schloser de Hylozoismo Stra- f. tonis, Wittemb. 1720. Reiman, Hist. Ath. sect. ii. c. 27. Voss. Hist. Gr. 1. i. c. 10, 11. , Hody de Sept, Int. c. 9. Bayle. Prideau.x, Conn. p. ii. 1. i. Carpzov. Inst. Orat. I. ii. c, 15. ' \ i; Chap. 10. OF THE CYNIC SECT. 171 CHAPTER X. OF THE CYNIC SECT. Before we dismiss the Ionic or Socratic school, two sects yet remain to be considered — the Cynic and the Stoic. Whilst other philosophers, who professed themselves disciples of So¬ crates, taught systems of speculative opinions, which had little connexion with the doctrine of their master, Antisthenes, judging it more consonant to the spirit of the Socratic school to adhere in practice to the precepts of morality which Socrates had taught, than to prosecute the subtle disquisi¬ tions in which many of his followers were engaged, became the founder of a school, the sole object of which was to support a rigid moral discipline. Antisthenes,* an Athenian, was born about the ninetieth Olympiad.j- In his youth he was engaged in military exploits, and acquired fame by the valour which he displayed in the battle of Tanagra. His first studies were under the direction of the sophist Gorgias, who instructed him in the art of rhetoric. Soon growing dissatisfied with the futile labours of this school, he sought for more substantial wisdom from Socrates. Captivated by the doctrine and the manner of his new master, he prevailed upon many young men, who had been his fellow-students under Gorgias, to accompany him. So great was his ardour for moral wisdom, that though he lived at the Pirteus, which was at the distance of forty stadia\ from the city, he came daily to Athens to attend upon Socrates. This wise man, as we have already seen, at the same time that he made morality the only subject of his instructions, powerfully recommended virtuous manners to his disciples by his own example. Despising the pursuits of avarice, vanity, and am¬ bition, he sought the reward of virtue in virtue itself, and declined no labour or suffering which virtue required. This noble consistency of mind was the part of the character of Socrates, which Antisthenes chiefly ad¬ mired; and he resolved to make it the object of his diligent imitation. Whilst he was a disciple of Socrates, he discovered his propensity towards severity of manners by the meanness of his dress.§ He frequently ap¬ peared in a thread-bare and ragged cloak. Socrates, who had great pene¬ tration in discovering the characters of men, remarking that Antisthenes took pains to expose rather than to conceal the tattered state of his dress, said to him, “ Why so ostentatious ? Through your rags I see your vanity.” After the death of Socrates, whilst all good men were lamenting his fate, and were indignant against his persecutors, Antisthenes, by a seasonable jest, hastened the deserved punishment of Melitus and Anytas. Meeting with certain young men from Pontus, who came to Athens with a design of attending upon Socrates, whose fame had reached their country, he publicly introduced them to Anytas, assuring them that he far exceeded Socrates in wisdom. This sarcastic encomium inflamed the resentment of the Athenians who happened to be present against the author of the dis¬ grace which had been brought upon their city by their putting to deatli so excellent a man. The consequence was, that Anytas was soon ban¬ ished, and Melitus sentenced to death. * Laert. 1. vi. sect. 1, &c. Siiidas. Pint, de Exil. t. ii. p. 530. X About five miles. § iElian, 1. ix. c. 36. t C. C. 420. 172 OF THE CYNIC SECT. Book 11. Whilst Plato and other disciples of Socrates were after his death form¬ ing schools in Athens, Antisthenes chose for his school a public place of exercise without the walls of the city, called the Cynosargum, or the Tem¬ ple of the White Dog ; * whence some writers derive the name of the sect of which he was the founder. Others suppose that his followers were called Cynics from the snarling humour of their master. Here he incul¬ cated, both by precept and example, a rigorous discipline. In order to accommodate his own manners to his doctrine, he wore no other garment than a coarse cloak, suffered his beard to grow, and carried a wallet and staff like a wandering beggar. Ilenouncing all the splendid luxuries of life, he contented himself with the most simple diet, and refrained from every kind of effeminate indulgence. In his discourses he censured the manners of the age with a degree of harshness which procured him the surname of the Dog. He expressed the utmost contempt for pleasure, accounting it the greatest evil, and saying that he would rather be mad than addicted to a voluptuous manner of living. Towards the close of his life the gloomy cast of his mind and the moroseness of his temper increased to such a degree, as to render him troublesome to his friends, and an object of ridicule to his enemies. In his last illness he was fretful and im¬ patient ; tired of life, yet loth to die. When Diogenes, at that time, asked him, whether he needed a friend, Antisthenes replied, “ Where is the friend that can free me from my pain ? ” Diogenes presented him with a dagger, saying, “Let this free you but Antisthenes answered, I wish to be freed from pain, not from life.” Neither his doctrine nor his man- ■■ ners were sufficiently inviting to procure him many followers. He paid || little respect to the gods and the religion of his country ; but as might be expected from a disciple of Socrates, he thought justly concerning the Supreme Being. In his book which treats on Physics, says Cicero,j' he y observes that the gods of the people are many, but the God of H NATURE is One. Antisthenes wrote many books, of which none are ex- u tant, except two J declamations under the names of Ajax and Ulysses. § The sect of the Cynics, founded by Antisthenes, is not so much to be i regarded as a school of philosophy, as an institution of manners. It was ■ formed rather for the purpose of providing a remedy for the moral dis- -i orders of luxury, ambition, and avarice, than with a view to establish any new theory of speculative opinions. The disciples of Antisthenes, and q other leaders of this sect, considered their masters, not as authors of any new doctrine, but as patrons of strict and inflexible virtue ; and were re- * garded by them, rather as examples for their imitation in the conduct of^ life, than as preceptors to guide them in the search of truth. The sole end*Di of the Cynic philosophy was, to subdue the passions and produce simplicity [L of manners. The characteristic peculiarities of the sect were, an indignant contempt of effeminate vices, and a rigorous adherence to the rules of moral discipline. A Cynic, according to the original spirit of the sect, was one who appeared in a coarse garb, and carried a wallet and staff, as external symbols of severity, and who regarded every thing with indiffer¬ ence, except that kind of virtue which consists in a haughty contempt of external good, and a hardy endurance of external ill.|| Simplicity and moderation were indeed in this sect carried to the extreme of austerity, and at last produced the Stoic system of apathy ; but the real design of the * Suidas, t. ii. Kwdaapyes. Hesycli. p. 572. Pausan. in Atticis. Potter's Antiq. i 1. i. c. 9. f De Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 13. + Laert. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 789. : § Conf. TElian, 1. x. c. 116. Sext. Enip. Pyrrli. 1. iii. c. 23. Aul. Cell. 1. ix. c. 5. II Laert. 1. vi. sect. 103, &c. Chap. 10. OF THE CYNIC SECT. 173 founders both of the Cynic and the Stoic sect seems to have been to esta¬ blish virtuous manners. The rigorous discipline which was practised by the first Cynics, and which afterwards degenerated into the most absurd severity, was at first adopted for the laudable purpose of exhibiting an example of moderation and virtuous self-command. If, in executing this praiseworthy design, a portion of vanity blended itself with the love of virtue, who will not be inclined to pardon the weakness out of respect to the merit of the character ? That they might be perfectly at liberty to apply themselves to the cul¬ tivation of virtuous habits and manners, without interruption from the noisy contests of speculative philosophy, the Cynics renounced every kind of scientific pursuit ; contending, that to those who are endued by nature with a mind disposed to virtue, the pursuits of learning are an unnecessary and troublesome interruption of the main business of life. Hence they entirely discarded all dialectic, physical, and mathematical speculations, and confined themselves to the study, or rather to the practice of virtue. This was certainly injudicious ; but it is some apology for their error that Socrates had taken pains to inspire his followers with a contempt of theo¬ retical science, when considered in comparison with practical wisdom. It may also be added, that the learning which flourished at that time in Greece chiefly consisted in futile speculations, and an illegitimate kind of eloquence, which contributed little towards the happiness of society, or the real improvement of the human mind.j- Farther to account for, and excuse, the singularities of the Cynic sect, it should be recollected that the manners of the Greeks were, at this time, strongly tending towards the extreme of efieminacy. So much attention was now paid to external appearance, especially among the Athenians, that not only the citizens at large were addicted to luxury and vanity, but even the philosophers themselves caught the infection, as sufficiently ap¬ pears from what has been related concerning the dress and manners of Aristippus, Arcesilaus, Aristotle, Stilpo, and others. Socrates had endea¬ voured, by modest censure mingled with easy pleasantry, as well as by a laudable example of moderation, to correct the public taste and manners. Antisthenes, without possessing either judgment or moderation equal to his master, adopted the same plan, but carried it to an extreme, which passed beyond the limits of decorum. Judging all regard to external appearance to be unfavourable to virtue, he neglected every attention of this kind, and went back towards the simplicity of nature nearer than was consistent with civilized life. His followers, observing the high degree of reputation for wisdom and fortitude which the strictness of his manners had procured him, determined to follow his steps, and carried his pecu¬ liarities to a ridiculous and absurd extreme. At first, a Cynic philosopher, being nothing more than a severe public monitor, Virtutis veraj custos, rigidusque satelles,J (a) commanded attention and respect ; but when the freedom of censure de¬ generated into scurrility, whilst the vulgar admired the boldness of these philosophers, the more judicious wondered at their impudence ; and the whole order gradually fell into disesteem and contempt. * Juliarii Oral. vi. vii. Maxim. Tyr. Dissert. 21. .Arrian. Diss, Epict. 1. iii. Diss. 22. Lucian in Vit. Auct. et Cynico, et Deinonacte. t Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. otil. Arr. Epict. 1. iii. p. 301. X Hor. Ep. 1. 1. 17. (rt) Tlie stern defender of pure virtue’s cause. 174 OF THE CYNIC SECT. Book II; These circumstances will account for the disgraceful tales which have j been so industriously propagated concerning this sect. The singularity/ of the early Cynics, and many gross violations of decorum, which at a later] period rendered the sect not only ridiculous but infamous, furnished occa¬ sion to those, who did not carefully distinguish between the first design of I this institution and its subsequent abuses, to declaim against the Cynical philosophy, as nothing better than a compound of vulgarity, spleen, and malignity. An impartial inquirer will therefore in this part of the history! of philosophy be particularly cautious in giving credit to Athenaeus, Lucian, ’ and other writers, who, to display their own wit, or to bring philosophy' into discredit, have on every occasion eagerly caught hold of stories dis¬ reputable to philosophers, without taking the pains, or perhaps witliout^] wishing to distinguish truth from falsehood. The sum of the moral doctrine of Antisthenes and the Cynic sect is this:* — Virtue alone is a sufficient foundation for a happy life. Virtue- consists, not in a vain ostentation of learning, or an idle display of words, but in a steady course of right conduct. Wisdom and virtue are the! same. A wise man will always be contented with his condition, and willj live rather according to the precepts of virtue, than according to the laws ^ or customs of his country. Wisdom is a secure and impregnable fortress; ; virtue, armour which cannot be taken away. Whatever is honourable is ' good ; whatever is disgraceful is evil. Virtue is the only bond of friend- j ship. It is better to associate with a few good men against a vicious mul-, titude, than to join the vicious, however numerous, against the good. The j love of pleasure is a temporary madness. The following maxims and apophthegms are also ascribed to Antis¬ thenes — as rust consumes iron, so doth envy consume the heart of man. That state is hastening to ruin, in which no difference is made between] good and bad men. The harmony of brethren is a stronger defence than a wall of brass. A wise man converses with the wicked, as a physician j with the sick, not to catch the disease, but to cure it. A philosopher] gains at least one thing from his manner of life, a power of conversing] with himself. The most necessary part of learning is, to unlearn our,] errors. The man who is afraid of another, whatever he may think ofj himself, is a slave. Antisthenes, being told that a bad man had been] praising him, said, “ What foolish thing have I been doing?” Diogenes, j: another celebrated Cynic, was born in the third year of the ninety-first Olympiad at Sinope, a city of Pontus. His father, who was a banker, was convicted of debasing the public coin, and was obliged to leave his country. This circumstance gave the son an opportunity of visiting Athens, where he soon found in Antisthenes a preceptor of a dis¬ position similar to his own. When Diogenes offered himself as a pupil of Antisthenes, that philosopher, having been mortified by neglect, was in a peevish humour, and refused to receive him. Diogenes still persisting to importune him for admission, Antisthenes lifted up his staff to drive him away ; upon which Diogenes said, “ Beat me as you please ; I will be your, scholar.”§ Antisthenes, overcome by his perseverance, received him, and afterwards made him his intimate companion and friend. Diogenes per¬ fectly adopted the principles and character of his master. Renouncing every other object of ambition, he determined to distinguish himself by his contempt of riches and honours, and by his indignation against luxury. He wore a coarse cloak ; carried a wallet and a staff ; made the porticos and * Laert. 1. v. sect. 11, 12. J Laert. 1. vi. sect. 20, &c. Suitlas. t Laert. Stobaeus. § jElian. J. x. c. 11 G. Chap. 10. OF THE CYNIC SECT. 175 other public places his habitation, and depended upon casual contributions for his daily bread. A friend, whom he had desired to procure him a cell, not executing his order as soon as he expected, he took up his abode in a tub,* or large open vessel, in the Metroum. It is probable, however, that this was only a temporary expression of indignation and contempt, and that he did not make a tub the settled place of his residence. This famous tub is indeed celebrated by Juvenal rj- - Dolia nudi Non ardent Cynici. Si fregeris altera fiet Cras doinus, aut eadem plumbo commissa manebit. (a) It is also ridiculed by Lucian,:}; and mentioned by Seneca :§ but no notice is taken of so singular a circumstance by other ancient writers who have mentioned this philosopher; not even by Epictetus, who discourses at large concerning Diogenes, and relates many particulars respecting his manner of life. It may therefore be questioned, whether this whole story is not to be ranked among the numerous tales which have been invented to expose the sect of the Cynics to ridicule. It cannot, however, be doubted that Diogenes practised the most hardy I self-control, and the most rigid abstinence : || exposing himself to the ut¬ most extremes of heat and cold, and living upon the simplest diet, casually supplied by the hand of charity. That he might accomplish the end for which this sect was instituted, the correction of luxurious and profligate manners, he reprehended the Athenians, especially those of the higher ranks, with great freedom and sternness. His reproofs, though exceed¬ ingly pungent, discovered so much ingenuity, that they commanded the 1 admiration even of those against Avhom they were immediately directed. He inculcated a hardy patience of labour and pain, frugality, temperance, ; and an entire contempt of pleasure. His rigid discipline, whilst it gained him respect and admiration from some, brought upon him contempt and indignity from others. He appeared, however, alike indifferent to both, ^ and at all times preserved an entire command of himself. It is said that Diogenes in his old age (it does not appear from what motive) sailed to the island of iEgina.^ Upon his passage he was taken by a company of pirates, who carried him into Crete, and there exposed I him to sale in the public market. When the auctioneer asked him what ; he could do, he said, “ I can govern men, therefore sell me to one who I wants a master.” Xeniades, a wealthy Corinthian, happening at that i instant to pass by, was struck with the singularity of his reply, and pur- I chased him. When he was delivered to his master, he said, “ I shall be I more useful to you as your physician than as your slave.” On their arrival i at Corinth, Xeniades remarking the singular character and genius of his I new slave, gave him his liberty, and at length committed to him the edu- 1 cation of his children, and the direction of his domestic concerns. Dio- . genes executed his trust with so much judgment and fidelity, that Xeniades used to say that the gods had sent a good genius to his house. He trained up his pupils in the discipline of the Cynic sect, and took more pains to ' give them habits of self-command than to instruct them in the elements of * Laert. Athen. 1. xiii. c. 26. f Sat. xiv. v. 308. (a) Safe in bis tub, the naked Cynic lives, Fearless of fire ; break up his house ; next day Brings him a new one, or repairs the old. + De Scrib. Hist. § Ep. 90. j] Epict. ap. Arr. 1. iii. Diss. 24. ^ Laert, 176 OF THE CYNIC SECT. Book II. science. He did not however neglect to teach them lessons of moral wisdom: * and for this purpose he chiefly made use of sententious maxims, written in verse by himself and others, which he required them to commit to memory. He allowed them the moderate use of athletic exercises and hunting. The young men were so well pleased with their preceptor, that they afterwards treated him with great respect, and recommended him to the attention of their parents. During this period of his life Diogenes frequently attended the assem¬ blies of the pebple at the Craneum, a place of exercise in the vicinity of Corinth, and at the Isthmian games. Here he appeared in the character of a public censor, and, after his usual manner, severely lashed the follies of the times, and inculcated rigid lessons of sobriety and virtue. It was at one of these assemblies that the celebrated conference between Alexan¬ der the Great and this philosopher is said to have happened. The story, as it has been related on authority of Plutarch,-!- • Alexander at this general assembly received the congratulations of all ranks, on being ap¬ pointed, after the death of his father, to command the general army of the Grecians on their intended expedition against the Persians. The young pr ince, who was not unacquainted with the character of Diogenes, expressed his surprise that whilst other philosophers were ready on this occasion to pay him respect, Diogenes, who resided at Corinth, w'as absent. Curious to see a philosopher, who had given so signal a proof of the haughty inde¬ pendence of his spirit, Alexander visited the Craneum, where he found the Cynic sitting in his tub in the sun. In the midst of a numerous crowd of attendants, the king came up to him, and said, “ I am Alexander the Great.” The philosopher, without at all relaxing the tone of his surly humour, immediately replied, “ And I am Diogenes the Cynic.” Alexander then requested that he would inform him if there w'ere any service that he could render him. “ Yes,” said he, “ not to stand between me and the sun Struck with astonishment at the magnanimity of this reply, Alexander said to his friends, who were ridiculing the whimsical singularity of the Cynic, “ If I were not Alexander, I would be Diogenes.” The story is too good to be omitted ; but there are several circumstances which in some degree diminish its credibility. It supposes Diogenes to live in his tub in the Craneum of Corinth ; whereas it appears, from the preceding nar¬ rative, that at Corinth he lived in the house of Xeniades, and that, if he ever dwelt in a tub, he left it behind him at Athens. Alexander was at this time scarcely twenty years old, and could not call himself Alexander the Great, for he did not receive this title till his Persian and Indian expe dition, after which he never returned into Greece ; yet the whole transac tion supposes him elated with the pride of conquest. Thus much however may be conceived to be probable ; that Diogenes, who at the beginning of the hundred and eleventh Olympiad, when Alexander held the general assembly of the Greeks, was upwards of seventy years old, might frequently appear in the public walks of Corinth, and that Alexander might have the curiosity to see a man celebrated for his singularity, and might for this pufjDose visit him in his usual public station. It is not unlikely too, thatj: the surly Cynic, to show his contempt for kings, might treat him with some kind of rudeness, similar to that which is related above. Some writers assert, that after the death of Antisthenes, Diogenes passed^ V * Aul. Gellius, 1. ii. c. 19. t Vit. Alex. t. iv. p. 455, et de Fort. Alex. p. 352. Dion. Oral. 8. p. 131. Senec. ' de Belief. 1. v. c. 4. Arr. Exped. Al. I. vii. c. 1. Diss. Rpict. 1. iii. c. 22. Chap. 10. OF THE CYNIC SECT. 177 his summers in Corintli, and his winters in Athens. But there seems to be no better foundation for this story than for the whole detail of small anecdotes and jests which have been ascribed to him. As to these they are entirely contrary to the general scope of his philosophy, and to that authority and respect which he enjoyed with the wise men of his age ; and are undoubtedly to be ascribed to that strong propensity to the fabulous, which has so often disgraced the memoirs of celebrated men with idle and silly tales. If we can pay any credit to the representation of the ancients,* * * § Diogenes was a philosopher of a penetrating genius, not unacquainted with learning, and deeply read in the knowledge of mankind. He moreover , possessed a firm and lofty mind, superior to the injuries of fortune, hardy ' in suffering, and incapable of fear. Contented with a little, and possessing within himself treasures sufficient for his own happiness, he despised the luxuries of the age. From an earnest desire to correct and improve the public manners, he censured reigning follies and vices with a steady confi- ! dence which sometimes degenerated into severity. He spared neither the rich nor the powerful, and even ventured to ridicule the religious super¬ stitions of the age. This freedom gave great offence to multitudes, who could not endure such harsh and reproachful lectures from the mouth of a mendicant philosopher. The consequence was, that he suffered much obloquy, and was made the subject of ludicrous and disgraceful calumny. It is wholly incredible, that a man, who is universally celebrated for his 1 sobriety and contempt of pleasure, and who, for his vehement indignation 1 against vice, and his bold attempts to reform the age in which he lived, has I been represented by some of the most eminent philosophers j- as one 1 endued with divine wisdom, should have been capable of committing the grossest indecencies. | The tale of his having obtained those favours ! from Lais, the celebrated courtezan, without reward, which Aristippus i purchased at a great price, is wholly inconsistent with chronology ; for Lais was seven years old when she was brought a captive by Nicias from Sicily to Corinth, in the ninety-first Olympiad, and Diogenes came to live there, as we have seen, about the hundred and tenth Olympiad ; Lais must ’ therefore have been fourscore years old, and Diogenes seventy, when this famous amour commenced, not to mention several insuperable difficulties in the history of Lais,§ nor to urge, that for these stories we are chiefly indebted to Athenaeus, a writer who seems to have ransacked every corner , of antiquity, and of his own invention too, for tales to the discredit of philosophy. ; But though we can, without difficulty, absolve Diogenes from the accu- I sation of gross impudence, we cannot so easily acquit him of the charge of i philosophical pride, j] There can be no doubt that he valued himself too ; highly upon a singular ruggedness of manners, which, though some might I admire, few would be inclined to imitate. It was owing to this haughty 1 temper that he treated other philosophers, and even magistrates and princes, with contempt, and that he reprehended vice, wherever he found it, with bitterness, and even scurrility. That neglect of civility and decorum which this humour produced is eertainly not to be justified. Wisdom did not require Diogenes to take the cloak and wallet of a mendicant. Various accounts are given concerning the manner and time of his death. It seems most probable that he died at Corinth, of mere decay, in the * Arrian. Epic. 1. iii. Diss. 21. Laert. I t Epict. 1. c. Max. Tyr. 1. c. Le Vayer de Virt. Gent. t. v. p. 134. i Laert. Pint, de llep. Stoic, t. iii. p. 23. Athen. 1. iv. p. 158. 1. xiii. p. 588. § Hayle, Lais. || jElian, 1. iii. c. 29. N 178 OF THE CYNIC SECT. Book II: '! ninetieth year of his age, and in the 114th Olympiad.* His friends con¬ tended for the honour of defraying the expenses of his funeral : but the magistrates of Athens settled the dispute, by ordering him an honourable interment at the public expense. A column of Parian marble, terminated by the figure of a dog, was raised over his tomb ; and his friends erected many brazen statues from respect to his memory. Diogenes left behind him no system of philosophy. After the example of his master, he was more attentive to practical, than theoretical wisdom. The chief heads of his moral doctrine may be thus briefiy stated : — Virtue of mind, as well as strength of body, is chiefly to be acquired by exercise and habit. Nothing can be accomplished without labour, and every thing may be accomplished with it. Even the contempt of pleasure may, by the force of habit, become pleasant. All things belong to wise men, to whom the gods are friends. The ranks of society originate from the vices and follies of mankind, and are therefore to be despised. Laws are necessary in a civilized state ; but the happiest condition of human life is that which approaches the nearest to a state of nature, in which all are equal, and virtue is the only ground of distinction. The end of philo¬ sophy is, to subdue the passions, and prepare men for every condition of life. From the numerous maxims and apophthegms which have been ascribed to Diogenes we shall select the following, without staying to inquire what right he has to the credit of them : :j: — Diogenes, treading upon Plato’s robe, said, “ I trample under foot the pride of Plato.” “ Yes,” said Plato, “ with greater pride of your own.” Being asked in what part of Greece he had seen good men, he answered, “ No where ; at Sparta I have seen good boys.” To a friend who advised i him, in his old age, to indulge himself, he said, “ Would you have me quit’ the race, when I have almost reached the goal ? ” Observing a boy drink ] water out of the hollow of his hand, he took his cup out of his wallet, and ' threw it away, saying, that he would carry no superfluities about him.! Plato having defined man to be a two-legged animal without wings, Dio-1 genes plucked off the feathers from a cock, and turned him into the. Academy, crying out, “ See Plato’s man.” In reply to one who asked ' him at what time he ought to dine, he said, “ If you are a rich man, when ' you will; if you are poor, when you can.” “ How happy,” said one, “isj Callisthenes in living with Alexander ! ” No,” said Diogenes, “ he is not] happy ; for he must dine and sup when Alexander pleases.” Plato, dis-i coursing concerning ideas, spoke of the abstract idea of a table and a cup 1 (rpaTreiioTrjra, (cuadoVrjra), Diogenes said, “ I see the table and the cup, butj not the idea of the table and the cup.” Plato replied, “ No wonder, for] you have eyes, but no intellect.” His answer to an invitation from Craterusi to come and live with him was, “ I had rather lick salt at Athens than sit] down to the richest feast with Craterus.” Being asked what countryman] he was, he answered, “ A citizen of the world.” To one that reviled him] he said, “ No one will believe you when y^ou speak ill of me, any more] than they would me, if I were to speak well of you.” Hearing one of his] friends lament that he should not die in his own country, he said, “ Be] not uneasy ; from every place there is a passage to the regions below.’ “ Would you be revenged upon your enemy,” said Diogenes, “ be virtuous,] that he may have nothing to say against you.” Onesickitus of iEgina,§ who afterwards accompanied Alexander in hi^ * Laert. § Laert. 1. vi. sect. 76. f Laert, Arrian. 1. c. p. 149. J Laert. Stob. Plut. Chap. 10. OF THE CYNIC SECT. 179 Asiatic expedition, was an admirer of the doctrine and discipline of the Cynic sect, and a follower of Diogenes. Monimus,* a Syracusan, who was in the service of a Corinthian banker, feigning himself mad, left his master, that he might assume the character of a Cynic. His wisdom and hardy virtue were celebrated by Menander.-j- His doctrine was. To vTro\i](j)dsv Tv^ov eipai 7rdv,J “ All the opinions of men are unsubstantial, and fleeting, as a vapour a sentiment which Sextus Empiricus presses into the service of Scepticism ; but it was probably borrowed from Demo¬ critus, or some other of the Eleatic school ; and only denotes, that material things, which are the objects of opinion, are too variable and mutable to be the ground of certain knowledge ; a doctrine admitted by Plato, Pythagoras, and most other ancient philosophers. Monimus is also cele¬ brated for the successful application of ridicule to the reprehension of vice, according to the maxim of Horace,§ - Ridiculum acri Fortius ac melius magnas plerumque secat res. (a) After Diogenes, the most distinguished professor of the Cynic philoso- I phy was Crates, a Theban,]] who flourished about the hundred and thirteenth Olympiad. He was of honourable descent, and inherited a large estate ; but, when he devoted himself to philosophy, that he might be free from the dominion of those passions which are fostered by wealth, he distributed his whole property among the poor citizens. Leaving his native city, where he had been a disciple of Bryso, an Achaean philosopher who has been reckoned among the Cynics,^ he went to Athens, and there became a zealous disciple of Diogenes, adopting, in the utmost extreme, the singularities of his master.** In his natural temper, however, he was not, like Diogenes, morose and gloomy, but cheerful and facetious. His mirthful humour gained him many friends, and procured him access to the houses of the most wealthy Athenians. He acquired so much con¬ fidence among the citizens at large, that he was freely admitted into their domestic circles, and frequently became an arbiter of disputes and quarrels among relations. His influence in private families is said to have had a great effect in correcting the luxuries and vices which were at that time I prevalent in Athens.f f The wife of Crates, Hipparchia,^;^; must be mentioned in the list of Cynic philosophers. She was rich, of a good family, and had many suitors. She entertained, nevertheless, so violent a passion for this philosopher, that she was deaf to every other proposal, and threatened her parents that, if she were not permitted to marry Crates, she would put an end to her life. Crates, at the request of her parents, represented to Hipparchia every circumstance in his condition and manner of living which might induce her to change her mind. Still she persisted in her resolution, and not only became the wife of Crates, but adopted all the peculiarities of the Cynic profession. Disgraceful tales have been industriously circulated concern- ' ing Crates and his wife; but since they do not appear in any writings of the * Laert. f Grot, in not. ad Excerp. ex Tragic, p. 727. J Antonin, de se ipso, 1. ii. sect. 15. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 87.^ '• I § Sat. i. X. 14. («) Oft will the edge of ridicule succeed To cut the knot, where graver reas’ning fails. II Laert. 1. vi. sect. 85, Suidas. Plut. de Vit. Aer. al. t. ii. p. 437. Fabr. Bib. Gr. V. ii. p. 361. ** Laert. Apul. Apol. p. 202. Florid, p. 355. ft Laert. Plut. de Tranq. An. t. ii. p. 252. Sympos. 2 tom. iii. p. 150. Apul. ib. Jt Laert. 1. vi. c. 96. Apul. 1. c. 180 OF THE CYNIC SECT. Book II. period in which they lived, and are neither mentioned by Epictetus, who wrote an apology for the Cynic philosophy, nor by Lucian or Athenseus, who were so industrious in accumulating calumnies against philosophers, they must unquestionably be set down among the malicious fictions of later writers, who were desirous to bring the Cynic and Stoic sects into discredit. Had either Diogenes or Crates been the beasts which some have represented them, it is wholly incredible that Zeno and the Stoics would have treated their memory with so much respect.* Metrocees,-|' the brother of Hipparchia, was also a disciple of Crates. He had formerly been a follower of Theophrastus and of Xenocrates ; but when he commenced Cynic, he committed their works to the flames, as the useless dreams of idle speculation. In his old age he became so dis¬ satisfied with the world, that he strangled himself. Menippus of Sinope, another Cynic, was the author of many satirical pieces, and is introduced by Lucian into several of his dialogues. J In Menedemus, of Lamp- sacus,§ the spirit of the Cynic sect degenerated into downright madness. Dressed in a blaek cloak, with an Arcadian cap upon his head, on which were drawn the figures of the twelve signs of the zodiac, with tragic buskins on his legs, with a long beard, and with an ashen staff in his hand, he went about like a maniac, saying, that he was a spirit, returned from the infernal regions to admonish the world. || He lived in the reign of Antigonus, king of Macedon. CHAPTER XI. OF THE STOIC SECT. SECTION I.— OF ZENO AND HIS PHILOSOPHY. The Stoic was a branch from the Cynic, and as far as respected morals, differed from it in words more than in reality. Its founder, whilst he avoided the offensive singularities of the Cynics, retained the spirit of their moral doctrine ; at the same time, from a diligent comparison of the tenets of other masters, he framed a new system of speculative philosophy. This sect rose to great distinction among the Grecians, and gave birth to many illustrious philosophers, whose names and doctrines have been tx'ans- mitted with great respect to the present times. This part of the history of philosophy will therefore require a diligent and minute discussion. Zeno,^ the father of the Stoic sect, was a native of Cittius, a maritime * Laert. Sext. Emp. Pyrr. Hyp. 1. i. c. 14. 1. iii. c. 24. Apul. l.c. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. iv. Lactant. 1. iii. c. 15. Stob. Serm. 143. p. 662. f Laert. 1. vi. sect. 94. Stob. Serm. 237. p. 778. J Laert. 1. v. sect. 99. Luc. Char, et Men. § Laert. 1. vi. sect. 102. II Suidas in (l>abs, t. ii. p. 589. Athen. 1. p. 15. 1. iv. p. 162. Vidend. Potter. Arch. Gr. 1. i. c. 9. Jons. 1. i. c. 8. et Diss. Perip. 1. Voss, de Sect, c. 17. sect. 3. 9. August. Civ. Dei. 1. xiv. c. 20. Stollii Diss. de Antisthene Cyn. Hist. Phil. Mor. p. 77. 83. 97. Ferrarius de Re Vestiaria, p. ii. 1. iv. c. 19. Juliani Orat. de Cynicis. Lips. Manud. 1, i. Diss. 13. Horn. Hist. Ph. p. 209. Heuman. Diss. de Doliari hab. Pcecil. tom. 1. 1. iv. Reiman. Hist. Ath. c. 26. Cudworth, c. iv. sect. 22. La Vayer de Virt. Gent. t. v. Op. p. 134. Fontenelle, Dial, des Morts, p. 175. Menzius de Fastu Phil. Lips. 1712. Macrob. Somn. Scip. 1. i. c. 12. Bayle. ^ Laert. 1. vii. Suidas. Chap. 11. S. 1. OF ZENO AND THE STOIC PHILOSOPHY, 181 town of Cyprus. This place having been originally peopled by a colony of Phoenicians, Zeno is sometimes called a Phoenician.* His father was by profession a merchant, but discovering in the youth a strong propensity towards learning he early devoted him to philosophy. In his mercantile capacity he had frequent occasion to visit Athens, where he purchased for his son several of the writings of the most eminent Socratic philosophers. These he read with great avidity ; and when he was about thirty years of age he determined to take a voyage to a city, which was so celebrated both as a mart of trade and of science. Whether this voyage was in part mer¬ cantile, or wholly undertaken for the sake of conversing with those philoso¬ phers, whose writings Zeno had long admired, is uncertain. If it be true, as some writers relate, that he brought with him a valuable cargo of Phce- nician purple, which was lost by shipwreck upon the coast of the Piraeus, this circumstance will account for the facility with which he at first attached himself to a sect, whose leading principle was the contempt of riches. Upon his first arrival in Athens, going accidentally into the shop of a bookseller, he took up a volume of the Commentaries of Xenophon, and after reading a few passages, was so much delighted with the work, and formed so high an idea of the author, that he asked the bookseller where he might meet with such men. Crates, the Cynic philosopher, happening at that instant to be passing by, the bookseller pointed to him, and said, “ Follow that man.” Zeno soon found an opportunity of attending upon the instructions of Crates, and was so well pleased with his doctrine, that he became one of his disciples. -j- But though he highly admired the general principles and spirit of the Cynic school, he could not easily reconcile himself to their peculiar manners. Besides, his inquisitive turn of mind would not allow ! him to adopt that indifference to every scientific inquiry, which was one > of the characteristic distinctions of the sect. He therefore attended upon H other masters, who professed to instruct their disciples in the nature and I causes of things. When Crates, displeased at his following other philoso- . phers, attempted to drag him by force out of the school of Stilpo, Zeno said to him, “ You may seize my body, but Stilpo has laid hold of my mind.” After continuing to attend upon the lectures of Stilpo several years, he I passed over to other schools, particularly those of Xenocrates and Diodorus I Chronus. By the latter he was instructed in dialectics. He was so much i delighted with this branch of study, that he presented to his master a large 1 pecuniary gratuity, in return for his free communication of some of his in- ! genious subtleties. At last, after attending almost every other master, he i offered himself as a disciple of Polemo. This philosopher appears to have been aware that Zeno’s intention, in thus removing from one school to another, was to collect materials, from various quarters, for a new system i of his own ; for, when he came into Polemo’s school, he said to him, “ I I am no stranger, Zeno, to your Phoenician arts ; I perceive that your design ( is to creep slily into my garden, and steal away my fruit.’’J ' Polemo was not mistaken in his opinion. Having made himself master of the tenets of others, Zeno determined to become the founder of a new sect. The place which he made choice of for his school was called the Pcecile, or painted Porch ; a public portico so called, from the pictures of Polygnotus, and other eminent painters, with which it was adorned. This Portico, which was the most famous in Athens, was called 2roa, The * Cic. de Fin. 1. iv. Tusc. Qu. 1. v. c. 12. f Laert. Senec. de Tranq. Anim. c. 14. Pint, de Cap. ex host. util. tom. ii. p. 200. I Laert. sect. 35. Suidas. 182 OF ZENO AND THE Book II. Porch. It was from this circumstance that the followers of Zeno were called Stoics.* Zeno excelled in that kind of subtle reasoning which was at this time popular. At the same time, he taught a strict system of moral doctrine, and exhibited a pleasing picture of moral discipline in his own life. It is not therefore at all surprising that he obtained the applause and affection of numerous followers, and even enjoyed the favour of the great. An- tigonus Gonates, king of Macedon, whilst he was resident at Athens, attended his lectures, and upon his return earnestly invited him to his court. He possessed so large a share of esteem among the Athenians that, on account of his approved integrity, they deposited the keys of their citadel in his hands. They also honoured him with a golden crown, and a statue of brass. Among his countrymen, the inhabitants of Cyprus, and with the Sidonians, from whom his family was derived, he was likewise highly esteemed.-i" In his person, Zeno was tall and slender ; his aspect was severe, and his brow contracted. His constitution was feeble, but he preserved his health by great abstemiousness. The supplies of his table consisted of figs, bread, and honey ; J notwithstanding which, he was frequently honoured with the ' company of great men. It was a singular proof of his moderation, mixed indeed with that high spirit of independence which afterwards distinguished his sect, that when Demochares, son of Laches, offered to procure him some ! gratuity from Antigonus, he was so offended, that from that time he declined all intercourse with him. In public company, to avoid every j appearance of an assuming temper, he commonly took the lowest place. ! Indeed so great was his modesty, that he seldom chose to mingle with a crowd, or wished for the company of more than two or three friends at ^ once. He paid more attention to neatness and decorum in external ap- 1 pearance than the Cynic philosophers. In his dress indeed he was plain, and in all his expenses frugal ; but this is not to be imputed to avarice, but a ■ contempt of external magnificence. He showed as much respect to the ' j poor as to the rich, and conversed freely with persons of the meanest oc- ^ cupations. He had only one servant, or, according to Seneca, none.§ '[ Although Zeno’s sobriety and continence were even proverbial, he was j not without enemies. Among his contemporaries, several philosophers of / great ability and eloquence employed their talents against him. Arcesilaus and Carneades, the founders of the Middle and New Academy, were his > professed opponents. Towards the latter end of his life,|| he found another . powerful adversary in Epicurus, whose temper and doctrines w'ere alike inimical to the severe gravity and philosophical pride of the Stoic sect. Hence mutual invectives passed between the Stoics and other sects, to A which little credit is due. At least, it may be fairly presumed that Zeno, whose personal character was so exemplary, never countenanced gross " immorality in his doctrine. Zeno lived to the extreme age of ninety-eight,^ and at last, in conse- quence of an accident, voluntarily put an end to his life. As he was walk- >. ing out of his school he fell down, and in the fall broke one of his fingers; ‘ upon which, he was so affected with a consciousness of infirmity, that, striking the earth, he said, “ Why am I thus importuned ? I obey thy summons;” and immediately went home, and strangled himself. He died ^ * Plin. Hist. N. 1. xxxv. c. 9, Pausan. 1. i. p. 13. 27. 78. Suidas v. Polygnotus. t Laert. 1. vii. sect. 6, 7. X Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. ii. p. 413. Conf. Laert. sect. 25. ; I § Laert. Sen. Consol, c. 12. || Suidas. Aul. Cell. 1. xvii. c. 21. i ^ Laert. Luc. Longsev. t. ii. p. 821. fl Chap. 1 1. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 183 in the first year of the hundred and twenty-ninth Olympiad.* The Athenians, at the request of Antigonus, erected a monument to his ; memory in the Ceramicum.-j- From the particulars which have been related concerning Zeno, it will not be difficult to perceive what kind of influence his circumstances and character must have had upon his philosophical system. If his doctrines 1 be diligently compared with the history of his life, it will appear, that having ' attended upon many eminent preceptors, and been intimately conversant ! with their opinions, he compiled, out of their various tenets, an heteroge- ; neous system, on the credit of which he assumed to himself the title of the I founder of a new sect. When he resolved, for the sake of establishing a i school, to desert the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, in which he had been perfectly instructed by Xenocrates and Polemo, it became necessary, I either to invent opinions entirely new, or to give an air of novelty to old j systems by the introduction of new terms and definitions. Of these two I undertakings Zeno prudently made choice of the easier. Cicero says, con¬ cerning Zeno, J that he had little reason for deserting his masters, especially i those of the Platonic school, and that he was not so much an inventor of new opinions, as of new terms. The thorny logomachies of Zeno and his followers are thus ridiculed by a comic poet quoted by Athenaeus :§ 'AKot'icrar’ S Sroa/ces efnropoi \^pov i Aoywv viroKpiTrjpes. (a) I That this was the real character of the Porch will fully appear from an ! attentive perusal of the clear and accurate comparison which Cicero has drawn between the doctrines of the Old Academy and those of the Stoics, in his Academic Questions. The dialectic arts which Zeno learned in the i school of Diodorus Chronus he did not fail to apply to the support of his ' own system, and to communicate to his followers. As to the moral doctrine i of the Cynic sect, to which Zeno strictly adhered to the last, there can be no doubt that he transferred it, almost without alloy, into his own school. Et qui nec Cynicos, nec Stoica dogmata legit A Cynicis tunica distantia.|| (b) In morals, the principal diflPerence between the Cynics and the Stoics was, that the former disdained the cultivation of nature, the latter affected I to rise above it. On the subject of physics, Zeno received his doctrine from Pythagoras and Heraclitus, through the channel of the Platonic ■ school,|[ as will fully appear from a careful comparison of their respective I systems. The Stoic philosophy being in this manner of heterogeneous origin, it necessarily partook of the several systems of which it was composed. The j idle quibbles, jejune reasonings, and imposing sophisms, which so justly ' exposed the schools of the dialectic philosophers to ridicule, found their way into the Porch, where much time was wasted, and much ingenuity ! thrown away, upon questions of no importance. Cicero censures the Sto¬ ics** for encouraging in their schools a barren kind of disputation, and * B. C. 264. f Laert. J De Fin. 1. iii. Tusc, Qu. 1. v. § L. xiii. (a) Ye sages of the Porch, loquacious tribe, Traders in trifles, arbiters of words. And censors — hear ! II Juv. Sat. xiii. v. 121. {b) Not fetch’d from Cynic or from Stoic schools ; In habit different, but alike in rules. Owen. ^ Cic. de Nat. Deor. 1. iii. c. 14. ** De Fin. l. iii. c, 1. 1. iv. c. 3. 184 OF ZENO AND THE Book II. employing themselves in determining trifling questions, in which the dis- putants can have no interest, and which, at the close, leave them neither wiser nor better. And that this censure is not, as some modern advocates for Stoicism have maintained, a mere calumny, but grounded upon fact, sufficiently appears from what is said by the ancients, particularly by Sextus Empiricus, concerning the logic of the Stoics. Seneca, who was himself a Stoic, candidly acknowledges this.* It may perhaps be thought surprising that philosophers who affected so much gravity and wisdom should condescend to such trifling occupations. But it must be considered that, at this time, a fondness for subtle disputa¬ tions so generally prevailed in Greece, that excellence in the arts of rea¬ soning and sophistry was a sure path to fame. The Stoics, with whom vanity was unquestionably a ruling passion, were ambitious of this kind of reputation. Hence it was that they engaged with so much vehemence in verbal contests, and that they largely contributed towards the confusion, instead of the improvement of science, by subsituting vague and ill de¬ fined terms in the room of accurate conceptions. The moral part of the Stoical philosophy in like manner partook of the defects of its origin. It may be as justly objected against the Stoics as the Cynics, that they a.ssumed an artificial severity of manners, and a tone of virtue above the condition of man. Their doctrine of moral wisdom was an ostentatious display of words, in which little regard was paid to nature and reason. It jirofessed to raise human nature to a degree of perfection before unknown; but its real effect was merely to amuse the ear, and captivate the fancy, with fictions which can never be realised. Lastly, the physical and theo¬ retical system of the Stoics, like those from which it had been borrowed, ! had, in its principles, a strong bias towards enthusiasm. If, as we have before shown, the doctrine of Plato, which derives the human mind from the soul of the world, has this tendency, much more must this be the case with the Stoical doctrine, which supposes, as we shall afterwards see, that all human souls have immediately proceeded from, and will at last re-' turn into, the divine nature. The extravagancies and absurdities of the Stoical philosophy may also be in some measure ascribed to the vehement contests which subsisted be¬ tween Zeno and the Academics on the one hand, and between him and Epicurus on the other. For, not only did these disputes give rise to many of the dogmas of Stoicism, but led Zeno and his followers, in the warmth j of controversy, to drive their arguments to the utmost extremity, and to express themselves with much greater confidence than they would probably otherwise have done. This is perhaps the true reason why so many ex¬ travagant notions are ascribed to the Stoics, particularly upon the subject of morals. Whilst Epicurus taught his followers to seek happiness in tranquillity, or a freedom from labour and pain, Zeno imagined his wise man not only free from all sense of pleasure, but void of all passions and emotions, and capable of being happy in the midst of torture. That he might avoid the torpid indolence of the Epicureans, he had recourse to a- moral institution, which bore indeed the lofty front of wisdom, but which was elevated far above the condition and powers of human nature. The natural disposition of Zeno, and his manner of life, had, moreover, no inconsiderable influence in fixing the peculiar character of his philoso¬ phy. By nature severe and morose, and constitutionally inclined to reserve and melancholy, he early cherished this habit by submitting to the austere ! > ; ■i!. Liiap. 11. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 1S5 and rigid discipline of the Cynics. Those qualities, which he conceived to be meritorious in himself, and which he found to conciliate the admiration of mankind, he naturally transferred to his imaginary character of a wise or perfect man. His followers, ambitious of acquiring reputation in the same w^ay, put on an appearance of gravity and dignity, which they were more careful to support by external show, than by the real practice of sublime or useful virtues. Hence it happened that the more eminent Stoics themselves saAv reason to complain of the inconsistency of many of their own sect, who were philosophers in w’ords, rather than in actions, and that their adversaries found so much room for satirical ridicule and invective against Stoical pride and hypocrisy.* Nor is it surprising that this should have happened ; for a system of philosophy which attempts to raise men above their nature must commonly produce either wretched fanatics or artful hypocrites. It is no proof of the perfection w'hich some have been willing to ascribe to the Stoic philosophy, -j- that there were among its , professors many persons highly distinguished by genuine wisdom and virtue; for their uncommon merit was rather the effect of a happy temperament, or of fortunate circumstances, in concurrence with those moral principles which are common to all mankind, than to the peculiarities of the Stoical system, which, as we shall presently see, were not adapted to cherish the genuine sentiments either of virtue or piety. In order to form an accurate judgment concerning the doctrine of the Stoics, besides a careful attention to the particulars already enumerated, it will be necessary to guard with the utmost caution against two errors, intO' W'hich several writers, who have bestow'ed unlimited praise upon the Stoical i philosophy, have fallen. Great care should be taken, in the first place, not to judge of the doctrine of the Stoics from words and sentiments, detached from the ' general system, but to consider them as they stand related to the whole train of premises and conclusions. For want of this caution, many moderns, dazzled by the splendid expressions which they have met with in the writings of the Stoics concerning God, the soul, and other subjects, have imagined that they have discovered an invaluable treasure ; whereas, if they had taken the pains to restore these brilliants to their proper i places in the general mass, it would soon have appeared that a great part of their value was imaginary. They who would not ascribe to the Stoics tenets which they never held, and affix to their language a modern mean¬ ing which they never conceived, must diligently examine their whole i system, and explain detached passages in such a sense, as shall be most consistent with their general doctrine, and their fundamental principles. The second caution is, not to confound the genuine doctrines of Zeno ' and other ancient fathers of this sect with the glosses, or improvements, of the later Stoics. Any one who attentively examines the writings of the philosophers after the promulgation of the Christian doctrine will perceive that the Stoics, in order to support the credit of their system, artfully ac¬ commodated their language, and even their tenets as far as they were able, to the Christian model. Out of the many proofs of this change which might be adduced w'e shall select one, which is the more worthy of notice, as it has occasioned many disputes among the learned. The doctrine we mean is that concerning Fate. This doctrine, according to Zeno and Chrysippus (who herein meant to combat Epicurus’s doctrine of the for- 1 * Avr. Epic. Diss. 1. iv. c. 9. 1. iii. c. 23. Aul. Cell. 1. vii. c. 19. Juv. Sat. ii. Horat. Serin. 1. ii. Sat. 2. Lucian in Hermotiin. t. ii. p. 287. t Lipsii Manud. ad Phil. Stoic. Gataker in Antonin. 186 OF ZENO AND THF. Book II. I tuitous concourse of atoms), implies an eternal and immutable series of causes and effects, within which all events are included, and to which the , Deity himself is subject : whereas the later Stoics, changing the term Fate into The Providence of God, discoursed with great plausibility on this j subject, but still in reality retained the ancient doctrine of universal fate. From this example, a judgment may be formed concerning the necessity, of using some caution in appealing to the writings of Seneca, Antoninus, , and Epictetus, as authorities in determining what were the original doc- j trines of the Stoic philosophers. If the remains of the Stoic philosophy preserved by Cicero, Plutarch,; Laertius, Sextus Empiricus, Simplicius, and Stobseus, be diligently and cautiously compared with the writings of Seneca, Antoninus, and Epictetus, the following will perhaps appear to be a faithful representation of the leading tenets of this celebrated sect, under the distinct heads of philoso- phy in general, logic, physics, metaphysics, and morals. Concerning Philosophy in general, the doctrine of the Stoics was,* that wisdom consists in the knowledge of things divine and human ; that philosophy is such an exercise of the mind as produces wisdom ; that in this exercise consists the nature of virtue ; and consequently, that virtue is a term of extensive meaning, comprehending the right employment oLthe mind in reasoning, in the study of nature, and in morals. The wisdom of the Stoics is either progressive, through several stages; or perfect, when every weakness is subdued, and every error corrected, without the possi¬ bility of a relapse into folly or vice, or of being again enslaved by any, passion, or afflicted by any calamity. j* With Socrates and the Cynics, Zeno represented virtue as the only true wisdom; but being disposed to 3 extend the pursuits of his wise man into the regions of speculation and| science, he gave, after his usual manner, a new signification to an old term, and comprehended the exercise of the understanding in the search of truth, ; as well as the government of the appetites and passions, under the general; term virtue. J The propriety of this extensive definition of virtue, and' the great importance of the united exercise of the intellectual and active j powers of the mind are thus beautifully asserted by the philosophical em-i peror :§ ^‘Let every one endeavour so to think and act, that his contem¬ plative and active faculties may at the same time be going on towards, perfection. His clear conceptions and certain knowledge will then produce; within him an entire confidence in himself, unperceived perhaps by others, ; though not affectedly concealed, which will give a simplicity and dignity) to his character; for he will at all times be able to judge, concerning thej several objects which come before him, what is their real nature, what place they hold in the universe, how long they are by nature fitted to last,] of what materials they are composed, by whom they may be possessed,'! and who is able to bestow them, or take them away.” The sum of the definitions and rules given by the Stoics concerning] Logic is this : — Logic is either rhetorical or dialectic. Rhetorical logic is the art of reasoning and discoursing on those subjects which require aj diffuse kind of declamation. Dialectic is the art of close argumentation! in the form of disputation or dialogue. The former resembles an open,^ the latter a closed hand. Rhetoric is of three kinds, deliberative, judicial,'! and demonstrative. The dialectic art is the instrument of knowledge, asis it enables a man to distinguish truth from error, and certainty from barej * Plut. de Plac. Phil. 1. i. c. 1. t. ii. p. 3. Sen. Ep. S9. f Sen. Ep. 71, 72. 75.^ X Pint. Sen. 1. c. Laert. 1. vii. sect. 40. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 17. § Antonin. 1. x. sect. 9. Chap. 11. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 187 probability. This art considers things as expressed by words, and words themselves.* * * § External things are perceived by a certain impression made either upon some parts of the brain, or upon the percipient faculty, which may be called an image, ^avraaia, since it is impressed upon the mind like the image of a seal upon wax.-f- This image is commonly accompanied with a belief of the reality of the thing perceived ; but not necessarily, since it does not accompany every image, but those only which are not attended with any evidence of deception. Where only the image is perceived by itself, the thing is apprehensible ; where it is acknowledged and approved as the image of some real thing, the impression is called apprehension, KardXrjipiQ, because the object is apprehended by the mind, as a body is grasped by the hand. Such apprehension, if it will bear the examination of reason, is knowledge ; if it is not examined, it is mere opinion; if it will not bear this examination, it is misapprehension. The senses, corrected by reason, give a faithful report ; not by affording a perfect apprehension of the entire nature of things, but by leaving no room to doubt of their reality. Nature has furnished us with these apprehensions, as the elements of knowledge, whence further conceptions are raised in the mind, and a way is opened for the investigations of reason. ;}; Some images are sensible, or received immediately through the senses, others rational, which are perceived only in the mind. These latter are called ’ivvoiai, notions or ideas. Some images are probable, to which the mind assents without hesitation ; others improbable, to which it does not 1 readily assent ; and others doubtful, where it is not entirely perceived whether they are true or false. True images are those which arise from things really existing, and agree with them. False images, or phantasms, are immediately derived from no real object. Images are apprehended by immediate perception through the senses, as when we see a man ; conse¬ quentially, by likeness, as when from a portrait we apprehend the original ; by composition, as when, by compounding a horse and man, we acquire the image of a Centaur ; by augmentation, as in the image of a Cyclops ; or by diminution, as in that of a pigmy. § Judgment is employed either in determining concerning particular things, or concerning general propositions. In judging of things, we make use of some one of our senses, as a common criterion or measure of appre¬ hension, by which we judge whether a thing is, or is not ; or whether, or not, it exists with certain properties ; or we apply to the thing, concerning : which a judgment is to be formed, some artificial measure, as a balance, a rule, &c. ; or we call in other peculiar measures to determine things not perceptible by the senses. In judging of general propositions, we make use of our preconceptions, or universal principles, as criteria or measures , of judgment, jj 1 The first impressions from the senses produce in the mind an involuntary emotion ; but a wise man afterwards deliberately examines them, that he may know whether the image be true or false, and assents to or rejects them, as the evidence which offers itself to his understanding appears sufR- * Sen. Ep. 48. Lucian, Herm. t ii. p. 390. Laert, 1. vii. sect. 42. 47. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. ii. sect. 6, 7. Cic. de Fin. 1. ii. c. 6. De Orat. c. 32. Quintil. 1. ii. c. 20. t Laert. 1. vii. sect. 45. Cic. Acad. Qu. 1. i. c. f 1. Boethius de Consol. 1. v. Met. 3. J Laert. sect. 45 — 52. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 29. 163. 228. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. ii. c. 6. 1. iv. c. 47. § Laert. Sext. Pimp. Pyrrh. Hyp. 1. ii. Pint. Plac. 1. iv. c. 12. II Cic. Acad. Qu. 1. i. Laert. Sext. Emp. adv. Log. 188 OF ZENO AND THE Book II. cient or insufficient. This assent or approbation (o-uvmraSeo-tie) will indeed be as necessarily given, or withheld, according to the ultimate state of the proofs which are adduced, as the scales of a balance will sink or rise, according to the weights which are placed upon them ; but while the vulgar give immediate credit to the reports of the senses, wise men suspend their assent till they have deliberately examined the nature of things, and carefully estimated the weight of evidence.* * * § The mind of man is originally like a blank leaf, wholly without charac¬ ters, but capable of receiving any. The impressions which are made upon it, by means of the senses, remain in the memory, after the objects which occasioned them are removed; a succession of these continued impressions, made by similar objects, produces experience ; and hence arises perma¬ nent notions, opinions, and knowledge. Even universal principles, 7rpo\r;;//£te, are originally formed, by experience, from sensible images. All men agree in their common notions or preconceptions ; disputes only arise concern¬ ing the application of these to particular cases, j' These three things are mutually related ; the expression, the notion or ** image in the mind which is expressed, and the external object. Under SI the head of expression, dialectics consider vocal sound as expressed by i letters ; the several parts of speech ; the etymology, analogy, or anomaly ' of syntax ; the signification of words, and other properties of language, i The notion or image expressed is the ^avraala, phantasy, already gj explained. i Dialectics consider things as capable of being classed under species and ■ genera. The most comprehensive genus is that which includes all beings both real and imaginary. Things are subdivided into four kinds : 1. Sub¬ stance. 2. Qualities, which are the differences of substances, not taken ^ individually, but collected into one notion in the mind. 3. Modes, respect¬ ing quantity, place, time, &c. 4. Relations, as those of father and son, right and left. Things considered with respect to speech are said to be Xe/cra, capable of being expressed in words. This character includes what is imaginary, as well as what is real. All notions residing in the mind, | ready for expression, come under this description.§ Predicates are those things which are predicated, or declared concern- j ing another. When these are connected with the person, or thing, to whom| the predicate is applied in a direct assertion, the sentence is called anj axiom. An axiom may be either simple or compound ; simple, which does not consist of several different axioms, or of one axiom twice taken ; .] compound, consisting of one axiom diversified, or of more than one. Int! compound axioms, that which immediately follows the conjunction if, , since, &c. is called the antecedent, the rest the consequent. Complex, axioms are of various kinds, according to the nature of the conjunction I which connects them, whence they are connective, conjunctive, disjunctive, ^ casual, comparative, &c. Axioms admit of various other characters, asij possible, probable, necessary, paradoxical, contrary. An argument, (Xoyoc) ; commonly consists of a general truth admitted (Xfigga) ; a particular case i i supposed ('irpocrXrjniJ.a) ; and a conclusion {inapopa). For example : If it be day it is light ; but it is day; therefore it is light. An argument admits of more variety in its form than a syllogism. It may consist of one i complex proposition, as. Thou livest, therefore thou breathest ; or, the * Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. Aul. Gellius, 1. xix. c. 1. ^ f Plut. Plac. 1. iv. c. 11, 12. Arrian. 1. i. Diss. 22. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. i. c. II. 9 X Sext. Emp. adv. Log. Laert. 1 § Laert. 1. vii. sect. 60 — 63. Sext. Emp. ib. Siinplic. in Categ. [J STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 189 , Chap. 11. S. 1. conclusion may be such, as necessarily to follow from the premises, though there be not a major and minor. For example ; The first is equal to tlie second, and the second is equal to the third, therefore the first is equal to the third. This argument, though conclusive, is not syllogistical, for want of this universal proposition, things which are equal to the same thing are equal to one another.* Besides these, and other technical modes of arguing, the Stoics amused themselves with quibbles, and fallacies, of the same kind with those which we have before noticed in the Megaric School ; but of this ridiculous method of trifling one example j- shall suffice. Protagoras the Sophist agreed to instruct a young man in eloquence, for a large sum, one half of which was to be paid in hand, the other half upon his first successful pleading in the courts. Neglecting to plead for a long time after Prota¬ goras had completely instructed him in the art of rhetoric, the Sophist sued him for the remaining moiety of his stipend. Each pleaded his own cause. I Protagoras urged, that which way soever the cause was determined the : young man must complete the payment ; for if the cause was determined , against the defendant, the payment would be granted him by judgment ; ; if for him, the payment would be due according to agreement. The young man, on the contrary, pleaded, that if the cause was determined in his favour, he should be excused from the payment by the decision of the court ; if against him, Protagoras, by his own agreement, could have no demand upon him. The subtlety of these pleas perplexed the judges ; and, i without coming to any determination, they dismissed the court. Such vagaries of human ingenuity, however trifling and ridiculous in themselves, afford an instructive example of the folly of attempting to excel in trifles, and of the mischief arising from philosophical vanity ; i they well illustrate the poet’s doctrine, ' - - — Sapientia prima est Stultitia caruisse. (a) What can we say concerning the whole business of dialectics, as it I appears to have been conducted by the Stoics, but exclaim with Seneca — I “O pueriles ineptias I in hoc, supercilia subduximus ? in hoc, barbam ■ demissimus ? hoc est, quod tristes docemus, et pallidi.?” J ( Let us pass on to the Stoical doctrine concerning nature. ; According to Zeno and his followers, § there existed from eternity a 1 dark and confused chaos, in which was contained the first principles of ' all future beings. This chaos, being at length arranged, and emerging i into variable forms, became the world, as it now subsists. The world, or i nature, is that whole, which comprehends all things, and of which all things ! are parts and members. The universe, though one whole, contains two I principles, distinct from elements, one passive, the other active. The ! passive principle is pure matter without qualities ; the active principle is reason or God. This is the fundamental doctrine of the Stoics concern¬ ing nature. In order to understand clearly wherein it differs from other * Laert. Alex. Aphrod. in Analyt. prior. f Aul. Gell. 1. v. c. 10. (a) The beginning of wisdom is, to be free from folly. X Childish trifling ! Is it for this we contract our brows, and let our beards grow ? ' Are these the lessons we teach with such pale and dismal looks ? § Laert. 1. v. sect. 150. Stob. Eel. Phys. c. 14. Senec. Consol, ad Pol. c. 20. 190 OF ZENO AND THE Book II. systems, a brief review of the ancient doctrines upon this subject will be necessary. * It appears from the preceding parts of this work, that almost all ancient philosophers agreed in admitting two principles in nature, one active and the other passive, but that they differed in the manner in which they con¬ ceived these principles to subsist. Some held God and Matter to be two principles, which are eternallj’^ opposite, not only differing in their essence, but having no common principle by which they can be united. This was the doctrine taught by Anaxagoras, and, after him, by Plato, and the whole Old Academy. This system, for the sake of perspicuity, we will call The Dualistic System. Others were convinced that nature con¬ sists of these two principles ; but finding themselves perplexed by the diffi¬ culty with which they saw the Dualistic System to be encumbered, that of j supposing two independent and opposite principles, they supposed both - ^ these to be comprehended in one universe, and conceived them to be united by a necessary and essential bond. To effect this, two different hypotheses were proposed. Some thought God to have been eternally united to matter in one whole, which they called Chaos, whence it was sent forth, and at a certain time brought into form, by the energy of the divine inhabiting mind. This was the System of Emanation, commonly embraced by the ancient barbaric philosophers, and afterwards admitted ' ^ into the early theogonies of the Greeks. Others attempted to explain the ^ F subject more philosophically, and to avoid the absurdity which they con- ^4- ceived to attend both the former systems, asserted that God the rational f -’ and efficient principle, is as intimately connected with the universe, as the /■ human mind with the body, and is a forming power, so originally and !^‘ necessarily inherent in matter, that it is to be conceived as a natural part V of the original ehaos. This system seems not only to have been received by the Ionic philosophers, Thales and Anaximander, but by the Pytha-YJ goreans, the followers of Heraclitus, and others. Zeno, determining to '1 innovate upon the doctrine of the Academy, and neither choosing to adopt ’ the Dualistic, nor the Emanative System, embraced the third hypothesis, 7 ® which, though not originally his own, we shall distinguish by the name of , ’ J the Stoical System. Unwilling to admit, on the one hand, two oppo-^ site principles, both primary and independent, and both absolute and infinite, or, on the other, to suppose matter, which is in its nature diame-j*)i trically opposite to that of God, the active efficient cause, to have been derived by emanation from him ; yet finding himself wholly unable to derive these two principles from any common source, he confounded essence, and maintained that they were so essentially united, that theirH: nature was one and the same. That this was the real doctrine of the Stoics will appear from the sequel. The Stoical system teaches, that both the active and passive principles in nature are corporeal, since whatever acts or suffers must be so. The efficient cause, or God, is pure ether, or fire, inhabiting the exterior surface ^ of the heavens, where every thing which is divine is placed. This ethereal | substance, or divine fire, comprehends all the vital principles by which\. individual beings are necessarily produced, and contains the forms ofi?' * Cic. de Nat. Deor. I. ii. Senec. Consol, ad Helv. c. 8. Lactant. Inst. 1. vii. c. 3.' Sext. ad Math. 1. ix. sect. 332. Suidas in v. wav. Stobaeus, Eel. Phys. c. 13. 25. Pint. Plac. Ph. 1. ii. c. 1. Laert. 1. vii. sect. 143. Senec. Ep. 65. 97. k h* sect. 2.^ j 1. iv. sect 40. 21. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 16, ■' h Chap. 11. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 191 things, which, from the highest regions of the universe, are diffused through every other part of nature.* * * § Seneca, indeed, calls God Incorporeal Reason : but by this term he can only mean to distinguish the divine ethereal substance from gross bodies ; for, according to the Stoics, whatever has a substantial existence is corpo¬ real ; nothing is incorporeal, except that infinite vacuum which surrounds the universe ; even mind and voice are corporeal, and, in like manner. Deity. Matter, or the passive principle, in the Stoical system, is destitute of all qualities, but ready to receive any form ; inactive, and without motion, unless moved by some external cause. The contrary principle, or the ethereal operative fire, being active, and capable of producing all things from matter, with consummate skill, according to the forms which it con¬ tains, although in its nature corporeal, considered in opposition to gross and sluggish matter, or to the elements, is said to be immaterial and spiritual, ■j- For want of carefully attending to the preceding distinction, some writers have been so far imposed upon by the bold innovations of the Stoics in the I use of terms, as to infer from the appellations which they sometimes apply to the Deity that they conceived him to be strictly and properly incor- , poreal. The truth appears to be, that, as they sometimes spoke of the soul of man, a portion of the divinity, as an exceedingly rare and subtle body, ffwpa dpawrepov rat XeTTroixapiarepov, and sometimes as a warm or fiery spirit, TvvevpLa kVfieppov, J so they spoke of the Deity as corporeal, considered as distinct from the incorporeal vacuum, or infinite space, but as spiritual, i considered in opposition to gross and inactive matter. They taught, in- ■ deed, that God is underived, incorruptible, and eternal ; possessed of intelligence ; good and perfect ; the efficient cause of all the peculiar qualities or forms of things ; and the constant preserver and governor of ' the world ; and they described the Deity under many noble images, and in the most elevated language. The hymn of Cleanthes, § in particular, is ' justly admired for the grandeur of its sentiments, and the sublimity of its diction. But if, in reading these descriptions, we hastily associate with them modern conceptions of Deity, and neglect to recur to the leading i principles of the sect, we shall be led into fundamental misapprehensions i of the true doctrine of Stoicism ; for, according to this sect, God and Matter are alike underived and eternal, and God is the former of the uni- I verse in no other sense, than as he has been the necessary efficient I cause by which motion and form have been impressed upon matter. What i unworthy notions the Stoics entertained of God sufficiently appears from I the single opinion of his finite nature; an opinion which necessarily followed ‘ from the notion, that he is only a part of a spherical, and therefore a finite universe. On the doctrine of divine providence, which was one of the chief points upon which the Stoics disputed with the Epicureans, much is written, and . with great strength and elegance, by Seneca, Epictetus, and other later Stoics. But we are not to judge of the genuine and original doctrine of this sect from the discourses of writers who had probably improved their * Laert. 1. vii. sect. 55. Plut. de Stoic. Repugn. Senec. Ep. 89. 102. Plut. Plac. Phil. 1. i. c. 7. Orig. Philosophum, c. 21. p. 143. t Laert. 1. v. sect. 147. 150. Sen. Ep 65. Stob. Eel. Phys. c. 14. Plut. Plac. Phil. 1. i. c. 3. 6. X Plut. de Stoic. Repugn, t. iii. p. 3. Laert. 1. vii. sect. 140. § Clem. Alex, ad Gent. p. 47. Stob. H. Stephan. Poes. Phil. p. 49. Cudworth, Int. Syst. c. iv. sect. 25. 192 OF ZENO AND THE Book II. notions, or at least corrected their language, on this subject, by visiting the Christian school.* The only way to form an accurate judgment of their opinions concerning providence is, to compare their popular language upon this head with their general system, and explain the former consist¬ ently with the fundamental principles of the latter. If this be fairly done, it will appear that the agency of Deity is, according to the Stoics, no¬ thing more than the active motion of a celestial ether or fire, possessed of intelligence, which at first gave form to the shapeless mass of gross mat¬ ter, and being always essentially united to the visible world, by the same necessary agency, preserves its order and harmony. The Stoic idea of providence is, not that of an infinitely wise and good being, wholly inde¬ pendent of matter, freely directing and governing all things, but that of a necessary chain of causes and effects, arising from the action of a power, which is itself a part of the machine which it regulates, and which, equally with that machine, is subject to the immutable law of necessity. Provi¬ dence, in the Stoic creed, is only another name for absolute necessity, or fate, to which God and Matter, or the universe which consists of both, is immutably subject. -|- The rational, efficient, and active principle in nature, the Stoics called^; by various names; Nature, Fate, Jupiter, God. “What is nature,” says*' Seneca, J “ but God? — the divine reason, inherent in the whole universe, and all its parts ; or you may call Him, if you please, the Author of all things.” And again, “ Whatever appellations imply celestial power and energy may be justly applied to God ; his names may properly be as numerous as his offices.” The term Nature, when it is at all distinguished^ in the Stoic system from God, denotes, not a separate agent, but that order of things which is necessarily produced by his perpetual agency. Since the active principle of nature is comprehended within the world/ and with matter makes one whole, it necessarily follows, that God pene-H trates, pervades, and animates matter, and the things which are formed from it, or, in other words, that he is the Soul of the universe. In this manner he is described by Manilius : § Vivere mundum Et rationis agi motu, cum spiritus unus Per cunctas habitet partes, atque irriget orbem, Omnia pervolitans corpusque animale figuret. (a) The universe is, according to Zeno and his followers, ovaia e/ixl/vKog /cat" at(70/j7i/c>), 11 “a sentient and animated being.” Nor was this a new tenet* but, in some sort, the doctrine of all antiquity. Zeno, however, under^ stood this doctrine in a sense different from that in which it was conceived by many former philosophers. Plato, and other advocates of the Dualistic system, supposed the world to be endued with a soul, but conceived this soul ' to have been derived from the Deity, of an inferior nature, and united by the will and power of God, at a certain time, to matter, which till then had been without this animating principle. Those philosophers who held the system of emanation conceived God to have been eternally the source of matter, from whom it proceeded, and on whom it is inseparably depend- Arrian. Epict. 1. i. Diss. 12. f Cic. de Nat. Deor. 1. i. Antonin. 1. vii. sect. 9. t De Benef. 1. iv. c. 7. Quaest. Nat. 1. i. c. 45. Lactant. 1. ii. sect. 148. § Lib. ii. (a) One source of life, one animating soul Dwells in each part, and forms and guides tbe whole. II Laert. 1. vii. sect. 139. Chap. 11. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 193 ent for motion and animation. But Pythagoras, Heraclitus, and after these Zeno, taking it for granted that there is no real existence which is not corporeal, conceived nature to be One Whole, consisting of a subtle ether and gross matter, the former the active, the latter the passive prin¬ ciple, as essentially united as the soul and body of man : that is, they supposed God, with respect to nature, to be, not a co-existing, but an in¬ forming principle. In fine, although the Deity of the Stoics is the efficient and intelligent cause of all the effects which are produced in the world, yet his nature and attributes are much less perfect than many admirers of this system have represented. Residing primarily in the superior celestial region, and being thence diffused, as a subtle fire, through a finite world, his universal presence falls far short of the attribute of immensity, as it belongs to the Divine nature.* * * § United to matter by the immutable chain of necessity, he wants that freedom of action which appears to be one of the most es¬ sential characters of the Supreme Being. The original communication, and the perpetual preservation of forms and qualities, by the necessary action of a subtle fire upon matter, though this principle be supposed to be possessed of reason and intelligence as well as energy, is certainly an idea of deity which falls far short of that pure and sublime doctrine, which represents God as creating and governing the world by voluntary agency and with wise design. That the Deity is, according to the Stoic doctrine, subject to the law of necessity no less than matter and all subordinate be¬ ings, Seneca, and other writers of this sect, expressly assert. “ Both gods and men are bound,” says he, “ by the same chain of necessity. Divine and human affairs are alike borne along in an irresistible current ; cause de¬ pends upon cause ; effects arise in a long succession ; nothing happens by accident, but every thing comes to pass in the established order of na- ture.”'j' Portions of the ethereal soul of the world being distributed throughout all the parts of the universe, and animating all bodies, hence arise, in the system of the Stoics^ infesior gods and demons, with which all nature is peopled. All these divinities they considered as derived from the soul of nature, and as limited in their duration. “ Chrysippus and Cleanthes,” says Plutarch, J “taught that the heavens, the earth, the air, and the sea, are full of gods ; but that none of them are immortal, except Jupiter, to whom all the rest will at length return, and in whom they will lose their separate existence.” Demons wore divided by the Stoics into superior and inferior ; the superior those which inhabited the sun and stars, which they considered as ovaLaq ipvxti^oc, animated substances ; the inferior, human souls separated from the body, or heroes. “ Illustrious men,” says Cicero,§ “ whose souls survive and enjoy immortality, are justly esteemed to be gods, since they are of an excellent and immortal nature.” Besides this, there seems little reason to doubt that the Stoics acknowledged the exis¬ tence of inferior divinities, portions of the soul of the world, and taught that they are endued with human passions, and therefore are proper ob¬ jects of sacrifice and worship.” || As the Stoics held, that all the inferior divinities are portions separated • Seneca, Praef. Qu. Nat. Aul. Gellius, 1. vi. c. 11. t Seneca de Providentia, c. 5. Anton. 1. iv. sect. 10. 24. 34. Aul. Cell. 1. vi. c. 2. I De Repugn. Stoic, t. iii. p. 29, &c. Pint. Plac. Phil. 1. i. c. 8. § Nat. D. 1. ii. c. 24. Laert. 1. vii. sect. 151. II Plut. ib. Senec. Ep. 110. Qu. Nat. 1. vii. c. 31. Plin. 1. ii. c. 7. Arrian. 1. i. Diss. 14. Laert, 1. vii. sect. 147. o 194 OF ZENO AND THE Book II. from the soul of the world ; so they conceived that a period would arrive when they would return into the first celestial fire, and supposed that, at the same time, the whole visible world would be consumed in one general conflagration.* The Stoics, as well as all other ancient philosophers, were much per¬ plexed with the great question concerning the Origin of Evil. Some of them adopted the notion of the Platonists, and ascribed it to the defective nature of matter, which it was not in the power of the Great Artificer to change ; asserting, that imperfections appear in the world, not through any defect of skill in its Author, but because matter will not admit of the ac¬ complishment of his designs.f But it was perceived by others that this hypothesis was inconsistent with the fundamental doctrine of Stoicism concerning nature. For since, according to this system, matter itself re¬ ceives all its qualities from God, if its defects be the cause of evil, these defects must be ultimately ascribed to him. No other way of relieving this difficulty remained but to have recourse to fate, and say, that evil was the necessary consequence of that eternal necessity, to which the great Whole, comprehending both God and Matter, is subject. Thus when Chrysippus was asked, whether diseases were to be ascribed to Divine Providence, he replied, that it was not the intention of nature that those things should happen ; nor were they conformable to the will of the Au¬ thor of nature and Parent of all good things ; but that, in framing the world, some inconveniences had adhered, by necessary consequence, to his wise and useful plan. Concerning the Second Principle in the universe. Matter, and concern¬ ing the visible world, the doctrine of the Stoics is briefly this : Matter is the first essence of all things, destitute of, but capable of receiving, qua¬ lities. Considered universally, it is an eternal whole, which neither in¬ creases nor decreases. Considered with respect to its parts, it is capable of increase and diminution, of collision and separation, and is perpetually changing. Bodies are continually tending towards dissolution ; matter always remains the same. Matter is not infinite, but finite, being circum¬ scribed by the limits of the world ; but its parts are infinitely divisible. § The world is spherical in its form, and is surrounded by an infinite] vacuum. The action of the Divine nature upon matter first produced the element of moisture, and then the other elements, fire, air, and earth, i of which all bodies are composed. Air and fire have essential levity, or tend towards the exterior surface of the world ; earth and water have essential gravity, or tend towards the centre. All the elements are capable of re¬ ciprocal conversion ; air passing into fire, or into water ; earth into air and water; but there is this essential difference among the elements, that' fire and air have within themselves a principle of motion, while water and earth are merely passive. 1| ^ The sun is a sphere larger than the earth, consisting of fire of the purest kind : it is therefore an animated being, and the first of the derived divini¬ ties. The stars too are of the same kind, fiery bodies endued with perception and intelligence, and therefore to be ranked among the gods. They are nourished by exhalations from the seas and rivers.^ * Plut. Rep. Stoic, t. iii. p. 29. Senec. Ep. 9. f Senec. de Provid. c. 5. + Aul. Cell. 1. vi. c. 1. § Laert. I. vii. sect. 150. Ant. 1. iv. sect. 4. Sen. Ep. 36. 38. 58. Stob. Eel. Ph. c. 14. j| Plut. Plac. Phil. 1. ii. c. 1, 2. 18. Laert. 1. vii. sect. 136. 141, 142. Stob. Eel. Phys. c. 17. 24. Sen. Na^. Qu. 1. iii. c. 20. Lucret. 1. i. v. 781. ^ Laert. 1. vii. sect. 142. 144. Anton. 1. iii. sect. 26. Arrian, 1. i. c. 14. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. ii. c. 15. Nat. Dcor. I. ii. c. 15. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 195 Chap. 11. S. 1. Because the heavenly bodies are animated, they are capable of foresee¬ ing future events, and of declaring to mankind, by certain signs, the ap¬ pointments of fate. Manilius expresses the doctrine of his sect, when he says, - Conscia fati Sidera diversos hominum variantia casus, (a) The foundation of this notion is, that the stars, being pure and perfect portions of the Divine nature, must be acquainted with the decrees of fate.* The celestial bodies move in their orbits, in the following order: Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, the Moon. The moon, which occupies the lowest part of the ethereal region, is, like the rest, a fiery luminary possessed of intelligence ; but the fire is mixed with air ; whence the spots upon its surface. Its form is spherical, and its motion spiral, and of two kinds ; the one, from east to west, with the heavens ; the other, from west to east, through the signs of the Zodiac. I- Below the sphere of the moon is the region of the air. The earth is the most dense part of the world, and is the main support of nature, like the bones of an animated body. The earth, with its waters, forms a globe, which is the centre of the world : it always remains immovable. J The world, including the whole of nature, God and Matter, subsisted from eternity, and will for ever subsist ; but the present regular frame of nature had a beginning, and will have an end. The parts tend towards a dissolution, but the whole remains immutably the same. The world is liable to destruction from the prevalence of moisture, or of dryness ; the former producing an universal inundation, the latter an universal confla¬ gration. These succeed each other in nature as regularly as winter and summer. When the universal inundation takes place, the whole surface of the earth is covered with water, and all animal life is destroyed ; after which, nature is renewed and subsists as before, till the element of fire, becoming prevalent in its turn, dries up all the moisture, converts every substance into its own nature, and at last, by an universal conflagration, re¬ duces the world to its pristine state. At this period all material forms are lost in one chaotic mass : all animated nature is re-united to the Deity, and nature again exists in its original form, as one w'hole, consisting of God and Matter. From this chaotic state, however, it again emerges, by the energy of the Efficient Principle, and gods and men, and all the forms of regulated nature, are renewed, to be dissolved and renewed in endless succession.§ The general inundation, which is admitted into the Stoic system, however 1 similar in terms to the ancient tradition concerning the deluge, differs from ' it in this material respect, that it happens at regular intervals by the same I necessary law which produces the succession of the seasons. The doctrine : of conflagration is a natural consequence of the general system of Stoicism. For since, according to this system, the whole process of nature is carried on in a necessary series of causes and effects, when that operative fire (a) The conscious stars, versed in the will of fate, Unfold what good or ill on mortals wait. * Sen. Nat. Qu. 1. ii. c. 32. Ep. 80. f Cic. Nat. D. 1. ii. c. 20. Laert. 1. vii. sect. 145. Stob. p. 59. Pint, de Plac. Phil. 1. ii. c. 25. De Fac. Lun. t. iii. p. 353. I Stob. 1. c. p. 48. Laert. 1. vii. sect. 140. 155. Pint. 1. c. c. 9. 10. § Laert. Philo de Mund. incorr. p. 940, Eitseb. Prmp. 1. iv. p. 816. Cic. de N. Deor. 1. iii. c. 46. Stob. Eel. Ph. c. 24. Sen. Qu. Nat. 1. iii. c, 27. 29. Ep. 9. 36. 71. Anton. 1. V. sect. 13. 1. X. sect. 7. 1. xi. sect. 1, o 2 196 OF ZENO AND THE Book II. which at first, bursting from chaos, gave form to all things, and which has since pervaded and animated all nature, shall have consumed its nutriment, that is, when the vapours which are the food of the celestial fires shall be exhausted, a deficiency of moisture must produce an universal conflagra¬ tion. This grand revolution in nature is, after the doctrine of the Stoics, thus elegantly described by Ovid Esse quoque in fatis reminiscitur, afFore tenipus, Quo mare, quo tellus, correptaque regio cceli Ardeat, et mundi moles operosa laboret. (a) Seneca, speaking of the same event, says,-|- the time will come when the world will be consumed, that it may be again renewed ; when the powers of Nature will be turned against herself ; when stars will rush upon stars, and the whole material world, which now appears resplendent with beauty and harmony, will be destroyed in one general conflagration. In this grand catastrophe of nature, all animated beings (excepting the Universal Intelligence) men, heroes, demons, and gods, shall perish together. Seneca the tragedian, who was of the same school with the philosopher, writes Cceli regia concidet, Certos atque obitus trabet, Atque omnes pariter deos Perdet mors aliqua et chaos. (6) During the course of this vast conflagration, the Stoics conceived that the world would expand, and in its chaotic state continue to fill a much larger portion of infinite space than it had required, or would again require, in a state of orderly arrangement.§ After an interval of rest, says Seneca, || in which the Deity will be intent upon his own conceptions, the world will be entirely renewed ; every animal will be reproduced ; and a race of men, free from guilt, and born under happier stars, will re-people the earth. Degeneracy and corruption will, however, again creep into the world ; for it is only whilst the human race is young that innocence remains upon the earth. The grand course of things, from the birth to the destruction of fl the world, which, according to the Stoics, is to be repeated in endless suc¬ cession, is accomplished within a certain period. This period, or fatedK round of nature, is probably what the ancients meant by the Great Year^Jj From this brief account of the Stoic doctrine of the final conflagration^* it evidently appears that it differs ih several essential particulars from thelT Christian doctrine on this head. It is the work of fate performed by na^, tural and mechanical laws, and repeated eternally at certain periods, with® out any good reason, since with every revolution the same disorders and® vices return. Philo justly ridicules this dogma ; remarking,^ that th^ Stoics make their deities act like children, who raise up piles of sand onl^ for the pleasure of beating them down. Several of the Stoics themselvesj| were aware of the absurdity of this system, and rejected it ; particularly^l Boethius, Posidonius, Diogenes the Babylonian, and Pansetius. f ^ * Metam. 1. i. v. 256. ■ (a) Rememb’ring in the fates a time when fire V Should to the battlements of heaven aspire, ' i When all his blazing worlds above should burn, : And all the inferior globe to cinders turn. Dryden. [ f Ad Marcian. c. ult. (5) The mighty palace of the sky, In ruin fall’n is doom’d to lie. And all the gods, the wreck beneath, Shall sink in chaos and in death. § Pint. Repug. t. iii. p. 462. || Ep. 9. Qu. Nat. c. ult. Here. Oct. v. 1112 L. c. Chap. 11. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 197 It is a necessary consequence of this doctrine, of the conflagration and subsequent restoration of all things, that the race of men will return to life. Whence it appears in what sense we are to understand the Stoic doctrine of a resurrection, upon which Seneca has written with so much elegance ; and what meaning we are to annex to his words, when he says,* “Death, of which we are so much afraid, and which we are so desirous to avoid, is only the interruption, not the destruction, of our existence : the day will come which will restore us to life.” This tenet is not to be confounded with the Christian doctrine of the resurrection of the body ; for, aecording to the Stoics, men return to life, not by the voluntary appointment of a ; wise and merciful God, but by the law of fate; and are not renewed for the enjoyment of a better and happier condition, but drawn back into their former state of imperfection and misery. Accordingly Seneca says, “ This restoration many would reject, were it not that their renovated life is ac¬ companied with a total oblivion of past events.” *}■ Man, according to the Stoics, is an image of the world ; one whole, I composed of body and mind. The mind of man is a spark of that divine fire, which is the soul of the world. That Eternal Reason, by which all I nature is animated, and which, by its productive power, communicates es¬ sential qualities to every thing that exists, impressed the forms, qualities, and powers of man upon certain portions of matter. The soul of man, being a portion of the Deity, is then of the same nature : a subtle fiery substance, endued with intelligence and reason : but the energy of this principle is confined and restrained, in the birth of man, by its union with I grosser matter. J Concerning the duration of the soul of man the Stoics entertained very different opinions. Cleanthes thought that all souls would remain till the I final conflagration. Chrysippus was of opinion that this would only be the lot of the wise and good ; § and Seneca |1 seems to have entertained the same notion. Epictetus and Antoninus^ asserted, that as soon as the soul • is released from the body, it returns to the soul of the world, or is lost in the universal principle of fire. Some were so absurd as to believe, that ' the human soul, consisting of a fiery spirit, condensed by its union with air, is capable of being extinguished.** Whilst others, with equal ab¬ surdity, conceived that the human soul, shut up within the gross body, ' could not, at death, find a free passage, 'but remained with the body till ‘ it was entirely destroyed. The only idea of the immortality of the soul, which seems to have been entertained by the Stoics, was tliat of a reno- ; vation of being, in that fated circuit of things which we have seen to be 1 one of their fundamental doctrines. In the universal restoration of : nature, some imagined that each individual would return to its former ! body ; whilst others conceived that, after a revolution of the Great Year, j similar souls would be placed in similar bodies. I The soul, which, as appears from what has been said concerning its origin, was conceived by the Stoics to have been material, they represented as consisting of eight distinct parts ; namely, the five senses, the productive * Ep. 36. t L. c. t Manil. 1. ii. Cic. de Leg. 1. i. Sen. Ep. 90. Qu. Nat. 1. ii. c. 6. I. iii. c. 29. ad Helv. ' c. 6. Pint, de Repug. Stoic, t. iii. p. 31. Cic. in Somn. Scip. Plin. 1. ii. c. 26. Arrian, i. i. Diss. 14. iii. 24. Anton. 1. iv. sect. 4. 1. ii. sect. 4. 1. ix. sect. 8. Laert. I. vii. sect. 158. ' § Laert. 1. vii. sect. 157. Plut. Plac. I. iv. c. 7. || Senec. ad Marc. c. iik. Ep. 63. ^ Arr. 1, iii. Diss. 13. Ant. 1. iv. sect. 13. 21. ** Sen. Ep. 57. Thomasiiis de Morte. ! 198 OF ZENO AND THE Book I faculty, the power of speech, and the ruling part, to ^yej-ioviKov, or reason.* Those who held the existence of the soul after death supposed it to be removed into the celestial regions of the gods, where it remains till, at the general conflagration, all souls, both human and divine, shall be lost in the Deity. But many supposed that before they were admitted among the divinities they must purge away their inherent vices and imperfections, by a temporary residence in the aerial region between the earth and the moon, or in the moon itself. ■f' With respect to depraved and ignoble souls, it was a common opinion, that after death they were agitated in the lower region of the air, till the fiery parts were separated from the grosser, and rose by their natural levity to the orbit of the moon, where they were still further purified and refined ; a kind of mechanical purgatory, which very well agreed with the mechanical principles of the Stoic philosophy. These fancies are treated with ridicule by Epictetus and Seneca, ;}: who frequently speak of the happiness of good men after death in terms which might have suited a better system.. Seneca, consoling Marcia under the loss of her son, says,§ “ The sacred assembly of the Scipios and Catos, who have themselves despised life and obtained freedom by death, shall welcome the youth to the region of happy souls. Your father himself (for all are there known to all) shall embrace his grandson, and shall direct his eyes, now furnished with new light, along the courses of the neighbouring stars, with delight explaining to him the mysteries of nature, not from conjecture, but from certain knowledge. Like a welcome guide in an unknown city, he will unfold to the inquiring stranger the causes of the celestial appearances.” Upon the preceding principles of physics depend the whole Stoic doc¬ trine of Morals. Conceiving God to be the principal part of nature, by whose energy all bodies are formed, moved, and arranged, and human reason to be a portion of the Divinity, it was their fundamental doctrine in ethics, that in human life one ultimate end ought for its own sake to be pursued; and that this end is, to live agreeably to nature, that is, to be conformed to the law of fate by which the world is governed, and to the reason of that divine and celestial fire which animates all things. Since man is himself a microcosm, composed, like the world, of matter and a rational principle, it becomes him to live as a part of the great whole, and to accommodate all his desires and pursuits to the general arrangement of nature. II Various terms were made use of, by different philosophers of the Porch, to express this doctrine. Chrysippus taught that we ought to live accord¬ ing to our experience of natural events ; Cleanthes, that we should follow the nature common to all men; Diogenes the Babylonian, that we should conform to the reason and law of life, choosing those things Avhich are naturally eligible, and rejecting those things which nature instructs us to reject ; Pansetius, that we should yield to the impressions of nature ; and Posidonius, that we should contemplate truth, follow nature, and imitate God, by making the eternal reason, and immutable law of the universe, the rule of our actions. Thus to live according to nature, as the Stoics teach, is virtue and * Laert. 1. v. sect. 157. Plut. Plac. 1. iv. c. 2 — 4. f Sen. ad Marc. c. 25. Plut. de Fac. Lun. t. iii. 383, Lact. I. vii. c. 7. X Avr. 1. iii. Diss. 13. Sen. ad Marc. c. 19. Ep, 117. § Ad. Marc. c. 25. 11 Laert. 1. vii. sect. 81, &c. Stob. Eel. Etli. 1. ii. c. 3. p. 172. edit. Canteri. Cic. de Fin. 1. ii. c. 11. Sen. Ep. 41. Anton. 1. vi. sect. 15. Hor. Ep. i. 18. Stob. 1. c. Anton. 1. vi. sect. 15. Arr. 1. i. Diss. 1. 1. iii. Diss. 24. Epict. Encliir. c. 1, 2. Sen. Ep. 1C. 31. 41. 74. 76. Vit. Beat, c, 15. Chap. 11. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 199 virtue is itself happiness ; for the supreme good is to live according to a just conception of the real nature of things, choosing that which is in itself eligible, and rejecting the contrary. Every man, having within himself a capacity of discerning and following the law of nature, has his happiness in his own power, and is a divinity to himself. Horace seems to have adopted this notion when he says ; * * * § Sed satis est orare Jovem quse ponit et aufert : Det vitam, det opes ; aequum mi animum ipse parabo. (a) Wisdom consists in distinguishing good from evil.f Good is that which produces happiness according to the nature of a rational being. As the order of the world consists in an invariable conformity to the law of fate, so the happiness of man is tvpota,^ that course of life which flows in an uninterrupted current according to the law of nature. Since those things only are truly good, which are becoming and virtuous, and virtue, which is seated in the mind, is alone sufficient for happiness, external things con¬ tribute nothing towards happiness, and therefore are not in themselves good. The wise man will only value riches, honour, beauty, and other external enjoyments, as means and instruments of virtue ; for in every condition he is happy in the possession of a mind accommodated to na¬ ture. § Pain, which does not belong to the mind, is no evil. The wise man will be happy in the midst of torture. All external things are in¬ different, since they cannot affect the happiness of man : nevertheless, some of these are conducive, others unfavourable, to the life which is according to nature, and as such are proper objects of preference or rejection, ■7r(>oriyjieva r) aTroTrpoi\y}xiva.\\ Every virtue being a conformity to nature, and every vice a deviation from it, all virtues and vices are equal.^ One I act of beneficence, or justice, is not more truly so than another; one \ fraud is not more a fraud than another ; therefore there is no other differ- ij ence in the essential nature of moral actions, than that some are vicious, ' and others virtuous. This is the doctrine to which Horace refers, when ' he says,** Nec vincet ratio hoc, tantundem ut peccet idemque Qui teneros caules alieni fregerit horti, j Et qui nocturnus sacra divum legerit. (6) The Stoics advanced many extravagant assertions concerning their wise I man. j-j- For example, that he feels neither pain nor pleasure ; that he ex- I ercises no pity ; that he is free from faults ; that he is divine ; that he can j neither deceive, nor be deceived ; that he does all things well ; that he i alone is great, noble, ingenuous ; that he is the only friend ; that he alone i is free ; that he is a prophet, a priest, and a king ; and the like. These I paradoxical vauntings are humorously ridiculed by Horace : * Ep. 1. i. 18. ult. (а) For life and wealth to Jove I’ll pray; These Jove can give or take away ; But for a firm and equal mind, This blessing in myself I’ll find, Francis, f Sen. Ep. 71. 118. Laert, 1. vii. sect. 88. 102. Cic. de Fin. 1. iii. c. 10, Anton. 1. ii. sect. 3. \ Epict. Ench. c. 13. Anton. 1. x. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. 1. iii. c. 21. § Laert. sect. 92 — 102. Cic. de Fin. 1. iii. c. 10. 34. Sext. Emp. ib. c. 20 — 24. Stob. Eel. Eth. c. 4. p. 166, &c. || De Fin. 1. iii. c. 12. 15, 16. Senec. Ep. 74. ^ Laert. sect. 120. Cic. Parad. 3. Stob. Eel. Eth. p. 174. ** Serin. 1. i. Sat. 4. (б) Nor can we judge, compared by reason’s eye, ' PilPring and sacrilege of equal die. tt Ciceron. Paradoxa. Laert, 1. vii. sect. 117, &c. Stob. 1. c. ++ Serm. 1. i. Sat. iii. apud fin. 200 OJ? ZENO AND THE Book II. Si dives, qui sapiens est, Et sutor bonus, et solus formosus, et est rex. Cur optas quod babes 1 (a) In order to conceive the true notion of the Stoics concerning their wise man, it must be clearly understood, that they did not suppose such a man actually to exist, but that they framed in their imagination an image of perfection, towards which every man should continually aspire. All the extravagant things which are to be met with in their writings on this sub¬ ject may be referred to their general principle of the entire sufficiency of virtue to happiness, and the consequent indifference of all external circum¬ stances. Or they may, perhaps, l3e placed to the account of mere logo¬ machy ; * for nothing was more common with the philosophers of the Porch than to depart from the usual definition of terms, that they might excite admiration by positions, which, when fairly explained, appeared either perfectly obvious, or exceedingly trifling. Seneca himself honestly confesses this : “ You boast that you are capable of great attainments, far beyond what is commonly to be desired, or even credited. In your vaunt¬ ing you assert that a w’ise man cannot be poor ; and yet you do not deny that he is often destitute of attendants, clothing, and habitation. Remove the mask of your swelling words, by restoring to things their proper names, and you are immediately brought down to a level with others.” It is one of the boasts of the Stoics that their wise man is perfectly free, and can do Avhatever he pleases without restraint or compulsion : -f- and yet nothing is more certain than that they understood this freedom to consist merely in the superiority of virtue to all external circumstances ; for, according to the fundamental doctrine of the Porch, the human mind is bound by the indissoluble chain of nature, and subject to the eternal law of fate ; and all human actions are a necessary consequence of that order by which all beings in nature are irresistibly impelled. Notwith¬ standing the lofty things which Seneca sometimes says in praise of human liberty, he acknowledges j; that man is subject to the law of necessity. “ Whatever happens, think that it ought to happen, and cast no reproach upon nature. It is best to endure patiently what you cannot mend, and to concur with the Divine Being, by whom all things are directed, without murmuring. He is a bad soldier who follows his commander reluctantly : let us receive the orders of our leader with cheerfulness, and execute them with alacrity ; and let us never desert the path marked out for us in the course of nature because it is perplexed with difficulties. That man possesses a truly great mind who delivers himself up entirely to God.” Concerning the progress of virtue, and the several species of virtuous actions, the doctrine of the Stoics is as follows : Nature impels every man to pursue whatever appears to him to be good. Self-preservation and defence is the first law of animated nature. All animals necessarily derive pleasure from those things which are suited to them ; but the first object of pursuit is, not pleasure, but conformity to nature. Every one, therefore, who has a right discernment of what is good, will be chiefly concerned to conform to nature in all its actions and (a) Is not the wise a shoemaker profess’d, Handsome and rich, of monarchy possess’d ? Why wish for what you have ? Francis. * Ets TT^vTwv euiKwv Ku\ \pvxpvv ayopdv. Plut. Logom. f Sen. Ep, 41. 51. I Ep. 107. Conf. Arr. 1. iii. Diss. 26. Anton. 1. vii. sect. 31. 1. viii. sect. 41. L x. sect. 32. 1. iv. sect. 32. 1. v. sect. 3. Chap. 11. S. 1. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 201 pursuits. This is the origin of moral obligation. False conceptions of good produce violent emotions and passions, which are contrary to right reason and nature. Of these the principal are animal desires, joy, fear, and sorrow. Passions are the desires of the mind, which it is the office of reason to prevent, or cure. Wisdom subjects the mind to the control of reason, and thus produces a conformity to nature and virtue.* * * § Of virtues, some are contemplative, others practical ; some primary, others subordinate. The contemplative, or scientific virtues, are those which consist in just conceptions and principles; the practical, those which concern the conduct of life. The primary virtues are prudence, temperance, fortitude, and justice. Prudence respects the choice and pur¬ suit of goods ; temperance, the government of the appetites ; fortitude, the endurance of that which is commonly esteemed evil; and justice, the offices of social life.f All virtues being the same in their origin and end, are mutually related and dependent ; so that he who possesses one possesses all. As there is i no medium between a right and a curve line, so there is no mean between i virtue and vice ; virtue and vice admit of no degrees, either of excess or j defect. Virtue may be taught, and bad men may become good men. i Virtue is to be sought for its own sake, not through the fear of punish- i ment, or the hope of reward ; for virtue being a conformity to nature, is in itself happiness, j; Of actions which proceed from desire, some are good, some are bad, and others indifferent. Good actions are either, KaTopQ(!)jj.aTd, actions in themselves right, or, KadfiKovra, those concerning which it may be asserted with probability that they are convenient, and conducive to happiness. Bad actions are those which nature and reason teach us to avoid. In- ! different actions are such as reason neither prescribes nor prohibits.§ I Duties may be divided into three classes, as they respect God, ourselves, i and our neighbour. || The duties of religion are, to think justly concerning God, and to wor- i ship him piously. He thinks justly of God, who believes him to be the Supreme Director of human affairs, and the Author of all that is good i and fitting in human life. He worships God piously who reveres him j above all beings ; who perceives and acknowledges him in all events ; who is in every thing resigned and obedient to his will ; who patiently receives whatever befals him, from a persuasion that whatever God appoints must be right ; and in fine, who cheerfully follows, wherever Divine Providence ' leads him, even though it be to suffering and death. ^ The sum of a man’s duty with respect to himself is, to subdue his pas- ! sions, of joy and sorrow, hope and fear, and even pity. He who is, in ; this respect, perfectly master of himself, is a wise man; and in proportion as we approach towards a state of apathy, we advance towards perfection. Virtuous self-command consists, not in preventing the casual impressions of external objects upon the senses, in which the mind is rather passive than active ; but in not giving a voluntary assent to those passions which external objects excite. A wise man may justly and reasonably withdraw * Laert. 1. vii. sect. 8.5 — 90. Cic. Tusc. Qii. I. iv. c. 6. De Fin. 1. iv. c. 5, 6. 9, 10. 20, 23. Stob. 1. c. p. 175, 176. f Laert. sect. 92, 93. Stob, p. 167. X Laert. sect. 125—127. Stob. 1. c. Pint, de Stoic. Rep. t. v. p. 10. De Fin. 1. iv. § Laert. sect. 108. Cic. de Fin. 1. ii. c. 17. de Offic. 1. i. c, 3. Stob. 1. c. 11 Epict. Ench. c. 37. Arrian, ). ii. Diss. 14. 1. iii. Diss. 2. Siraplic. ad Enchir. j Anton. I. i. sect. 12. viii. 27. ix. 22. ^ Epict. 1. c. Arr. 1. i. Diss. xii. 14. 16. Anton. 1. ii. sect. 11. 1. vi. sect. 43. Seneca de Tranquil. Aninii, &c. passim. 202 OF ZENO AND THE STOIC PHILOSOPHY. Book II. from life, whenever he finds it expedient ; not only because life and death are among those things which are in their nature indifferent, but also be¬ cause life may be less consistent with virtue than death. Since all duty arises from a conformity to nature, it may happen that a man may be in such circumstances, that to remain in life may be more contrary to nature than to depart. A wise man will, at the close of every day, take a re¬ trospect of his words and actions, that he may confess his errors and amend. The first and noblest office of wisdom is, to examine ourselves ^ and regulate our dispositions and actions by the law of virtue. Hence ; will arise self-denial, and a contempt of pleasure. A wise man will never ; suffer himself to be diverted from his duty by any prospect of indulgence, or any fear of loss, pain, or death.* ^ The duty w^e owe towards others, is to love all men, even our enemies. !; A good man will love his neighbour from his heart, will refrain from injuring, and take pleasure in protecting and serving him. He will not think himself born for himself alone, but for the common good of mankind, gt-j and will show himself kind to all according to his ability. He will think himself sufficiently rewarded by the consciousness of well doing, and will never cease to do good, although he has no witness of his good deeds, nor is ever likely to receive any applause or recompense for his beneficence. The wise man never remits the punishment due to a criminal through pity, which is a weakness not to be indulged : nevertheless, in cases where reason ' suggests sufficient grounds for clemency, he will not treat a delinquent with rigour. He will relieve the sick, assist the shipwrecked, afford pro¬ tection to the exile, or supply the hungry with food, but with an undis-' turbed mind, and a cheerful countenance ; disdaining all sorrow arising from sympathy, as well as from personal sufferings. No one is more ready, than the wise man to exercise lenity and benignity, and to attend to the welfare of other individuals, and to the general interest of mankind, j- Concerning the whole moral system of the Stoics, it must be remarked that, although it be highly deserving of praise for the purity, extent, and variety of its doctrines, and although it must be confessed, that in many- select passages of the Stoic writings it appears exceedingly brilliant, it is nevertheless founded in false notions of nature and of man, and is raised to a degree of refinement which is extravagant and impracticable. The piety which it teaches is nothing more than a quiet submission to irresistible fate. The self-command which it enjoins annihilates the best affections of the human heart. The indulgence which it grants to suicide is inconsist-, ent, not only with the genuine principles of piety, but even with that con-j ■ stancy which was the height of Stoic perfection. And even its moral; | doctrine of benevolence is tinctured with the fanciful principle, which lay^ , at the foundation of the whole Stoic system, that every being is a portion| of one great whole, from which it will be unnatural and impious to attempt ; a separation. We must then conclude, that the ethics of Zeno and his followers, how¬ ever splendid, and in many particulars well founded, deviated, as a system, j from the true principles of nature, and had a tendency to produce artificial characters, and to encourage moral aflfectation and hypocrisy. j; * Senec. de Ira, 1. i. c. 8. iii. 37. Arr. 1. iii. Diss. 2. 22. 25. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. i. viu Laert. sect. 130, &c. Cic. de Fin. 1. iii. c. 17. Stob. 1. c. Anton. 1. iii. sect. 1. 37. it vii. 14. Pint. Rep. Stoic. 1. c. Sen. Ep. 16, 17. 55. 58. 60. 68. 70. 77. 80. t Anton. 1. iv. sect 37. vii. 26. 14. ix. 28, xi. 8, 9. 13. Sen. de Clem. 1. ii. c. 6, 7. Conf. Gataker, Proeloq. ad Anton, et Lipsii Manud. et Diss. X Vidend. Jons, 1. ii. c. 1. 18. Burnet, Arch. 1, i. c. 13. Heuinan. Act Ph. v, i. Chap. 11. S. 2. OF THE SUCCESSOUS OF ZENO. 203 SECTION II.— OF THE DISCIPLES AND SUCCESSORS OF ZENO IN THE STOIC SCHOOL. After having discoursed so largely upon the life of Zeno, and the doctrines of his school, a brief account of his disciples and successors will suffice. During his life, Zeno had many disciples, among whom may be par¬ ticularly mentioned Perseus, Aristo the Chian, Herillus, and Sphserus. Perseus,* the son of Demetrius, flourished in the hundred and thir¬ tieth Olympiad.-]- He was sent by Antigonus Gonata to Zeno, for the purpose of copying his writings, and for a long time remained with him, as his companion and friend. On his return to Antigonus, he was entrusted with the charge of the citadel of Corinth ; but he was probably more attentive to philosophy than to civil or military affairs ; for he suffered this important fortress to be taken by Aratus. Aristo ]; of Chios, the son of Miltiades, was an intimate associate of Perseus, and with him attended upon the lectures of Zeno ; but he disco¬ vered a disposition to loquacity, and a propensity to pleasure, which were dis¬ pleasing to his master, whom he left, and went over to the school of Polemon. He soon after attempted, but with little success, to institute a school of his own. He was a violent opponent of the Academic philosophers, and par¬ ticularly of Arcesilaus. The chief points in which he innovated upon the Stoic philosophy were, that there is a certain limit between virtue and vice, in which consists indifference ; that all physical and logical studies are to be rejected ; the former, as above all human comprehension, the latter as not interesting to human nature ; that a wise man will not speculate on opinions ; that the nature of the Deity is unknown ; and that it is doubtful whether he is a percipient being. This last opinion seems rather to have been advanced in opposition to the Stoic idea of Deity, than to imply a general denial of the existence of God. Aristo probably conceived the questions concerning the nature of the universe, and of God, to be above the human understanding, and maintained that the doctrine of Zeno, who asserted God to be a subtle ether, or fire, diffused through the world, was incon¬ sistent with the notion of an intelligent nature. Eratosthenes, aCyrenean, born in the first year of the hundred and twenty-sixth 01ympiad,§ a man highly distinguished by his logical, mathematical, and philosophical learn- p. 741. V. ii. p. 168. Lipsii Manuductio ad Phil. Stoic, et Diss. de Phys. Stoic. Ludg. Hat. 1644. Scioppii Manud. ad Phil. Mor. Stoic. Gataker in Antonin. Heinsii Orat. de Phil. Stoic. Meursii Athen. 1. ii. c. 29. Bochart. Sac. Geog. p. ii. I. i. c. 3. Voss, de Sect. c. six. Morhoff. Polyhist. t. ii. 1. ii. p. i. c. 8. Crophii Diss. de Gymn. Lit. p. 49. Parker de Deo, Disp. vi. Fabricii Diss. de Cavillationibus Stoicorum in Syllog. Diss. Werenfels, de Meteor. Orat. Morini Diss. de Stoicis hirciscundiis. Voss, de Theol. Gent. 1. ii. c. 49. Ot. Vindel. Mel. i. 11. Thomas de Exust. Mund. Stoic. De Stoicis subdolis Christ, imit. Temp. Helvet. t. iii. Buddaei Diss. de Error. Stoic. Ot. Vind. Diss. ii. De Fat. Stoic, ap. Amcen. Lit. t. viii. Wolf, de Manich. ante Manich. sect. 30. Cudworth, c. iv. sect. 25. Zimmerman, Mus. Hist. Brera. v. 1. Budd. Ann. Hist. Ph. p. 147. Epist. ad Schelhorn. Amcen. Lit. t. viii. Burgmann. Diss. de Stoa a Spinoz. Exculp. Windet de Vit. Funct. Statu, sect. 3. Thomas Diss, de Morte. Obs. Hal. t. vii. Diss. de Sect. Elp. Hist. Misc. Berol. t. v. Thomas de Loco Anim. Sap. t. i. p. 70. Roetenbecchii Diss. de Stoic, et Arist, Moral. Werenfels, de Logomach. Erudit. Op. p. 461. Centner, de Meteor Phil. Dantz, 1744. 8 vo. * Laert. 1. vii. sect. 36. Suidas. Athen, 1. iv. p. 162. Aul. Cell. 1. ii. c. 18, Pausan. Corinth, c. 8. p. 130, Arch. c. 8. p. 511. Plut. Vit. Arati, t. vi. p. 296. t B. C. 260. Laert, 1. vii, sect. 160 — 162. § B. C. 276. 204 OF THE SUCCESSORS OF ZENO. Book II. ing was liis pupil. He was appointed by Ptolemy Pliilopater keeper of the Alexandrian library.* Herillus, the Carthaginian, submitted the correction of his morals to Zeno, and, deserting the school of pleasure, became his disciple. His peculiar tenet was, that science is the end of life ; which he probably understood not, as Cicero every where interprets his opinion the mere knowledge of abstract truth, but as Laertius and Suidas explain it, that the conduct of life ought always to be conformable to truth. His followers are mentioned by Cicero as a distinct sect ; but if it existed at all, it was of short duration, and has left nothing worthy of remembrance.-j' Sph^rus of Boristhenes was at first a follower of Zeno, and afterwards of Cleanthes. He taught philosophy at Sparta, and had among his pupils the illustrious Cleomenes. He afterwards removed to Alexandria, where he enjoyed the protection of Ptolemy Philopater.j; After the death of Zeno his school was continued by Cleanthes § of Assus, in Lydia. His first appearance was in the character of a wrestler. In this capacity he visited Athens, where the love of philosophy was diffused through all ranks of people. He soon caught the general spirit ; and though he was possessed of no more than four drachmas, he deter¬ mined to put himself under the tuition of some eminent philosopher. His first master was Crates the Academic. He afterwards became a disciple of Zeno, and a celebrated advocate for his doctrines. The patient industry with which Cleanthes applied himself to labour, that he might procure himself the necessary supports of life without inter¬ rupting his philosophical studies, was highly meritorious. By night he drew water as a common labourer, in the public gardens, that he might have leisure in the day-time to attend the schools of philosophy. The Athenian citizens observing that, though he appeared strong and healthy, he had no visible means of subsistence, summoned him before the court of Areopagus, according to the custom of the city, to give an account of his manner of living. Upon this he produced the gardener for whom he drew water, and a woman for whom he ground meal, as witnesses to prove that he subsisted by the honest labour of his hands. The judges of the court were so much struck with admiration of this singular example of industry and perseverance, that they ordered ten min(B to be paid him out of the public treasury : which, however, Zeno would not suffer him to accept. [[ Antigonus afterwards presented him with three thousand mincB. From the manner in which this philosopher supported himself, he was called (jjpearrXoQ, the well-drawer. Cleanthes Avas for many years so poor, that he was obliged to write the heads of his master’s lectures upon shells and bones for want of money to buy paper, ^ But, notwithstanding all his poverty, he persevered in the study of philosophy, and remained a pupil of Zeno nineteen years. Flis natural faculties were slow ; but resolution and perseverance enabled him to overcome every difficulty; and he at last became so complete a master of the Stoic system, that he was perfectly qualified to succeed Zeno in his school. His fellow-disciples often ridiculed him for his dulness, by calling him an ass ; but he took no other notice of the sarcasm, than by saying in his defence, that if he Avas an ass, he Avas the better able to bear the burden * Laert. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 30. 41. Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 14. Tusc. Qu. 1. v. c. 30. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. Suidas in Eratosthene. Sen. Ep. 89. f Laert. 1. vii. 165 — 167. Suidas inreAos. Tusc. Qu. 1. iv. J Ib. sect. 177. Athen. 1. viii. c. 13. p. 354., § Laert. 1. vii. sect. 168. Suidas. II Laert. Val. Max. 1. viii. c. 7. Sen. Ep. 44. *|] Laert. sect. 170. OF THE SUCCESSORS OF ZENO. 205 Chap. 11. S. 2. i of Zeno’s doctrine. Being reproved for his timidity, he replied, “ It is to i this quality that I am indebted for my innocence.” Though he was not of the school of Arcesilaus, when he heard him condemned for undermining I by his doctrine the foundations of virtue, he candidly apologised for him, 1 bv remarking, that though he might seem an enemy to Virtue in his dis¬ courses, he showed himself her friend in his conduct. Arcesilaus being in¬ formed of the handsome apology which Cleanthes had made for him, said to him, “ You know how much I dislike flattery ; why will you flatter me? ” “ Is it then flattery,” replied Cleanthes, “ to say of you, that you speak one thing and do another ? ” * Cleanthes frequently advised his pupils to con- 1 ceive of pleasure, as a deity sitting on her throne, attended by the Virtues, ' who are ready on every occasion to whisper in her ear, “ Do nothing which will occasion pain or grief to yourself or others.”'}' A friend ob- I serving him silent in company, said, “ One would think, Cleanthes, from i your silence, that you took no pleasure in conversing with your friends :” I Cleanthes replied, “ It is because I know the value of this pleasure that I ] am silent, for I wish my friends to enjoy it as well as myself.” The rea¬ son which he assigned for the superiority of former philosophers above the present w'as, that former philosophers studied things, whereas now they study only words. When he was old, he still retained the entire use of his ! faculties, and often said, that he should always think life worth preserving I as long as he should be able to write and study. He wrote much, but none I of his writings remain, except the hymn already mentioned. Long after ! his death the Roman senate paid respect to his memory, by ordering a statue to be erected in honour of him at Assus.§ After Zeno, no philosopher more truly exhibited the character, or more illustriously displayed the doctrine, of the Stoic sect than Chrysippus.|1 i He was a native of Solis, a town of Cilicia, afterwards called Pompeiopolis. His father, Apollonius, was of Tarsus. Having spent his paternal for¬ tune (as some writers say, in the public service), he devoted himself to , philosophy, and fixing his residence at Athens, became a disciple of Cle¬ anthes ; from whom, however, even during his life, he in many particulars ; dissented. The natural powers of his mind soon enabled him to distin- ; guish himself above his brethren of the Porch. The ancients agree in 1 ascribing to Chrysippus an uncommon share of acuteness and penetration.^ ^ At the same time, he was indefatigably industrious. It is said, that he > seldom sutfered a day to pass without writing five hundred lines.** In dis- j putation, in which he spent the greater part of his life, he discovered a j degree of promptitude and confidence which approached towards audacity. He often said to his preceptor, “ Give me doctrines, and I will find argu- ! ments to support them.” It was a singular proof of his haughty spirit, ! that when a certain person asked him, what preceptor he would advise , him to choose for his son, he said, “ Me; for if I thought any philosopher i excelled me, I would myself become his pupil.” With so much contempt ■ did he look down upon the distinctions of rank, that he would never, as ! other philosophers did, pay his court to princes or great men, by dedi- ! eating to them any of his writings. The vehemence and arrogance with which he supported his tenets created him many adversaries, particularly in the Academic and Epicurean sects. Even his friends of the Stoic school complained, that in the warmth of dispute, whilst he was attempting • * Laert. f Cic. de Fin. 1. ii. % Stob. Serin. 12C. § Strabo, 1. xiii. p. CIO. 11 Laert. 1. vii. 179, &c. Suidas. Strabo, 1. xii. p. 462. Solin. c. 42. Orig. Cont. Cels. 1. iv. p. 202. ^ Cic. de Nat. D. 1. iii. c. 10. ** Laert. I I ‘206 OP THE SUCCESSORS OF ZENO. Book II. to load his adversary with the reproach of obscurity and absurdity, his own ingenuity often failed him, and he adopted such unusual and illogical modes of reasoning as gave his opponents great advantage against him.* It was also a common practice with Chrysippus, at different times, to take the opposite sides of the same question, and thus furnish his antagonists with weapons which might easily be turned, as occasions offered, against himself. Carneades, who was one of his most able and skilful adversaries, frequently availed himself of this circumstance, and refuted Chrysippus by convicting him of inconsistency. Plutarch, in his piece, “ On Stoic Con¬ tradictions,” has collected many examples of inconsistent opinions, most of which are ascribed to Chrysippus. His skill in the arts of sophistry, and particularly his frequent use of the figure sorites, is noticed by the satirist Persius, who, on this account, alluding to the sorites, calls it the heap of Chrysippus : Inventus, Chrysippe, tui finitor acervi. (a) Although it cannot be questioned that this philosopher possessed great ingenuity and extensive learning, so that, after Zeno, he might justly be considered as the main pillar of the Stoic Porch, it must nevertheless be acknowledged that, as far as we are able at present to form a judgment of them, his discourses abounded more in curious subtleties, and nice distinc¬ tions, than in solid arguments. It was the prejudice of party, or the pride of Stoicism, rather than sound judgment and just criticism, which dictated the encomium that was passed upon him, that, if the gods themselves were to hold disputations, they would adopt the manner of Chrysippus. '|- Some writers have charged this philosopher with indecent freedom of language. But it is not improbable that what he advanced of this kind was merely in the way of paradoxical assertion, thrown out in the course of disputation, for the sake of displaying his ingenuity. It has been said too that Chrysippus taught doctrines entirely subversive of religion. Plu¬ tarch asserts, J concerning Chrysippus and Cleanthes, that when they had I filled heaven, earth, the air, and the sea, with divinities, they allowed none of them to be exempt from death, except Jupiter alone, into whom they thought that all the other deities would at last be resolved. From this passage it has been inferred that it was a doctrine of the Stoics that the Divine nature is mutable and corruptible. But it appears from the Stoic system of nature, as it has been already explained, that this conclusion j from the passage in question is without foundation. According to this system, the inferior deities, which are portions of that divine fire by which all nature is animated, will, in the general conflagration of the universe, return to the source from which they were originally derived, till a general renovation shall take place. That Chrysippus did not recede from the idea of the Stoic school concerning nature, the following passage from Cicero § fully proves: “Chrysippus, who is esteemed the most ingenious interpreter of Stoic dreams, has assembled a numerous band of unknown gods ; indeed so perfectly unknown, that the human mind, though it be capable of forming conceptions of every kind, is unable to frame a con¬ jecture concerning their nature. He says, that the divine energy is placed in reason, and in the soul or mind of the universe. The world itself hef * Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 27. Pint. Repugn. Stoic, t. iii. p. 7. ' (a) Thou who couldst once so happily assign Bounds to Aea», now limit this of mine. Brewster. i I Laert. sect. 180. J De comm, notionibus, t. iii. p. 459. § De Nat. D. I. i, c. 15.' OF THE SUCCESSORS OF ZENO. 207 Chap. 11. S. 2. maintains to be God, or a universal effusion of his spirit, and asserts, that the superior part of the spirit, which consists in mind and reason, is the common nature of things, containing the whole and every part. Some¬ times he speaks of God as the power of fate, and the necessary chain of events ; sometimes he calls him fire, or the ether which I mentioned above ; and sometimes he deifies the fluid parts* of nature, as water and air ; and again, the earth, the sun, the moon, and stars, and the universe, in which these are comprehended, and even those men who have obtained immor¬ tality.” There is nothing in this account which is not perfectly consonant to the physics and theology of the Stoic system, in the sense in which they have been already explained. It seems therefore reasonable to exculpate Chrysippus from any other kind of impiety than that which may be charged upon the sect, of which he was one of the chief supporters. Chrysippus wrote about seven hundred books, three hundred of which were upon logical subjects ; but in all his works he made large and numer¬ ous quotations from the writings of others. Of these nothing remain, except a few extracts, which are preserved in the works of Cicero, Plutarch, Seneca, and Aulus Gellius. He died in the hundred and forty-third Olympiad,"!- eighty-three years of age. A statue was erected to his I memory by Ptolemy. ;|; The immediate successor of Chrysippus, in the Stoic school, was Zeno OF Tarsus, § or, as some say, of Sidon. He does not appear to have receded in any respect from the Stoic tenets, except that he withheld his assent to the doctrine of the final conflagration. Diogenes of Seleucia, called also the Babylonian, || from the vicinity of Babylon to his native place, next assumed the chair, and applied himself so diligently to the study and propagation of the Stoic doctrine, that Cicero^ calls him a great and respectable Stoic. This was unquestionably the reason for which he was sent with Carneades and Critolaus on the celebrated embassy from Athens to Rome, of which we have already taken notice in 1 our account of the life of Carneades. Seneca relates,** that as he was one day discoursing upon anger, a foolish youth, in hope of raising a laugh against the philosopher by making him angry, spit in his face ; upon which Diogenes meekly and prudently said, “ I am not angry, but I am in doubt I whether I ought not to be so.” He lived to the age of eighty-eight years.-!"!- Antipater of Tarsus, the disciple and successor of Diogenes the Baby- 1 Ionian, is applauded, both by Cicero and Seneca, as an able supporter of the i Stoic sect. His chief opponent was Carneades. Pan^tius, a Rhodian, was a polite and respectable philosopher. He 1 enjoyed an intimate acquaintance with several eminent Romans, particularly i Scipio andLmlius; and Cicero says§§ that his abilities and accomplishments ! rendered him highly worthy of their friendship. He disliked the Stoic , doctrine of apathy ;|||| was a great admirer of Plato, and freely borrowed opinions and sentiments from philosophers of every sect. His moral doc¬ trines were doubtless excellent, since they are so highly extolled by Cicero, in his admirable treatise De Officiis. He passed a considerable part of his life at Rome, where he had many illustrious disciples ; but towards the latter end of his days he removed to Athens, where he died. He treated * Vid. loc. Davisii edit. p. 37. n. 8. f B. C. 208. X Laert. 1. vii. sect. 189. 202. Val. Max. 1. viii. c. 10. Cic. Fin. I. i. c. 11. § Laert. 1. vii. sect, 38. Suidas. Euseb. Prsep. 1. xv. c. 18. || Laert. 1. vi. sect. 81. ^ Tusc. Qu. 1. iii. c. 12. ** De Ira. ff Lucian. Longaev. t. ii. p. 829. Cic de Offic. 1. iii. c. 12. Sen. Ep. 92. Plut. de Garrul. t. ii. p. 319. §§ De Off. 1. iv. c. 9. |1|| Aul. Gell. 1. xii. c. 5. 208 OF PYTHAGOUAS Book II. ■J astrological predictions, and divinations of every kind, with contempt, and 'j seems to have rejected the doctrine of the immortality of the soul.* * * § | Posidonius, j' a native of Apamea in Syria, the last of that series of r Stoics which belongs to the history of the Greek philosophy, taught at Khodes with such reputation, that Pompey came thither, on his return from Syria, to attend his lectures. When he arrived at his house, he forbade his lictor to knock, as was usual, at the door. The hero, who had subdued 'j the eastern and western world, paid homage to philosophy, by lowering the I fasces at the gate of Posidonius. When he was informed that he was at '■ that time sick of the gout, he visited him in his confinement, and expressed j great regret that he could not attend upon his school. Upon this, Posido- : nius, forgetting his pain, gratified his guest, by delivering a discourse in | his presence, the subject of which was to prove that nothing is good which j is not honourable, j; He studied natural as well as moral science ; and in J order to represent the ce\e&Wd\ phe7iomena, he constructed a kind plane- J tarium, § by means of which he exhibited the apparent motions of the « sun, moon, and planets round the earth. Cicero says|| that he himself i attended upon this philosopher; and a later writer^ asserts that he was • brought to Rome by Marcellus, in the seven hundred and second year : from the building of the city.** Thus much concerning the Stoic sect, the last branch of the Ionic ^ School. j-f i ' CHAPTER XH. i OF THE ITALIC OR PYTHAGORIC SECT. SECT. I.— OF THE LIFE AND PHILOSOPHY OF PYTHAGORAS. In tracing the progress of the Ionic school, from Thales its founder, through all its branches, the Ionic, Socratic, Cyrenaic, Megaric, Eliac, Eretriac, Academic, Peripatetic, Cynic, and Stoic Sects, we have com¬ pleted one principal part of the history of the Grecian philosophy. Another main branch of this philosophy, namely, that which sprung from Pythagoras, and afterwards sprouted out into the Eleatic, Heracli- TEAN, Epicurean, and Sceptic Sects, yet remains to be considered. This school, having been first instituted in that part of Italy which, from the * Cic. de Off. 1. ii. c, 14. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. 33. De Fin. 1. i. c. 2. 1. iv. c. ult. Tusc. Qu. , 1. i. c. 32. De Div. 1. i. c. 3. 7. 1. ii. c. 42. ■< ] t Laert 1. vii. sect. 38. Strabo, 1. vii. p. 310. 1. xiv. p. 655. i X Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. ii. c. 25. Plin. 1. vi. Ep. 30. § Cic. de Nat. Deor. 1. ii. c. 34. || De Nat. Deor. i. c. 3. ^ Suidas in Posid. ** B. C. 52. ' If Vidend. Cudvvortli, c.iv. sect. 25. Bayle. Sciopp. Elim. Phil. Mor. p. 165. Zwinger.-* i Theatr. Vit. Hum. v. 19. sect. 3560. Thomas, de Plagio Lit. sect. 388. Euseb. Praep. 1 Ev. 1. vi. c. 6. Gassend. Vit. Epic. 1. iii. c. 2. Schmid, de Chrysip. Log. Jons. 1. i. c. 13. i 1. ii. c. 8. Meurs. de Ceramic. Voss, de Nat. Log. c. viii. sect. 18. Hist. Gr. 1. iii. p. 324. ! Weidler, Hist. Astr. c. vi. sect. 18. ; Chap. 12. S. 1. AND HIS PHILOSOPHY. 209 Grecian colonies which had been settled there, was called Magna Grcccia, has taken the appellation of the Italic School.* Before we enter upon the history of the celebrated founder of the Italic School some notice must be taken of Pherecydes, one of the wise men of Greece, who, though himself instituted no sect, is distinguished as the first preceptor of Pythagoras. Pherecydes,"|- a native of the island of Scyrus, one of the Cyclades near Delos, flourished about the forty-fifth Olympiad. J It has been maintained, with great erudition, that Pherecydes derived his principles of philosophy and theogony from the sacred books of the Phoenicians ; but little dependence is to be placed in a question of this kind upon the au¬ thorities by which this opinion is supported ; and it will appear, upon inquiry, that the tenets of this philosopher were not less similar to those of the most ancient Grecian and Barbaric philosophers than to the doc¬ trine of the Phoenicians. The opinion of Josephus § that Pherecydes studied philosophy in Egypt seems more probable : for Egypt was at that time universally resorted to as the seat of learning ; the symbolical method of teaching, which was made use of by Pherecydes, was perfectly after the Egyptian manner; and the general aspect of his doctrine bears a strong resemblance to the dogmas of the Egyptian school. The particulars which remain of the life of Pherecydes are few and imperfect. Marvellous circumstances have been related of him, which only deserve to be mentioned in order to show that what has been deemed supernatural by ignorant spectators may be easily conceived to have liap- 1 pened from natural causes, A ship in full sail was at a distance approach¬ ing its harbour; Pherecydes predicted that it would never come into the haven, and it happened accordingly, for a storm arose which sunk the vessel. After drinking water from a well, he predicted an earthquake, which happened three days afterwards. |1 It is easy to suppose that these predictions might have been the result of a careful observation of those phenomena which commonly precede storms, or earthquakes, in a climate where they frequently happen. This is the more probable, as it is well known to have been the usual practice with the ancients, and particularly with Pythagoras, the pupil of Pherecydes, to impose upon the ignorant mul¬ titude, by pretending to powers which they did not possess, and particularly applying their knowledge of nature to the purposes of imposture. Phere¬ cydes is said to have been the first among the Grecians who wrote concern¬ ing the nature of the gods ; but this can only mean, that he was the first who ventured to write upon these subjects in prose; for before his time Or- ; pheus, Musasus, and others, had Written theogonies in verse. Some have ascribed to him the invention of the sun-dial ; but the invention was of more ancient date ; for this instrument is mentioned in the Jewish history of . Hezekiah king of Judea.^ Concerning the manner in which Pherecydes died, nothing certain is known ; for, as to the story ** of his having been gradually consumed for his impiety by the loathsome disease called mor¬ bus pedicularis, it must doubtless be set down in the long list of idle tales by which the ignorant and superstitious have always endeavoured to bring philosophy into contempt. His disciple Pythagoras is said to have erected a tomb to his memory. He lived to the age of eighty-five years. It is difficult to give, in any degree, an accurate account of the doctrines * Laert. 1. i. sect. 13. Arist.de Coelo, c. 1. f Laert. 1. i. Suidas. X B. C. 600. § Contr. Apion, 1. i. |1 Laert. ^ 2 Kings, c. xx, v. II. ** iElian, I. iv. c, 28. p 210 OF PYTHAGORAS Book II. of Pherecydes, both because he delivered them after the manner of the times, under the concealment of symbols, and because very few memoirs of this philosopher remain. It is most probable that Pherecydes taught those opinions concerning the gods, and the origin of the world, which the ancient Grecian theogonists borrowed from Egypt. On the ground of this opinion, it may perhaps be possible to explain the fragment of liis book concerning the origin of things, which is preserved by Laertius.* The words are, Stve jjev kuI xpoyog eig del koI iiv, Xdoylrj te ovofia lyivero yij, avr?) Zevg yepag If by xdijy we understand what the ancient philosophers understood by mot, the chaos which was admitted into all the ancient theogonies, and by yepag h^o~i the communication or grant of form to the chaotic mass, the meaning of the passage will be this: “ Jupiter, and Duration, and Chaos, are eternal : from the time when Jupiter communicated form to chaos it was called the earth a doctrine which agrees with that which was com¬ monly received among the oriental and Egyptian philosophers. Perfectly consonant to this doctrine is the tenet which Aristotle "f- ascribes to Phere¬ cydes, TO yevyrjaav dptaroy elyai, that the first cause of all things is most excellent. Another tenet which is, by the universal consent of the ancients, as¬ cribed to Pherecydes, is that of the Immortality of the Soul, for w'hich he was perhaps indebted to the Egyptians. Cicero says;]; that he was the first philosopher in whose writings this doctrine appeared. He is also said, and not improbably, § to have taught the doctrine of the transmigration •of the soul, for this was a tenet commonly received among the Egyptians, and afterwards taught by Pythagoras. Whether it w'as that Pherecydes instituted no sect, or that his writings fell into disuse through their ob¬ scurity, or that Pythagoras designedly suppressed them, that he might ' appear the original author of the doctrines which he had learned from his master, or whatever else might be the cause, we are left without further information concerning his philosophy. We therefore proeeed to the history of the life and opinions of his celebrated pupil, the founder of the Italic School. The history of Pythagoras, beyond that of any other ancient philo¬ sopher, abounds with difficulties and contradictions, and is enveloped in fable and mystery. Pythagoras himself, and his followers through a long succession, were so far from committing their doctrines to writing, for the information of posterity, that they made use of every expedient to conceal them from their contemporaries. Hence the first records of the life and doctrines of this philosopher, which were only such as could be casually gathered up from tradition, were not less defective in probable and well i authenticated facts than they were abundant in absurd fictions. It was not till many ages after the time in which Pythagoras flourished that Porphyry and Jamblicus undertook to digest these scattered materials into a regular narrative. And these writers themselves were too credulous, too careless, and too much biassed by prejudice, to be capable of giving a judicious and impartial representation of what was at that time known concerning Pytha- i goras. They were of the school of Ammonius and Plotinus ; in which, as we shall afterwards find, it was the common practice to misrepresent and falsify every thing, and to obtrude upon the world marvellous tales, instead of real facts, for the sake of supporting the credit of their sect • Laert. 1. i. sect. 119. f Metaph. 1. xii. c. 4. X Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 16. f Suidas in Plior. Chap. 12. S. 1. AND HIS PHILOSOPHY. 211 and religion in opposition to Christianity. In order to be convinced that Jamblicus was nothing better than an impudent trifler, the reader need only peruse the introduction to his life of Pythagoras. The labours of sub¬ sequent writers, though sufficiently numerous, cast little new light upon this part of the history of philosophy. Notwithstanding all that has beep done, it resembles a wood, which after many trees are cut down, and many thickets cleared away, still remains dark, rugged, and pathless. We shall therefore hope for indulgence if, in this part of our work, the reader should frequently find it necessary to suspend, and sometimes even to withhold, his assent. The ancients are by no means agreed concerning the birth-place of Pythagoras ;* but the more common opinion is, that he was a native of the island of Samos. Of his extraction nothing farther is known than that his father’s name was Mnesarchus, probably a merchant of Tyre, or some other maritime city, who, trading to Samos, w'as admitted to the rights of citizenship, and settled his family in that island. As to the tale of Jamblicus,*!' which makes him a de.'icendant of Jupiter, and relates a prediction of his birth and character from the Delphian priest, barely to mention, is to refute it. The time of the birth of Pythagoras is covered with inextricable ob¬ scurity. Three English critics of great eminence have employed their profound erudition in endeavouring to settle this point. Bentley, in his dispute with Boyle concerning the age of Phalaris, investigates with his usual industry the time of the birth of Pythagoras, and (chiefly on the testimony of Eratosthenes, who relates, that whilst he was young he w’as a victor at the Olympic games, in the forty-eighth Olympiad §) determines the date to be the fourth year of the forty-third Olympiad. || Lloyd, in his dissertation concerning the chronology of Pythagoras^ endeavours to prove tliat the Olympic victor was not the same person with the philoso¬ pher, and insists upon several particulars, which make it probable that he W'as born about the third year of the forty-eighth Olympiad.** Dodwell discusses the same subject at large, in two dissertations on the age of Pha- lereus and Pythagoras,'!"!' places the birth of Pythagoras in the fourth year of the fifty-second Olympiad.^ j: His opinion chiefly rests on the authority of Porphyry and Jamblicus. Le Clerc has given a summary of their arguments.§§ We must content ourselves with observing, that, after carefully examining what has been written upon this question, we find the authorities so feeble and inconsistent, that we dare not give a decisive judgment; for where we cannot arrive at certain proof, we think it better honestly to confess our ignorance, than to impose an unsupported opinion upon our readers. We are, however, inclined to think that the prepon- derancy of argument is in favour of LViyd, whose opinion is, that Pytha¬ goras was born about the third year o ‘the forty-eighth Olympiad, || |1 and died about the third year of the sixty-eighth Olympiad.^f!! It seems pretty certain that he was not born earlier than the fourth year of the forty-third Olympiad,*** nor later than the fourth year of the fifty-second.f -f f If we dismiss the tales of Jamblicus concerning the early wisdom, gravity, and temperance of Pythagoras, which are said to have been such * Laert. 1. viii. sect. 1. Conf. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 300. Plut. Qu. Conv. 1. viii. c. 7. t. iii. p. 280. f Vit. Pyth. c. 2. Porph. n. 1. J Dissertation on the Epistles of Phalaris. § B. C. 588. |1 B. C. 608. Ed. Lond.1699. •• B. C. 586. i f London, 1704. ++ B. C. 569. §§ Bibliotheque Choisde, t. x. p. 81, &c. |||| B. C. 586. 1111 B. C. 506. *** B. C. 605. fff B. C. 569. 212 OF PYTHAGORAS Book II. as to have filled all men with admiration, to have commanded respect and reverence from grey hairs, and even to have led many to assert that he was the Son of God,* ** we meet with no other credible particulars of his childhood and early education, but that he was first instructed in his own country by Creophilus, and afterwards by Pherecydes in the island of Scyrus.-j" When he had paid the last honours to his preceptor, for whom he appears to have entertained a high respect, he returned to Samos, ^ and again studied under the direction of his first master. Much is said by Jamblicus, and other later biographers, of Pytha- ^ goras’s early journey into Ionia, and his visits to Thales and Anaximander ; but we find no ancient record of this journey, nor any traces of its effects '! on his doctrine, which differs essentially from that of the Ionic School. It . is probable that his first journey from the Grecian islands was to Egypt, j the country at that time celebrated, above all others, for that kind of wis- dom which best suited the genius and temper of Pythagoras. On his way to Egypt, Jamblicus asserts J that he visited Phoenicia, and * conversed with the descendants of Moschus, and other priests of that country, and was initiated into their peculiar mysteries. And it may seem | not entirely improbable that he might wish to be farther acquainted with the Phoenician philosophy, of which he had doubtless heard a general re- J port from his father, and other merchants who traded to this coast. But it is certainly a fiction of the Alexandrian school that Pythagoras received p his doctrine of numbers from the Phoenicians : for we have already seen that their knowledge of numbers extended no farther than to the practical wj: science of arithmetic. Whatever be thought of this journey to the East|i (which, by the way, Le Clerc discredits §), we must dismiss, as wholly in-aj, credible, the stories of his visiting the temple on Mount Carmel, and maining there several days without food, passing among the inhabitants ft for a good demon, and obtaining from them religious honours, and of hisB proceeding into the country of Judea, and there going through several® ceremonies of the Mosaic law. ^ In Egypt II Pythagoras was introduced, by the recommendation of Poly-ff' crates, tyrant of Samos, to Amasis, king of Egypt, a great patron ofM learned men, particularly those of Greece, that he might the more easily^ obtain access to the colleges of the priests. The king himself could scarcely,'! j with all his authority, prevail upon the priests to admit a stranger to the^r■ knowledge of their sacred mysteries.^ The college of Pleliopolis, to whom ,.,.y the king’s instructions were sent, referred Pythagoras to the college of Memphis, as of greater antiquity ; from Memphis he was dismissed, under t the same preten'ce, to Thebes. The Theban priests, not daring to reject ’U the royal mandate, yet loth to comply with it, prescribed Pythagoras manyf severe and troublesome preliminary ceremonies, among which was that of.'il circumcision,^* hoping thereby to discourage him from prosecuting his I design. Pythagoras, however, executed all their injunctions with such?;p wonderful patience and perseverance, that he obtained their entire confi-- dence, and was instructed in their most recondite doctrines. He passed \ twenty-two years in Egypt, j-j- During this time he made himself perfectly |l master of the three kinds of writing which were in use in Egypt, — the ■ ! epistolary, the hieroglyphical, and the symbolical ; and, having obtained < j access to the most learned men in every celebrated college of priests, he j * Jamb. Vit. P. n. 6. f Laert. + L. ii. n. 13. § L. c. p. 98. i II Laert. 1. viii. sect. 3. Porphyr. n. 5. ^ Ilerodot. 1. ii. c. 172. Diodor. Sic. I. i. c. 2. ** Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 302. ft Jamb. c. ‘1. n. 18. " Chap. 12. S. 1. AND HIS PHILOSOPHY. 213 became intimately conversant with their ancient records,* and gained an accurate acquaintance with their doctrine concerning the origin of things, with their astronomy and geometry, and, in short, with Egyptian learning I in its whole extent. Many writers, who flourished after the commencement of the Christian era, both Pagan and Christian, have related that Pythagoras, immediately after he left Egypt, visited the Persian and Chaldean Magi, and travelled ; so far into the East as to converse with the Indian Gymnosophists. The occasion of this journey is thus related by Jamblicus i-j- — “ After spend¬ ing twenty-two yeai’s in Egypt, he was conveyed by the victorious army of ! Cambyses, among a numerous train of captives, to Babylon, where he made himself perfectly acquainted with the learning and philosophy of the , East; and after the expiration of twelve years, when he was in the sixtieth year of his age, he returned to Samos.” Cicero, j: Eusebius, § Lactantius,|| and Valerius Maximus,^ though they say nothing of the captivity, agree \' that he visited the Persian Magi. Some have maintained that in thisjour- ' ney he attended upon the instructions of the celebrated Persian sage, t: Zoroaster:** whilst others, who have placed the life of Zoroaster in an earlier period than that of Pythagoras, have asserted that he conversed j' with certain Jewish prophets, who were at that time in captivity at Baby¬ lon, and by this means became intimately conversant with the Jewish laws I and customs. j-j- After all, however, we must confess that we see much I reason to suspect the truth of the whole narrative of Pythagoras’s journey I into the East, for the relation is incumbered with inextricable chronological ' difficulties. It is unanimously agreed by chronologists that Cambyses in¬ vaded Egypt in the fifth year of his reign, or the third year of the sixty- :i third Olympiad. According to Jamblicus, ;|;j; Pythagoras, after staying ' twelve years in Babylon, and visiting several other countries, went into I Italy in the sixty-second Olympiad. Diodorus§§ and Clemens Alexan- driuus|| II affix nearly the same date to this journey ; and others place it fourteen years earlier. Now it is evident, that if Pythagoras left the East before the sixty-second Olympiad, after remaining twelve years, he could : not have been carried tliither by Cambyses in the sixty-third Olympiad. ! The whole narration of Pythagoras’s journey into the East is also eontra- ^ dieted by the express authority of Antiphon (quoted by Porphyry wdio says, that Pythagoras, after his residence in Egypt, returned into Ionia, i and opened a school in his own country ; and that at the age of forty I years, finding himself harassed by the tyranny of Polycrates, he withdrew into Italy ; an account which evidently leaves no interval for the supposed eastern expedition. The whole proof of the reality of this expedition 1 rests either upon the evidence of certain Alexandrian Platonists, who were desirous of exalting as much as possible the reputation of those ancient ' philosophers, to whom they looked back as the first oracles of wisdom, or upon that of certain Jewish and Christian writers,*** who were willing to i credit every tale which might seem to render it probable that the Pytha- * Valer. Max. 1. viii. c. 7. t Vit. Pyth. c. iv. n. 19. X De Fin. \. v. c. 9. § Praep. Ev. 1. viii. c. • J Plut. de vivend. sec. Epic. t. ii. p. 95. Cic. de Div. 1. ii. c. 42. Aul. Cell. 1. xvii.W. ' c. 21. Laert. 1. viii. sect. 86. Suidas. Athen. I. vii. p. 276. 1. vi. p. 288. 395. Strabo,^ j 1. ii. p. 100. 1. xvii. Euseb. Chron. 01. 89. 3. 97. 1. TElian, I. vii. c. 17. Sext. Emp.^^ adv. Math. 1. i. sect. 301. Vidend. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 466. 486. 501. 508. 645, 646. Obs. Hal. Lat. t. ii, Obs. 19. p. 433. t. iv. Obs. 18, 19. Bayle. Amoenit. Lit. t. vii. p. 247. Le Clerc,^J Hist. Med. p. i. 1. ii. c. 5. Otium Vindel. Mel. iii. p. 265. Scip. Aquilianus de Plac.'iE Phil, ante Arist. c. 20. 22. Cudworth, c. iv. sect. 21, &c. cum Not. Mosh. De Au-^ j1 tichthon. Pythag. Obs. Hal. t. iv. Ob. 19. sect. 25. Stoll. Hist. Ph. Mor. Gent.™'^ sect. 136. 138. Burnet, Arch. 1. i. c. 11. Parker de Deo, Disp. iv. sect. 3. lleimmann.' Hist. Ath. c. 20. sect. 3. Jons. 1. i. c. 6. 11. Gale, prsef. ad Tim. Opusc. Mylh.'^j^' Schmidii Diss. de Archyta, Jen®, 1683. Voss, de Scient. Math. c. 48. sect. 1. c. 33.,) sect. 13. Lipsii Manud. ad Phil. Stoic. 1. iii. Diss. vii. Thomas, de loc. Anim. et, Scapha Lun®, c. 5. sect. 11. in Hist. Sap. et Stult. t. i. p. 72. Carist. Hist. Mirab. c. 95. Bentleii Ep. Phal. p. 87. Mamertus de Statu Anim®, 1. ii. c. 2, 3. '.g § Strabo, 1. vi. p. 252. , i| Laert. 1. viii. sect. 18. 1. i. sect. 16. Clem. Al. Strom. 1. i. p. 301. Plut. Apoth. t. i.'; p. 327. Ps. Orig. Phil. c. xiv. p. 94. ‘jj B. C. 556. Chap. 13. OF THE ELEATIC SECT. 241 ever, a greater freedom of thought tlian was usual among the disciples of Pythagoras, he ventured to introduce new opinions of his own, and in many particulars to oppose the doctrines of Epimenides, Thales, and Py¬ thagoras. This gave occasion to Tiraon, who was a severe satirist, to introduce him in ridicule as one of the characters in his dialogues. Xeno¬ phanes possessed the Pythagorean chair of philosophy about seventy years, and lived to the extreme age of an hundred years, that is, accord¬ ing to Eusebius, till the eighty-first Olympiad.* Of the writings of the Eleatic school nothing remains except a few frag¬ ments collected by Henry Stephens. We chiefly rely for our information concerning this sect upon the authority of Plato and Aristotle ; the former of whom, while he professed to explain the doctrines of Parmenides, in the dialogues which bear his name, is acknowledged to have adulterated them with opinions of his own ; and the latter, in a particular treatise concerning Xenophanes, Zeno, and Gorgias, has not scrupled to misre¬ present their tenets, that he might the more easily refute them. These and other circumstances render it extremely difficult to relate, with accu¬ racy, the tenets of the Eleatic sect. As far as respects Xenophanes, after a careful comparison of the accounts which are given by Aristotle and others, the following is the best Summary we are able to collect of his doctrine. In Metaphysics, Xenophanes taught, -j- that if ever there had been a time when nothing existed, nothing could ever have existed. That what¬ ever is, always has been from eternity, without deriving its existence from any prior principle ; that nature is one and without limit ; that what is one is similar in all its parts, else it would be many ; that the one infinite, eternal, and homogeneous universe is immutable, and incapable of change ; that God is one incorporeal eternal being, and, like the universe, spherical in form ; that he is of the same nature with the universe, comprehending all things within himself ; is intelligent, and pervades all things ; but bears no resemblance to human nature either in body or mind.;]: In Physics, he taught, § that there are innumerable worlds ; that there is in nature no real production, decay, or change ; that there are four ele¬ ments, and that the earth is the basis of all things ; that the stars arise from vapours, which are extinguished by day and ignited by night ; that the sun consists of fiery particles collected by humid exhalations, and daily renewed ; that the course of the sun is rectilinear, and only appears cur¬ vilinear from its great distance ; that there are as many suns as there are different climates of the earth ; that the moon is an inhabited world ; that the earth, as appears from marine shells, which are found at the tops of mountains, and in caverns, far from the sea, was once a general mass of waters ; and that it will at length return into the same state, and pass through an endless series of similar revolutions. The doctrine of Xenophanes concerning nature is so imperfectly * Laert. Plut. I. c. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. Hyp. 1. i. c. 33. sect. 224. Fabr. Bib. Gr. V. i. p. 557. B. C. 456. t Arist. Phys. Acroas. 1. i. c. 2. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 37. Arist. Met. 1. i. c. 5. Ps. Orig. Pb. c. xi. p. 95. Laert. 1. ix. sect. 19. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. 1. i. c. 33. Cic. in Lucull. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 37. X Clem. Alex. Str. 1. v. p. 601. 1. vii. p. 701. § Arist. Orig. Laert. 1. c. Stob. Eel. Phys. p. 52. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 49. Plut. de aud. Poet. t. ii. p. 24, 25. PI. Ph. 1. ii. c. 20. Euseb. Pr. 1. i. c. 8. 1. xiv. c. 17. Stob. Eel. Ph. 1. i. p. 55, 56. Cic. de Div. 1. i. c. 3. Plin. 1. ii. c. 1 03. R 242 ' OF THE ELEATIC SECT. Book II. preserved, and obscurely expressed, that it is no wonder that it has been differently represented by different writers. Some have confounded it with the modern impiety of Spinoza, who supposed all the appearances in nature to be only modifications of one material substance. Others have endeavoured to accommodate it to the ancient system of emanation ; and others, to the Pythagoric and Stoic notions of the soul of the world. But none of these explanations accord with the terms in which the tenets of Xenophanes are expressed. Perhaps the truth is, that he held the uni¬ verse to be one in nature and substance, but distinguished in his concep¬ tion between the matter of which all things consist, and that latent divine force, which, though not a distinct substance, but an attribute, is neces¬ sarily inherent in the universe, and is the cause of all its perfection. This view of his doctrine seems to give consistency to the language ascribed to him, and is particularly suitable to his doctrine, preserved by Sextus Empiricus, that God is of the same nature with the universe ; tov Geof (jvfifvfj rc~iQ Tract. What Xenophanes maintained concerning the immobility and immuta¬ bility of nature is to be understood of the universe considered as one whole, and not of its several parts, which his physical tenets supposed to be liable to change. If he asserted that there is no motion in nature, he probably understood the term motion metaphysically, and only meant that there is no such thing in nature as passing from nonentity to entity, or the reverse. Perhaps the disputes among the ancients concerning motion, like many other metaphysical contests, were mere combats in the dark, for want of settling, at the beginning of the dispute, the meaning of terms. By the term motion they seem more commonly to have meant change of nature, than change of place. The notion ascribed to Xenophanes concerning the nature and origin of the celestial bodies, as meteors daily renewed, is so absurd, that w^e are inclined to think it must have been defectively or unfairly stated. It is not unreasonable to suppose, that many of the fancies ascribed to philo¬ sophers are nothing more than the misconceptions of ignorant or careless biographers. Equally distinguished in the Eleatic school with Xenophanes was his disciple Parmenides,* who continued the sect at Elea, his native city. He flourished about the sixty-ninth Olympiad.^ He is said to have at¬ tended upon the instructions of Anaximander ; but if this be true, it must have been while he was very young. His patrimony was large, his early manner of life was splendid, and his influence in the civil affairs of life considerable, till he formed an intimacy with Diochetas, a Pythagorean, by whom he was persuaded to withdraw from the business of public life to the science and leisure of the schools. He thought himself so much indebted to this poor but honest Pythagorean, for having introduced him into the recesses of philosophy, that after his death he consecrated a temple to his memory. Cebes in his allegorical table speaks of Parmenides as an eminent pattern of virtue. He wrote the doctrines of his school in verses, of which a few fragments still remain, but in so mutilated a state, that they afford little help in explaining his system of philosophy. Plato, in the dialogue which bears the name of Parmenides, professes to repre¬ sent his tenets, but confounds them with his own. From the scattered * Laert. 1. ix. sect. 21, &c. Suidas. •Jamb. Vit. Pyth. c. xxix. ti. 166. I Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 481. 489. Plato in Parmen. Athenaeus, 1. xi. p. 505. t B. C. 504. Chap. 13. oi? THE ELEATIC SECT. 243 reports of the ancients we gather up the following Abstract* of the Philosophy of Parmenides. Philosophy is twofold, that which follows the report of the senses, and that which is according to reason and truth. The former treats of the appearances of sensible objects, the latter considers the abstract nature of things, and inquires into the constitution of the universe. Abstract phi¬ losophy teaches, that from nothing nothing can proceed. The universe is one, immovable, immutable, eternal, and of a spherical form. Whatever is not comprehended in the universe has no real existence. Nothing in nature is either produced or destroyed, but merely appears so to the senses, j- Physical philosophy teaches that the principles of things are heat and cold, or fire and earth, of which the former is the efficient, the latter the material cause ; that the earth is spherical, and placed in the centre, being exactly balanced by its distance from the heavens, so that there is cause M'hy it should move one way rather than another ; that the first men were produced from mud, by the action of heat upon cold ; that the frame of the world is liable to decay, but the universe itself remains the same ; and that the chief seat of the soul is the heart, j: There is so near a resemblance between the metaphysical doctrines of Parmenides and Xenophanes, that it appears reasonable to explain both in the same way ; excepting, perhaps, that while Xenophanes considered the universe as possessing within itself a divine force, Parmenides adhered more strictly to the Pythagorean doctrine, and supposed the Deity to be an informing principle, or intellectual fire, diffused throughout the universe, but more especially residing in the extreme sphere of the world ; on which account he is metaphorically represented by this philosopher as a crown of light, inclosing within its circumference the celestial orb. § Melissus of Samos was a disciple of Parmenides, and adhered closely to his doctrines. As was usual with the Pythagorean philosophers, he ac¬ quired influence among his countrymen in affairs of state. Plutarch relates that he was entrusted with the command of a fleet, and gained a victory in a naval engagement with the Athenians. He flourished about the eighty-fourth Olympiad. || Like Parmenides, he held that the principle of all things is one and immutable ; that this one being includes all things, and is infinite, without beginning or end ; that there is neither vacuum nor motion in the universe, nor any such thing as production or decay ; ^ doctrines which admit of the same explanation which has been given of the tenets of Xenophanes and Parmenides. About the same time flourished Zeno, called the Eleatic, to distinguish him from Zeno the Stoic, and others. He was a zealous friend of civil liberty, and is celebrated for his courageous and successful opposition to tyrants ; but the inconsistency of the stories related by different writers concerning him in a great measure destroys their credit. He chose to reside in his small native city of Elea, rather than at Athens, because it * Laert. 1. ix. sect 22. Euseb. Pr. 1. i. c. 8. 1. xiv. c. 17. Pint. adv. Colot. t. iii. р. 416. 434. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 111. Simplic. in Phys. Arist. sect. 7. 17.31. t Arist. Phys. 1. i. c. 2, 3. Ps. Orig. 1. c. c. 11. p. 86. Plut. PI. Ph. I. i. c. 24. et adv. Colot. 1. c. t Laert. 1. c. Plut. adv. Colot. I. c. Arist. Met. 1. i. e. 4. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. ix. sect. 9. 1. vii. sect. 6. Stob. Eel. Ph. c. 12. 24. Plat, in Conv. Plut. Pi. Ph. 1. iii. c. 15. 1. iv. c. 5. § Cic. de Nat. Deor. 1. i. c. 11. || B. C. 444. ^ Laert. 1. ix. sect. 24. Plut. adv. Colot. t. iii. p. 434. Arist, Phys. 1. i. c. 7. 1- iv. c. 8; Plat. inTheaet. Sext. Emp. Pyr. Hyp. 1. iii. c. 7. sect. 65. Simplic. ad Arist. Phys. 1. is с. 3, Arist. de Ccelo, 1. iii. c. 1. 244 OF THE ELEATIC SECT. Book II. afforded freer scope to his independent and generous spirit, which could not easily submit to the restraints of authority. It is related that he vin¬ dicated the warmth with which he resented reproach, by saying, “ If I were indiflPerent to censure, I should also be indifferent to praise.”* The inven¬ tion of the dialectic art has been improperly ascribed to Zeno ; but there can be no doubt but this philosopher, and other metaphysical disputants in the Eleatic sect, employed much ingenuity and subtlety in exhibiting examples of most of the logical arts which were afterwards reduced to rule by Aristotle and others. -i According to Aristotle, Zeno of Elea taught that nothing can be pro¬ duced either from that which is similar or dissimilar ; that there is only one being, and that is God ; that this being is eternal, homogeneous, and spherical, neither finite nor infinite, neither quiescent nor movable ; tliat there are many worlds ; that there is in nature no vacuum ; that all bodies are composed of four elements, heat and moisture, cold and dryness ; and that the body of man is from the earth, and his soul an equal mixture of these four elements. He argued with great subtlety against the possibility of motion. If Seneca’s § account of this philosopher deserves credit, he reached the highest point of scepticism, and denied the real existence of external objects. The truth is, that after all that has been advanced by | different writers, it is impossible to determine whether Zeno understood the' term One, metaphysically, logically, or physically ; or whether he admitted or denied a nature properly divine. It is with equal judgment and modesty that Mosheim jj applies to the doctrine of Zeno the words of Terence: Incerta haec, si tu postules Ratione certa facere, nihilo plus agas, Quam si des operam, ut cum ratione insanias. (a) Thus much concerning that branch of the Eleatic sect which explained the nature and origin of the universe Metaphysically. A second sect of philosophers arose in this school, who treated the subject Physically; and who, giving up all metaphysical explanations of the cause of things, attempted to account for the 'phenomena of nature from the known laws of matter and motion. ' The author of this essential innovation was Leucippus,^ who is said by Laertius to have been a native of Elea, and who was a disciple of Zeno the Eleatic philosopher. He wrote a treatise concerning nature,** now lost, from which the ancients probably collected what they relate concerning his tenets. Dissatisfied with the metaphysical subtleties, by which the former philosophers of this school had confounded all evidence from the senses, Leucippus, and his follower Democritus, determined, if possible, to discover a system more consonant to nature and reason. Leaving behind them the whole train of fanciful conceptions, numbers, ideas, proportions, qualities, and elementary forms, in which philosophers had hitherto taken refuge, as the asylum of ignorance, they resolved to examine the real con- • Laert. 1. ix. sect. 25, &c. Suidas. Val. Max. 1. iii. c. 3 f Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 7. Plut. in Pericle, t iii. p. 178. Plat, in X De Xenoph. Zeno, Gorgia, t. i. c. 3. p. Ad Cudw. c. iv. sect. 21. 942. Phys. 1. vi. c. 9. § EP' Phsedro. i 58. : (a) Things thus uncertain, if by reason’s rules You ’d certain make ; it were as wise a task To try with reason to run mad. COLMAN. ^ Laert. 1. ix. sect. 50. Tzetz. Chil. v. 980. ** Pseud. Orig. Phil. c. xii. p. 88. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 778. Chap. 13. OF THE ELEATIC SECT. 245 stitution of the material world, and inquire into the mechanical properties of bodies; that from these they might, if possible, deduce from certain knowledge of natural cases, and hence be able to account for natural ap¬ pearances. Their great object was to restore the alliance between reason and the senses, which metaphysical subtleties had dissolved. For this purpose they introduced the doctrine of indivisible atoms, possessing within themselves a principle of motion. Several other philosophers, before their time, had indeed considered matter as divisible into indefinitely small parti¬ cles, particularly Anaxagoras, Empedocles, and Heraclitus. But Leucippus and Democritus were the first who taught that these particles were originally destitute of all qualities except figure and motion, and therefore may justly be reckoned the authors of the Atomic System of Philosophy. They looked upon the qualities, which preceding philosophers had ascribed to matter as the mere creatures of abstraction ; and they determined to ad¬ mit nothing into their system which they could not establish upon the sure testimony of the senses. They were moreover of opinion that both the Eleatic philosophers and those of other sects had unnecessarily encumbered their respective systems by assigning some external or internal cause of motion, of a nature not to be discovered by the senses. They therefore resolved to reject all metaphysical principles, and, in their explanation of the phenomena of nature, to proceed upon no other ground than the sensi¬ ble and mechanical properties of bodies. By the help of the internal prin¬ ciple of motion, which they attributed to the indivisible particles of matter, they made a feeble and fanciful effort to account for the production of all natural bodies from physical causes, without the intervention of Deity. But, whether they meant entirely to discard the notion of a divine nature from the universe is uncertain. The first idea of the atomic system was suggested by Leucippus ; it was improved by Democritus, and afterwards carried to all the perfection which a system so fundamentally defective would admit of, by Epicurus. The following Summary of the Doctrine of Leucippus will exhibit the infant state of the Atomic Philosophy, and at the same time sufficiently expose its absurdity. The Universe, which is infinite, is in part a plenum, and in part a vacuum. The plenum contains innumerable corpuscles or atoms, of vari¬ ous figures, which falling into the vacuum, struck against each other; and hence arose a variety of curvilinear motions, which continued till at length atoms of similar forms met together, and bodies were produced. The primary atoms being specifically of equal weight, and not being able, on account of their multitude, to move in circles, the smaller rose to the ex¬ terior parts of the vacuum, whilst the larger, entangling themselves, formed a spherical shell, which revolved about its centre, and which included within itself all kinds of bodies. This central mass was gradually increased by a perpetual accession of particles from the surrounding shell, till at last the earth was formed.* In the mean time, the spherical shell was con¬ tinually supplied with new bodies, which, in its revolution, it gathered up from without. Of the particles thus collected in the spherical shell, some in their combination formed humid masses, which, by their circular motion, gradually became dry, and were at length ignited, and became stars. The sun was formed in the same manner, in the exterior surface of the shell ; and the moon, in its interior surface. In this manner the world was form¬ ed ; and, by an inversion of the process, it will at length be dissolved.f * Laert. I. c. Theodoret. Therapeut. Serin, iv. Cic. de Nat. Deer. 1. i. Plut. de Plac. Ph. 1. ii, c. 7. 1. iii. c. 12. f Laert. et Ps. Orig. 1. c. 246 OF THii ELEATIC SECT. Book II. Democritus,* * * * tlie successor of Leucippus, was a native of Abdera,f a town in Thrace, the stupidity of whose inhabitants became proverbial. He was of noble descent. Laertius, after Apollonius, fixes the time of his birth in the first year of the eightieth Olympiad. J iElian§ must there¬ fore have been mistaken in making him contemporary with Alexander, and could have no good authority for the story which he relates, that Democritus laughed at Alexander, who complained that he had only one world to conquer. Democritus was contemporary with Socrates, Anaxa¬ goras, Archelaus, Parmenides, Zeno, and Protagoras. |1 The father of Democritus, with his fellow-citizens, is said ^ to have contributed largely towards the entertainment of the army of Xerxes, on his return to Asia ; in reward of which service, the Persian king made the Abderites rich presents, and left among them several Chaldean Magi. Democritus, ac¬ cording to Laertius, was instructed by some of these eastern sages in astronomy and theology. After the death of his father, Democritus de¬ termined to travel in search of wisdom ; and therefore, in the distribution of his father’s estates among him and his three brothers, he made choice of that part which, though least in value, consisted of money. His por¬ tion is said to have amounted to one hundred talents. Little stress is therefore to be laid upon the inconsistent story of his leaving his fields un¬ tilled, and giving up his patrimony to his counti’y.** * * §§ Amply provided with money to defray the expenses of travelling, after the manner of the age, in which it was customary to visit distant countries in pursuit of knowledge, he went first into Egypt, for the sake of learning geometry from the Egyptian priests ; and then turned aside into Ethiopia, to converse with the Gymnosophists of that country ; after which he passed over into Asia, resided some time among the Persian Magi, for the purpose of learning magical philosophy, and, as some assert, travelled into India.f f Whether in the course of his travels Democritus visited Athens, or attended upon Anaxagoras, is uncertain.:]: :|: There can be little doubt, however, that during some part of his life he was instructed in the Pythagorean school, and particularly that he was a disciple of Leucippus. After a long course of years spent in travelling, Democritus returned to Abdera, richly stored with the treasures of philosophy, which he had spared neither labour nor expense to procure, but destitute of the necessary means of subsistence. His brother Damasis, however, received him kindly, and liberally supplied his exigencies. It was a law in Abdera, that whoever should waste all his patrimony should be deprived of the rights of sepul¬ ture. Democritus, desirous of avoiding the disgrace to which this law subjected him, gave public instructions to the people, chiefly from his larger Diacosmus, the most valuable of his writings : in return he re¬ ceived from his hearers many valuable presents, and other testimonies of respect, which relieved him from all apprehension of suffering public cen¬ sure as a spendthrift.§§ Laertius asserts that his countrymen loaded him with riches, to the amount of five hundred talents ; but it is wholly incredi¬ ble that a sum, which few royal treasuries were at that time able to furnish, * Laert. 1. ix. sect. 34. f Pomp. Mela, 1. ii. c. 2. Solin, c. 10. Cic. ad Attic. 1. iv. Ep. 16. Juv. Sat. ix. v. 49. Mart. 1. ix. Ep. 25. % b. C. 460. § L. iv. c. 20. II Aul. Gell. 1. xviii. c. 21. Plin. 1. xxx. c. 1. Euseb. Chron. Diod. Sic. 1. xiv. c. 11. Val. Max. 1. viii. c. 7. ^ Herod. ). viii. Laert. sect. 34, &c. ** Val. Max. et iEl. 1. c. Hor. Ep. 1. i. Ep. 12. v. 12. Cic. de Fin. 1. v, c. 29. t j Laert. Ail. Suid. Clem. Al. Strom. 1. i. p. 304. Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. xxx. Prooem- xxiv. c. 17. ++ Laert. Val. Max. 1. viii. c. 7. §§ Laert. Suid. Plin. Hist. N. 1. xviii. c. 35. Atheu. 1. iv. p. 168. Chap. 13. OF THE ELEATIC SECT. 247 should have been raised in an obscure town as a gratuity to an individual. There can be no doubt, however, that Democritus, by his learning and wisdom, and especially by his acquaintance with nature, acquired great fame, and excited much admiration among the ignorant Abderites. By giving previous notice of unexpected changes in the weather, and by other artifices, he had the address to make them believe that he possessed a pow'er of predicting future events; and by this means he gained such an ascendency over them, that they not only gave him the appellation of Wisdom, and looked upon him as something more than mortal, but pro¬ posed to entrust him with the direction of their public affairs. From inclination and habit he, however, preferred a contemplative to an active life, and therefore declined these public honours, and passed the remainder of his days in solitude.* It is said that, from this time, Democritus spent his days and nights in caverns and sepulchres ; and that in one of these gloomy retreats, whilst he sat by his midnight lamp busily engaged in writing, he was on a sudden visited by several young men, who, in order to terrify him, had clothed themselves in black garments, and put on masks, pretending to be ghosts ; but that, upon their appearance, he coolly requested them not to play the fool, and went on with the studies in which they found him employed.f Others relate, J that Democritus, in order to be more perfectly master of his intellectual faculties, by means of a burning glass deprived himself of the organs of sight. But the former of these stories has the air of fable ; and the latter is wholly incredible, since the writers who relate it affirm that Democritus employed his leisure in vt riting books, and in dissecting the bodies of animals, neither of which could very well have been effected without eyes. Cicero, who was not destitute of credulity, mentions the story, but at the same time intimates his own doubts concerning its truth. Nor is greater credit due to the tale,§ that Democritus spent his leisure hours in chemical researches after the philosopher’s stone, the dream of a later age ; or to the story of his conversation with Hippocrates, grounded upon letters, II which are said to have passed between that father of medi¬ cine and the iDeople of Abdera, on the supposed madness of Democritus, but which are so evidently spurious, that it would require the credulity of the Abderites themselves to suppose them genuine. All that is probable concerning this conversation, so circumstantially and eloquently related in the Epistles ascribed to Hippocrates is, that Hippocrates, who was con¬ temporary with Democritus, admired his extensive knowledge of nature, and reprobated the stupidity of the Abderites, who imputed his wonderful operations to a supernatural intercourse with demons, or to madness. The only reasonable conclusion which can be drawn from these marvel¬ lous tales is, that Democritus was, what he is commonly represented to have been, a man of sublime genius and penetrating judgment, who, by a long course of study and observation, became an eminent master of specu¬ lative and physical science ; the natural consequence of which was, that, like Roger Bacon in a later period, he astonished and imposed upon his ignorant and credulous countrymen. Petronius relates that he was per¬ fectly acquainted with the virtues of herbs, plants, and stones, and that he spent his life in making experiments upon natural bodies. * Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. vi. p. 631. Laert. Suidas. t Lucian, Philopseud. t. iii. p. 595. J Aul. Gell. 1.x. c. 17. Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. v. c. 39. Plut. de Polypragm. Tertull. Apol. c. 46. § Borrich. de Art. Chem. p. 69. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 766. II Hippocr. Op. t. ii. p. 901. ed. Lind, Laert. sect. 42. Ail. 1. iv, c. 20. 248 OF THE EEEATIC SECT. Book II. 1 k'. if. ■ t * 4 ‘I?* m, Democritus has been commonly known under the appellation of The Laughing Philosopher ; and it is gravely related by Seneca * that he never ?• appeared in public without expressing his contempt of the follies of mankind by laughter. But this account is wholly inconsistent with what has been related concerning his fondness for a life of gloomy solitude and profound contemplation, and with that strength and elevation of mind, which his philosophical researches must have required, and which are ascribed to him by the general voice of antiquity. Thus much, however, may be easily admitted, on the credit of ^lian-j- and Lucian,;]; that a man so superior to the generality of his contemporaries, and whose lot it was to live among a race of men who were stupid to a proverb, might frequently treat their follies with ridicule and contempt. Accordingly we find that among his fellow-citizens he obtained the appellation of yeXamvog, The Derider. Democritus appears to have been in his manners chaste and temperate ;§ and his sobriety was repaid by a healthy old age. He lived, and enjoyed the use of his faculties, to the term of a hundred years (some say several years longer), and at last died through mere decay. || The following sin¬ gular circumstance is said to have happened just before his death. His sister, who had the care of him, observing him to be near his end, ex¬ pressed great regret that his immediate death would prevent her celebrating the approaching festival of Ceres ; upon which Democritus, who was now unable to receive any nourishment, that he might if possible gratify her wish by living a few days longer, desired her often to bring hot bread near his nostrils : the experiment succeeded, and he was preserved alive without food for three days. His death was exceedingly lamented by his country¬ men ; and the charge of his funeral was defrayed from the public treasury. He wrote much, but none of his works are extant. Concerning Truth Democritus taught,^ that there are two kinds of knowledge ; one, obscure ; the other, genuine ; the former, that which is derived from the senses ; the latter, that which is derived from the exercise of thought upon the nature of things. This exercise of the reason, to produce certain knowledge, he confessed to be exceedingly difficult ; and therefore said, that truth lay in a deep well, from which it is the office of reason to draw it up. Concerning Physics, the doctrine of Democritus was as follows :** nothing can ever be produced from that which has no existence ; nor can any thing which exists be ever annihilated. Whatever exists must therefore owe its being to necessary and self- existent principles. The first principles of all new things are two, atoms and vacuum. For bodies must consist of both these, since they cannot be divided till they are reduced to nothing. Neither of these principles is produced from the other. They are both infinite, atoms in number, vacuum in magnitude. Atoms j-f are solid, and the only beings ; vacuum, or entire space, can neither be said to be existent j nor non-existent, being neither corporeal nor incorporeal. Atoms have the? properties of figure, magnitude, motion, and weight, being heavy in pro- * De Ira, 1. ii. c. 10. De Tranq. c. 15. ^ f Var. H. 1. iv. c. 20. % Vit. Auct. t. iii. p. 112. § Plin. N. H, 1. xxviii. c. 6. Tertull. de Anim. c. 27. Clem. Al. Paedag. 1. ii. p. 193. ' ■ II Laert. sect. 39 — 43. Diodor. Sic. lib. xiv. Cic. de Senect. c. 7. Luc. de Longsev. y 1. viii. sect. 139. 327. Laert. 1 Diodor. sic. iiD. xiv. t. ii. p. 829. Athen. 1. ii. p. 46. Suidas. ^ Sext. Emp. adv. Math. I. vii. sect. 135, 136 44 — 46. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. i. c. 12. 1. iv. c. 10. ** Laert. 1. c. Arist. Phys. 1. i. c. 6. 1. iii. c. 4. Cic. Acad. Qu. 1. iv. c. 37. ft Arist. Metaph. 1. i. c. 4. Laert. Arist. de Gener. 1. i. c. 1. 1. v. c. 8. Phys, c. 6. 1. viii. c. 1. De Coelo, 1. iii. c. 4. Pseud. Or. c. xiii. p. 91. Cic. de Nat. D c. 24. De Fin. 1. i. c. 6. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. i. c. 16. 1. iv. c. 4. ix. sect. '1 I. i., 1. Chap. 13. OF THE ELEATIC SECT. 219 portion to their bulk. In figure they are various ; some are angular, others not so ; some circular, others curved, others plain ; some smooth, others rough ; some hooked, others pointed. With respect to magnitude, they are too small to be singly visible, but are of different sizes ; they are per¬ fectly solid, indivisible, and unalterable. These atoms, or first corpuscles, have been eternally moving in infinite vacuum or space, where there is neither high nor low, middle nor end.* * * § Their motion is of one kind, that which perpetually deviates from a right line. By their continual and rapid motion, collisions are produced which occasion innumerable combinations of particles, whence arise the various form of things. The natural necessity, by which the primary particles are thus moved and united, is the only fate by which the world is created or governed. The system of nature is one, consisting of parts, which differ only in their figure, order, and situation. The production of an organised body takes place when those atoms, which are in their nature fitted to form that body, happen to be suitably arranged : if this arrangement be diversified, alteration takes place ; if it be entirely destroyed, dissolu¬ tion. The qualities of bodies are not essential to their nature, but the casual effect of arrangement ; and to this cause is to be ascribed the dif¬ ferent impressions wdiich they make upon the senses. Bitterness and sweetness, for example, are not properties essential to bodies, but effects produced upon the senses in consequence of the various arrangement of atoms. -f- In infinite space there are innumerable worlds, some of which are per¬ fectly similar, others dissimilar ; but all subject to growth, decay, and de¬ struction. J The world has no animating principle, but all things are moved by the rapid agitation of atoms, as by an universally penetrating fire. The sun and moon are composed of light particles, which revolve about a common centre. The order of the heavenly bodies is, first, the fixed stars, then the planets, then the sun, then the moon. All the heavenly bodies move from east to west, and those which are nearest revolve with the least velocity ; whence the sun, the inferior planets, and the moon, move slower than the rest. A comet is a combination of planets which, approaching near each other, appear as one body. The earth at the first was so small and light, as to wander about in the regions of space ; but at length increasing in density, it became immovable. The sea is continually decreasing, and will at length be dried up.§ Men were at first produced from water and earth. Our knowledge of the existence of man arises from consciousness. The soul, or principle of animal life and motion is the result of a combination of round or fiery particles : it consists of two parts, the one seated in the breast, which is the rational, the other diffused through the whole body, which is the irrational. The soul is mortal, and perishes with the body ; but human bodies, which perish, will revive. Different animal beings possess different senses. Perception is produced by e’iSwXa, images, which flow * Arist. de Ccelo, 1. iii. c. 4. Cic. de Fin. 1. i. c. 6. Stob. Eel. Phys. 1. i. c. 23. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 38. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. ix. sect. 113. f Arist. Met. 1. i. c. 4. De Gener. 1. i. c. 2. 7, 8. De Ccelo, 1. i. c. 4. Laert. 1. ix. sect. 45. 72. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. Hyp. 1. i. c. 30. Adv. Log. 1. i. c. 135. 368. I. ii. sect. 6. 184. Adv. Mus. sect. 53. 1 Laert. 1. ix. sect. 44. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. ii. c. 1. 3. Orig. PI. Pli. c. xiii. p. 91. § Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 17. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. iv. c. 4. 1. ii. c. 20. 25. 15. 1. iii. c. 12, 13. Arist. de Ccelo, 1. iii. c. 4. 13. Cic. de Fin. 1. i. c. 6. Arist. de Meteor. 1. i. c. 6. 1. ii, c. 3. Senec. Qu. Nat. 1. v. c. 2. 250 OF THE ELEATIC SECT. Book II from bodies organ of sense.* according to their respective figures, and strike upon the The vacuum of Democritus is not to be confounded, as it has sometimes been, with air; it is unquestionably the same with that infinite space which gives locality to all bodies. The fundamental difference between the doc¬ trine of Democritus, and that of former philosophers, concerning atoms, is, that the latter conceived small particles endued with various qualities; whereas this philosopher conceived the qualities of bodies, not to arise from any essential difference in the nature of primary particles, but to be the mere effect of arrangement. It is evident, from the whole tenor of the Democratic system, that it pays no regard to an external Efficient Cause, but absurdly supposes that the intrinsic necessity, which is conceived to give motion to atoms, is alone sufficient to account for the phenomena of nature. This philosopher admitted no other soul of the world than one similar to that which he allowed to man, a blind force resulting from the combination of certain subtle atoms, of a round form, which produces fire. Whatever, therefore, he is said to have taught concerning nature, fate or providence, he can only be understood as asserting that this fire is a mechanical agent in nature, whose rapid motion is the chief cause of the changes which take place in the universe. According to Plutarch,-|- De- ;; mocritus thought the sun and moon to be ignited plates of stone; but this " is inconsistent wdth his general system, and with that knowledge of nature which this philosopher appears to have possessed. The belief of the na¬ tural materiality of the soul was a necessary consequence of the atomic system ; for if the soul be a composition of atoms, when these are dis¬ persed it must perish. The notion of Democritus concerning the revi viscence of human bodies seems to have been misunderstood by Pliny.ijij This philosopher can only be supposed, consistently with his system, to have meant, that the atoms of which any human soul had consisted, after being separated and dispersed through infinite space, would in some distant period meet again and recover their former life. The term ei^wXov, image, appears to have been used by Democritus in two different significations ;i first, for those images which he supposed to flow from external objects, and strike upon the senses, and to create notions or ideas in the mind and secondly, for divine beings existing in the air, which he called gods. For want of attending to this distinction, several writers have been led into mistakes concerning the tenets of Democritus. .«■ .rvl Although Democritus either entirely rejected the notion of Deity, or^ j allowed him no share in the creation or government of the world, yet he^ | endeavoured to conceal his impiety, by admitting the popular belief of divinities inhabiting the aerial regions, and teaching that they make them¬ selves visible to favoured mortals, and enable them to predict future events.' His doctrine concerning them was,§ that they are in form like men, but of f* a larger size, and superior nature ; that they are composed of the most t subtle atoms, and less liable to dissolution than human beings, but are nevertheless mortal; and that they have a power of serving or injuring i mankind, and of communicating their thoughts to them by vocal sounds, * and often give them information concerning futurity. ® * Censorin. de Die Nat. c. 4. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. i. c. 4. 8. 10. 1. iv. c. 4. 7. 1. v. c. 16. Sect. Emp. Pyrr. Hyp. 1. ii. c. 5. sect. 23. Adv. Matli. 1. vii. sect. 265. Arist. de Anim. 1. i. c. 10. Laert. sect. 44. Plin. H. N. 1. vii. c. 55. Cic. ad Att. 1. ii. Ep. 4. Pam. 1. XV. Ep. 16. Lucret. 1. iv. v. 238. t L. c. 20. I Hist. N.l. vii. c. 55. § Laert. 1. i. sect. 7. Cic. de Nat. D. !. i. c. 43. Sext. Emp. adv. ' li. 1. ix. sect. 19. 42. Chap. 13. OF THE ELEATIC SECT. 251 The moral doctrine of Democritus,* like that of Epicurus, afterwards to be considered, makes the enjoyment of a tranquil state of mind, evdvfiia the great end of life, and consequently teaches moderation as the first law of wisdom. At the same time this philosopher held, that there is nothing naturally becoming or base in human actions, but that every distinction of this nature arises from custom or civil institutions, and that laws are framed to curb the natural propensity of mankind to injure one another. This latter tenet nearly coincides with the modern doctrine of Hobbes. The simila¬ rity between the ethics of Democritus and Epicurus renders it unnecessary to enter into further particulars on this head at present. We shall there¬ fore only add a few of the most valuable Maxims which have been as¬ cribed to Democritus : j- — he who subdues his passions is more heroic than he who vanquishes an enemy ; yet there are men who, whilst they com¬ mand nations, are slaves to pleasure. It is criminal, not only to do mis¬ chief, but to wish it. He who enjoys what he has, without regretting the want of what he has not, is a happy man. We are most delighted with those pleasures which we have the fullest opportunity of enjoying. The sweetest things become the most bitter by excess. Do nothing shameful, though you are alone ; revere yourself more than all other men. A man must either be good, or seem to be so. Every country is open to a wise man, for he is a citizen of the world. It is better for fools to be governed, than to govern. Rulers are chosen, not to do ill, but good. By desiring little, a poor man makes himself rich. A cheerful man is happy, though he possesses little; a fretful man is unhappy in the midst of aflBuence. One great difference between a wise man and a fool is, that the former only wishes for what he may possibly obtain, the latter desires impossibi¬ lities. It is the office of prudence, where it is possible, to prevent injuries; but where this cannot be done, a wise regard to our own tranquillity will preserve us from revenging them. Democritus had many disciples. Of these the most celebrated was Protagoras, of Abdera. j: In his youth his poverty obliged him to per¬ form the servile offices of a porter, and he was frequently employed in carrying logs of wood from the neighbouring fields to Abdera. It hap¬ pened, that as he was one day going on briskly towards the city under one of those loads, he was met by Democritus, who was particularly struck with the neatness and regularity of the bundle. Desiring him to stop and rest himself, Democritus examined more closely the structure of the load, and found that it was put together with mathematical exactness ; upon which he asked the youth whether he himself had made it up. The youth as¬ sured him that he had, and immediately took it to pieces, and with great ease replaced every log in the same exact order as before. Democritus expressed much admiration of his ingenuity, and said to him, “ Young man, follow me, and your talents shall be employed upon greater and bet¬ ter things.” The youth consented, and Democritus took him home, maintained him at his own expense, and taught him philosophy.§ Protagoras afterwards acquired reputation at Athens, among the so¬ phists for his elociuence, aud among the philosophers for his wisdom. His public lectures were frequented, and he had many disciples, from whom he received the most liberal rewards ; so that, as Plato relates, he became exceedingly rich.|l At length, however, he brought upon himself the dis- • Laert. 1. ix. sect. 45, &c. Stob. Serm. 28. 37. 39. 44. 48. 117. 13G. 139. 147. 249. Flat, de Inst. Lib. t. i. p. 12. t Laert. Stob. J Laert. Suid. § Aul. Gell. 1. V. c. 3. 11 Laert. 1. ix. sect. 50. Suid. Gell. Plat, in Theu'teto, couf. ejusdem Protag. 252 OF THE ELEATiC SECT. Book. II. pleasure of the Athenian state, by teaching doctrines favourable to im¬ piety. In one of his books he said, “ Concerning the gods, I am wholly unable to determine whether they have any existence or not ; for the weakness of the human understanding, and the shortness of human life, with many other causes, prevent us from attaining this knowledge.” On account of this and several other similar expressions, his writings were ordered to be diligently collected by the common crier, and burnt in the market place, and he himself was banished from Attica.* He wrote many pieces upon logic, metaphysics, ethics, and politics, none of which are at present extant. After having lived many years in Epirus, he was lost by sea on his passage from that country to Sicily. •]' The Tenets of Protagoras, as far as they can be discovered, appear to have leaned towards scepticism. He is said to have taught that contra¬ dictory arguments may be advanced upon every subject ; that all natural objects are perpetually varying ; that the senses convey different reports to different persons, and even to the same person at different times ; and that, nevertheless, we have no other criterion of truth than our own per¬ ception, and cannot know that any thing is otherwise than it appears to our senses, which are the essence of the soul.;|; Adopting the doctrine of Democritus, that the atoms of which bodies are composed are in perpetual motion, Protagoras conceived that external objects are liable to such con¬ tinual fluctuation, that nothing can be certainly known concerning them; and therefore concluded, that nothing can be pronounced to exist but that which is at any instant perceived by the senses ; and that, since these are perpetually or incessantly varying, things themselves vary accordingly; so that, upon the same evidence, that of the senses, contradictory opinions may be advanced. This seems to be the true explanation of the funda¬ mental maxim of Protagoras, that man himself is the only measure, or criterion, of all things. Diagoiias,§ a native of the island of Melos, was another follower of Democritus. Having been sold as a captive in his youth, he was redeemed by Democritus, aud trained up in the study of philosophy. At the same time he cultivated polite learning, and distinguished himself in the art of lyric poetry, which was so successfully practised about that period by Pindar, Bacchylis, and others. His name has been transmitted to posterity with infamy, as an avowed advocate for the entire rejection of all religious belief. And, though Clemens Alexandrinus,]] and others, have taken pains to exculpate him, by pleading that his only intention was to ridicule hea¬ then superstitions, the general voice of antiquity has so strongly asserted his atheistical principles, that we cannot refuse credit to the report with¬ out allowing too much indulgence to historical scepticism. It is easy to conceive, that one who had studied philosophy in the school of Democri¬ tus, who admitted no other principles in nature than atoms and a vacuum, would r^ect the whole doctrine of Deity, as inconsistent with the system which he had embraced. And it is expressly asserted by ancient writers, that when in a particular instance he saw a perjured person escape punishment, he publicly declared his disbelief of divine providence, and from that time * Cic. de Nat. D. 1. i. Sext. adv. Math. 1. ix. sect, 18. Min. Pel. c. 8. f Laert. Philostr. Vit. Soph. 1. i. p. 496. X Laert. sect. 51. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. Hyp. 1, i. c. 32. sect. 216. Plato in Thea;t. Arist. Met. 1. iii. c. 5. 1. x. c. 6. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. c. 42. Euseb. Pra?p. Ev. 1. xiv. c. 20. § Suidas. Ilesychius. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 554. Sext. Enip. adv. Math. 1. ix. sect. 53. Tatian contr. Graec. p. 164. Athenag. Legat. pro Clir. p. 5. ed. Par. II Adm. ad Gent. p. 13. OF THE ELEATIC SECT. 253 Chap. 13. spoke of the gods, and of all religious ceremonies, with ridicule and con¬ tempt. He even attempted to lay open the sacred mysteries, and to dis¬ suade the people from submitting to the rites of initiation. These public insults otfered to religion brought upon him the general hatred of the Athenians ; who, upon his refusing to obey a summons to appear in the courts of judicature, issued forth a decree, which was inscribed upon a brazen column, offering the reward of a talent to any one who should kill him, or two talents to any one who should bring him alive before the judges. This happened in the ninety-first Olympiad.* From that time Diagoras became a fugitive in Attica, and at last fled to Corinth, where he died, j- It is said, that being on board a ship during a storm, the ter¬ rified sailors began to accuse themselves for having received into their ship a man so infamous for his impiety ; upon which Diagoras pointed out to them other vessels, which were near them on the sea in equal danger, and asked them, whether they thought that each of these ships also carried a Diagoras ; and that afterwards, when a friend, in order to convince him that the gods are not indifferent to human affairs, desired him to observe how many consecrated tablets were hung up in the temples in grateful acknowledgment of the escapes from the dangers of the sea, he said in reply, “ True; but here are no tablets of those who have suffered shipwreck, and perished in the sea.” But there is reason to suspect that these tales are mere inventions ; for similar stories have been told of Diogenes the Cynic, and others. From the school of Democritus also arose Anaxarchus,;|; of Abdera, who flourished about the hundred and tenth Olympiad. He is chiefly celebrated for having lived with Alexander, and enjoyed his confidence. § It reflects no credit, however, upon his philosophy, that when the mind of this prince was torn with regret for having killed his faithful Clitus, he administered the balm of flattery, saying, “ that kings, like the gods, could do no wrong.” This philosopher addicted himself to pleasure, and it was on this account, and not, as some supposed, on account of the apathy and tranquillity of his life, that he obtained the surname of EvdaifioviKOQ, The Fortunate. A marvellous story is related, of his having been pounded in an iron mortar by Nicocreon king of Cyprus, in revenge for the advice which he had given to Alexander to serve up the head of that prince at an entertainment, and of his enduring the torture with invincible hardiness. But the tale, for which there is no authority prior to the time of Cicero, is wholly inconsistent with the character of a man who had through his life been softened by effeminate pleasure. The same story is also related of Zeno the Eleatic. We therefore think ourselves at liberty to set it down among the numerous fables which some of the Grecian writers discovered ^so much ingenuity in inventing, and which so well justified the sarcasm of "Juvenal : \\ - Quicquid GrBecia mendax Audet in historia.^ (a) * B. C. 416. f Laert. Suid. Cic. de Nat. D. 1. iii. c. 37. Laert. 1. ix. sect. 58. Pint. Symp. 1. vii. c. 5. § jElian, 1. ix. c. 3. 30. Arrian. Exp. Alex. 1. iv. p. 84. Plut. ad Princ. indoct. Luc. Parasit. t. iii. p. 250. Athen. 1, vi. p. 250. 1. xii, p. 548. Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. ii. c. 22. Nat. D. 1. iii. c. 33. Laert. Ov. in Ibin. II Sat. X. 174. ^ Vidend. Budd. Ann. Hist. Phil. p. 320 — 323. Bayle. Reimmann. Hist. Ath. c. 17. 20. 30. Burnet, Arch. 1. i. c. 12. Waltheri Sepulchra Eleatica, c. 3. sect. 5, 6. (a) Whate’er in story lying Greece dares tell. 254 OF THE HERACLITEAN SECT. Book II. I OF THE HERACLITEAN SECT CHAPTER XIV Another sect, derived from Pythagoras, the founder of the Italic school, « was that which was instituted at Ephesus by Heraclitus ; a sect which, J though it has been almost entirely overlooked by the moderns, obtained! among the ancients no small share of celebrity. .i Heraclitus,* by birth an Ephesian, discovered an early propensity to the study of wisdom, and, by a diligent attention to the operations of his i own mind, soon became sensible of his ignorance, and desirous of instruc- tion. He was initiated into the mysteries of the Pythagorean doctrine by .1 Xenophanes and Hippasus, and afterwards incorporated them into his own S system. His fellow-citizens solicited him to undertake the supreme magis- i tracy ; but, on account of their dissolute manners, he declined it in favour j of his brother. When he was, soon afterwards, seen playing with the boys j in the court of the temple of Diana, he said to those who expressed their ! surprise that he was not better employed, “ Why are you surprised that I « pass my time with children ? It is surely better than governing the corrupt i Ephesians.” He was displeased with them for banishing from their city so 1 wise and able a man as Hermodorus,'|- and plainly told them that he per- 1 ceived they were determined not to keep among them any man who had more,! merit than the rest. His natural temper being splenetic and melancholy, he J despised the ignorance and follies of mankind, shunned all public intercourse | with the world, and devoted himself to retirement and contemplation. Hel made choice of a mountainous retreat for his place of residence, and lived upon the natural produce of the earth. Darius, king of Persia, having! heard of his fame, invited him to his court ; but he treated the invita-'l tion with contempt. J His diet and manner of life at length brought| him into a dropsy ; upon which this philosopher, who was always fond of I enigmatical language, returning into the city, proposed to the physicians! the following question : “ Is it possible to bring dryness out of moisture ? ” j Receiving no relief from them, he attempted to cure himself, by shutting! himself up in a close stable with oxen ; but it is doubtful how far he suc-J ceeded, for the cause and manner of his death are differently related byj different writers. He flourished, as appears from his preceptors and contein- j poraries, about the sixty-ninth Olympiad. § Sixty years are said to have! been the term of his life.H 3 Cudwortb, c. i. sect, 8. c. iv. sect. 20, 21. cum Not. Mosh. Grundling. p. xv. Diss. dS Lips. Manud. ad Phil. Stoic. 1. ii. Diss. 4. Gassendi, Phil. Ep. sect. ii. c. 5, Mour-l gues, Plan. Pyth. p. 16. Parker de Deo, Disp. vi, sect. 2. Scipio Acquilian. de Plac, Phil.l ante Arist. c. 8 — 17. Jonsius, 1. i. c. 14. 1. ii. c. 5. Magnenus de Vita Democ. Hag.! Comit. 1658. 12. Morhoff. Polyhist. t. ii. p. 183 — 185. Stollii Hist. Ph. Mor. sect. 10.1 103. Henman. Act. Ph. V. i. p. 671. Ohs. Hal. t. ii. Ohs. 15. Naude Apolog. c. 12. j Thomas. Hist, Sap. et Stult. t. ii. p. 8. Clerici Hist. Med. p. i. 1, iii. c. 31. Potter, .5 Arch. Gr. 1. ii. c. 20. Zimmerman, Epist. de Ath. Eumeri et Diag. ap. Mus. Brem. v. i. 'J p. iv. art. 3. * Laert. 1. ix. sect. 1, &c. Suidas. Clem. Al. Strom. 1. i. p. 302. Stob. Serm. 102. Pint. adv. Col. t. iii. p. 423. f An eminent lawyer, of whom see Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. v. c. 36. Strabo, 1. xiii. p. 642. Plin. 1. xxxiv. c. 5. J Ib. 1. vii. c. 19. § B. C, 504. II Laert. 1. ix. sect, 1, &c. Chap. 14. OF THE HERACLITEAN SECT. 255 It has been a tale commonly received,* * * § that Heraclitus was perpetually shedding tears, on account of the vices of mankind, and particularly of his countrymen. But the story, which probably took its rise from the gloomy severity of his temper, ought to be ranked, like that of the perpetual laugh¬ ing of Democritus, among the Greek fables ; and it must be left to the poet to say concerning these two philosophers ; - De sapientibus, alter Riclebat, quoties a limine moverat unum Protuleratque pedem ; flebat contrarius alter, (a) Juv.f Heraclitus wrote a treatise “ On Nature,” of which only a few frag¬ ments remain. Through the natural cast of his mind, and perhaps too through a desire of concealing unpopular tenets under the disguise of a figurative and intricate diction, his discourses were so incomprehensible, that he obtained the name of Srareivoe, The Obscure Philosopher ; a title given him by the unanimous consent of the ancients. Neither critics nor philosophers were able to explain his writings ; and they remained in the temple of Diana, where he himself had deposited them for the use of the learned, till they were made public by Crates, or, as Tatian relates the mat¬ ter, till the poet Euripides, who frequented the temple of Diana, committing the doctrines and precepts of Heraclitus to memory, accurately repeated them, J From the fragments of this work, which are preserved by Sextus Empiricus, it appears to have been written in prose, which makes Tatian’s account the less credible. After what has already been said concerning the original obscurity of this philosopher, and the present deficient state of his remains, it will not be expected that we should lay before our readers a perfectly clear and full account of his system. The following brief Heads of his Doctrine are all that we have been able to collect :§ — Reason, by means of the senses, is the judge of truth. This common and divine principle is derived by inspiration from that which surrounds us. In dreaming, the passages of the senses are obstructed, and the connexion of the human mind with that which surrounds us is interrupted : on waking, this connexion is restored, and the power of reason returns. All common maxims, being comprehended by common and divine reason, are to be received as true. Fire, or an ethereal exhalation, dvadv/jiiacnQ, is the principle from which all things in nature are produced. || This principle consists of small indivisible parts, i^typara, or atoms, which are simple in their natures, and eternal. There is in the universe no such thing as rest, the particles which compose the fiery or ethereal principle being perpetually in motion. From * All. 1. viii. c. 13. Senec, de Tranq. c. 4. de Ira, 1. ii. c. 10. Lucian, Vit. Auct. t. iii. p. 123. (a) Will you not now the pair of sages praise Who the same end pursued by different ways ? One pitied, one contemn’d the woful times ; One laugh’d at follies, and one wept over crimes. Drtden. Clem. Alex. Protrept. p. 33. Tatian. adv. Tert. de An, c. 15. Philost. Op. p. 391, f Sat. X. V. 34. X Laert. Fab. Bib. Gr. v. i, p. 760, 761. Graec. p, 143. § Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 126. Clem. Alex, Str. 1, v. 602, Ij Arist. Met. 1. i. c, 3. De Anim. 1, i. c. 2. Cic. Ac, Qu. 1. iv. c. 37. De Nat. D. 1. iii. c. 14. Plut. de Plac. Ph. 1. i, c. 3. 13. 23. Laert. 1. ix. sect. 5. 7. Clem. Alex. Str. 1. v. p. 599. Lucr. 1. i. v. 636. Tat, p. 143. Sext. Emp. adv. Math, 1. ix. sect. 131. 256 OP THE HERACI.ITEAN SECT. Book II. the combination of those minute particles, which are imperceptible by the senses, is produced elementary fire, and all the forms of nature ; and into these they are all, at certain periods, resolved. The world compre- heftds the eternal, living, or self-moving fire, which was neither made by gods nor men, but always was and will be, and the various bodies which are produced from it, and which have both beginning and end. The primary fire has within itself eternal and necessary motion, by the force of which the system of nature was produced. This eternal and necessary intrinsic motion is caused by fate ; the rational principle which animates the eternal fire, pervades the universe, and forms, preserves, and dissolves, in perpetual succession, the visible world. This principle or soul of the world, by its eternal, necessary, and rational motion, is God, Erjfj.iovpydg, the maker of all things.* The minute particles, which compose the primary fire, move in different directions, whence they are variously agitated and impelled ; and the contests or collisions, which these motions produce, collect into various masses the first principles of things, and thus produce natural bodies. Fire condensed becomes water ; water, still further con¬ densed, is conver ted into earth ; and the reverse. When the primary particles are thus formed into elements, they are pursuing their upward course, oSog avoj ; when the elements are again dissolved, they are pur¬ suing their downward course, 6^6g mrw. The elements of bodies being collected into one unformed mass, or chaos, this mass is at length, by the action of the animating fire, dissolved, the parts are diffused, ^elurai, and the various forms of nature appear. The heavenly bodies are in the form of boats, having the hollow side towards us; and they become luminous when certain fiery exhalations from the earth are collected within them. The sun is no larger than he appears to the sight, and becomes eclipsed when its convex surface happens to be turned towards the earth. The moon is of the same form and nature; and its monthly variations are caused by the gradual changes of its position towards the earth, from concave to convex, and the reverse. All the stars are nourished by exhalations from the earth, and these, as they are more or less splendid and warm, cause the varieties of day and night, of the seasons, and of weather.-j- No certain account can be given of the nature of the soul ; but the most probable notion is, that it is an exhalation from that fiery substance which pervades all things, and is the soul of the world, passing into human bodies through the senses. All nature is full of souls, or demons. Of these the best are such as have in their nature the least moisture, or approach nearest to the primary fire. Human souls are liable to perpetual changes ; and when they are loaded with moist vapours, they pass into the watery mass and perish : but if they are purified from these, they return into the soul of the universe. J Aristotle ranks Heraclitus among those philosophers who supposed only one material principle in nature, and provided no efficient cause, and asserts the first principle in his system to have been essentially endued with motion. And it evidently appears from his whole doctrine that Heraclitus conceived the particles of matter to have been eternally moving from an intrinsic necessity. What he says therefore concerning fate, as an intelli¬ gent and rational principle in nature, the cause of motion, and consequently * Clem. Alex. Protr. p. 42. Tertull. contr. Marcion. Stob. c. 23. 17. 27. Laert. 1. ix. sect. 7, 8, 9. t Laert. sect. 9, 10. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. ii. c. 22. 25. J Laert. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. iv. c. 3. Stob. S. 17. Stob. p. 53. 55. CO. Chap. ll-. OF THE HERACLITEAN SECT. 257 of production and dissolution, must be understood, not of a substance or being distinct from the primary fire, but of the intrinsic power of this first principle, the necessary energy by which all things are produced. Although this philosopher introduced into his system the term God, he seems to have made use of it to express, not a distinct being of a peculiar nature, but merely that innate force in the primary fire, by means of which its particles have been in eternal motion, and have at length united to form the present regular system of nature. To this force, considered as distinct from the matter to which it belongs, he gave the appellation of God ; and he called it rational and divine, because the effects, of which he conceived it to be the cause, were produced in a regular series, and according to a certain and immutable law.* * * § On the subject of Morals, Heraclitus taught, that the end of life is to enjoy happiness ; that for this purpose it is necessary to repose the body, and confine its wants within as narrow limits as possible ; that it is of more importance for men to know themselves, than to acquire extensive learning; that human life is in fact the death of the soul, as, whilst it continues in the body, it is confined and depressed, and never gains its true freedom and activity till it returns to the divine nature from which it comes ; that the first virtue is to be temperate, and the first wisdom, to follow nature ; and that all human laws are founded upon one divine law of necessity, which governs all things. These moral principles of Heraclitus have a reference to his physical system, as will be easily seen by comparing them. The Stoics were indebted to this philosopher for many parts of their physical and moral doctrine. Although Heraclitus took great pains to conceal his doctrines, he may properly be considered as the father of a sect. J For after he had deposited his writings in the temple of Diana, they were read by many philosophers, who afterwards taught his system, or incorporated it with their own. Plato himself, when he was young, learned the Heraclitean philosophy from Cratylus, and adopted that part which treated of the nature and motion of matter. This sect must, however, very soon have become extinct, for we find no traces of its existence after the death of Socrates ; which may be ascribed, in part, to the insuperable obscurity of the writings of Heraclitus, but chiefly to the superior splendour of the Platonic system, by which it was superseded. That Heraclitus, however, was long held in great esti¬ mation among the philosophers at Athens, may justly be concluded from the great pains which Zeno took to transfer several tenets of the Heracli¬ tean system into his own. Among the admirers of Heraclitus are to be ranked those who, though they did not entirely approve of his system, paid so much attention to it, as to obtain among the ancients the name of Heraclitists. The only one of these, whom it is necessary distinctly to notice, is the celebrated father of medicine, Hippocrates ; a name which also merits no mean place among philosophers. Without attempting to explain his system of medicine, which would be foreign from our design, § we shall mention a few particulars * Cic. de Nat. D. 1. i. Cic. Ac. Qu. 1. i. c. 7. t Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. vii. sect. 7. Theodoret, Then 1. xi. p. 152. Suidas. Laert. Stob. Serm. 4. 28. 250. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. I. i. c. 30. sect. 210. 1. ii. c. 6. sect. 63. 1. iii. c. 24. sect. 230. Cl. Alex. St. 1. iv. p. 532. 1. v. p. 615. + Arist. Met. 1. i. c. 6. 1. xiii. c. 4. Laert. l.ix. sect. 6. 15. Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. 1. i. c. 29. § Galen de Nat. Facultat. 1. i. 11. De Decret. Hipp. et PI. 1. v. Le Clerc, Hist. Med. p. i. 1. iii. c. 2. Fab. Bib. Gr. v. xii. p, 675. S 258 OF THE HERACLITEAN SECT. Book II. respecting his opinions concerning nature, which may serve to cast further light upon the Heraclitean philosophy. Hippocrates is not to be ranked among the followers of Democritus or Heraclitus, or any other philosopher ; for he expressly rejects the use of hypothetic philosophy in medicine, and particularly opposes, by arguments not unworthy of attention, the system which supposed four primary prin¬ ciples in nature, dryness and moisture, heat and cold.* His natural philo¬ sophy consisted of a collection of observations drawn from experience, from which he formed his judgment concerning the causes of diseases, and their remedies. For though he disapproved of the empirical method of relying wholly upon experience, without any attention to general rules or principles, and took pains to digest the art of healing into a systematic form, he did not derive his theory of medicine from any philosophical sys¬ tem, or hypothesis, but rather chose to raise it upon the foundation of the most accurate knowledge he was able to attain of the structure of the human body, and the nature of diseases. It is not therefore to be con¬ cluded that, because Hippocrates was a physician upon rational principles, he therefore professed any particular system of philosophy. What his ideas upon philosophical subjects were may be in part concluded from the fol¬ lowing Specimen :t — Concerning the sublime and divine subjects of phi¬ losophy, it is unnecessary to say more than may serve to improve our knowledge of the nature and causes of the diseases incident to the human body. That which we call heat seems to be an immortal principle, which understands, sees, hears, and perceives all things present and future. The purest part of this fire, in the original commotion of nature, retired into the superior region, which the ancients call the ether ; a second part, taking the lower region, which is called the earth, is mixed by continual agitation with the principles of cold, moisture, and dryness. A third part has ob¬ tained the middle region of the air, and produces elementary heat. All nature is subject to certain laws. Nothing in nature entirely perishes, nor is anything ever produced from nothing, but all the appearances of pro¬ duction, or dissolution, are merely changes in the form of bodies. By the necessary law of nature the elements are resolvable into each other, and all things are subject to a perpetual and reciprocal commixture. A portion of the primary principle of heat, uniting itself to the human body, forms the soul. The gods have established all nature in a certain order, and always conduct it well.J The reader will easily perceive a strong resemblance between the notions of Hippocrates and those of Heraclitus ; but the expressions of the former are so vague and obscure, as to have occasioned a dispute among the learned concerning his theological principles, which, for want of sufficient data, we shall not attempt to decide. § • De prisca Med. p. 8. ed. Foesii. f De Principiis, Op. t. i. sect. 3. tr. 4. p. 248. J I>e Genit. t. i. sect. 3. p. 231. De Diaeta, ib. p. 342. § Vidend. Jons. 1. ii. c. 3. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 760. H. Steph. Poes. Phil. p. 129. Cudworth, c. i. sect 16. c. iii. sect 8. c. iv. sect 13. Olearius de Heracliti Princip. ap. Stanley, p. ix. Hippocr. Vit a Sorano. Schulz. Hist Med. Per. i. s. iii. c. 1. J. Stephan. Hipp. Theolog. Venet 1638. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 192. Schmidii Diss.de Theol. Hipp. Treller. in Hipp. falso Atheismi accus. Rud. 1719. Gesner, Diss. de tj/uxais Hippoc. Goetting. 1737. Chap. 15. OF THK EPICUREAN SECT. 259 CHAPTER XV. OF THE EPICUREAN SECT. The Epicurean Sect, a branch of the Eleatic, appeared with great distinction upon the theatre of ancient philosophy, and was strongly marked by its peculiar tenets and character. Whilst it has obtained the highest applause from some writers, it has met with the severest censure from others, and its real merit still remains undetermined. That the reader may be enabled to form a judgment for himself, on this much controverted question, it will therefore be necessary that we trace its rise and progress, and unfold its doctrines, with all the accuracy and diligence in our power. In this part of our undertaking our chief guides among the ancients are, Laertius, who has industriously collected many particulars concerning Epi¬ curus and his philosophy from writings which are no longer extant ; the fragments collected by Suidas, Pseudo-Origen, and others ; and the poem of Lucretius, De Natura Rerum^ “ On the Nature of Things,” in which the doctrines of Epicurus are at once faithfully represented, and clothed in all the ornaments of poetic diction. As to the accounts which Plutarch, the Christian Fathers, and other later writers, have given of the Epicu¬ reans, it is evident that they were written too much under the bias of par¬ tiality to merit implicit confidence. Epicurus,* an Athenian, of the Egean tribe, was born at Gargettus, in the vicinity of Athens, at the beginning of the third year of the hundred and ninth Olympiad.'!" His father Neocles, and his mother, Chaerestrata, were of honourable descent ; but being reduced to poverty, they were sent with a colony of two thousand Athenian citizens to the island of Samos, which Pericles had subdued, to divide the lands among them by lot. The little farm which fell to their share not proving sufficient for their subsist¬ ence, Neocles took up the profession of a schoolmaster. Climrestrata, in the mean time, is said to have found her advantage in employing, among a superstitious populace, the arts of incantation and lustration, for the pur¬ poses of curing diseases, and driving away spectres, and in other equally marvellous services. It is added, that her son, whilst he was very young, furnished her with lustral songs for these solemn rites. At Samos, and the neighbouring island of Teos, Epicurus remained till he was eighteen years of age; when, for the sake of enjoying greater literary advantages, he removed to Athens. Upon the death of Alexander, when commotions rose in Athens through the tyranny of Perdiccas, Epicurus left the city, and went to his father at Colophon. Soon afterwards he removed to Mitylene, and after passing one year in that city, took up his residence four years in Lampsacus. At the expiration of this term, when he was in the thirty- sixth year of his age, he returned to Athens. J From his fourteenth year to this time he appears to have been industri¬ ously employed in the study of philosophy. The circumstance which first turned his attention to this study is said to have been, that, on reading the works of Hesiod, he consulted his master concerning the meaning of the word Chaos, who, not being able to explain it, referred him to the phi- * Laert. 1. x. sect. 1, &c. Suidas. Lucr. 1. vi. v. 1. Strabo, 1, xiv.p. 589. 638, Cic. vacuities between the particles ; for rays of light will pass easily through a dense body, as glass, if its vacuities be placed in a straight line. Hardness and softness, flexibility, ductility, and other qualities, may be explained in ;• a similar manner. The weight of a body is the result of the weight of all its atoms, and since gravity is an essential property of atoms, all bodies^ , must be heavy ; and the only reason why some bodies appear to have the ' : contrary property of levity is, that they are driven upwards by the denser"^ mass in which they are placed.:]: N From the combinations of the properties of atoms, and the qualities of * bodies already enumerated, arise other properties and faculties, which are “ likewise to be traced up to the principle of motion. Heat, for example, is the influx of certain small, round, soft corpuscles, which insinuate • themselves into the pores of bodies in continual succession, till, by their fl * Lucret. 1. ii. v. 94. Laert. sect. 46. 61, 62. f Plut. FI. Ph. 1. i. c. 3. Cic. de Nat. D. 1. i. c. 20. adv. Colot. Laert. 1. x. sect. 134. X Sext. Einp. adv. Math. 1. x. sect. 42. 51. 75. 1. iv. v. 605. 444. 266. 1. ii. 381. 1. i. 187. 360. 1. V. c. 1 9. Laert. Lucret. I. i. v. 1020, &c. Plut. Lucr. 1. i. V. 575. I. ii. v. 96. 759. | Arist. Phys. 1. i. c. 4. Plut. PI. Ph. i f Chap. 15. OF THE EPICUREAN SECT. 271 perpetual action, the parts are separated, and at length the body dissolved. The sense of heat is the perception of the separation of those parts which were before continuous. Cold is the influx of certain irregular atoms, whose motion is slower than those which occasion heat, and their effect the reverse of the former. Pleasure and pain, motion and rest, and even time, are accidents of bodies. Production and dissolution are nothing more than a change of the position of atoms, or an increase or diminution of the particles of which bodies are composed.* The world, or that portion of the universe which includes the whole circumference of the heavens, the heavenly bodies, the earth, and all visi¬ ble objects, is to be conceived as one whole, on account of the contiguity and relation of its parts ; but there is no proof that it is an organised and animated body. Because the world is a finite portion of the universe, it must be terminated, and have some figure ; but what this is, it is impossi¬ ble to discover. The world is not eternal, but began at a certain time to exist; for since every thing in the world is liable to the vicissitudes of production and decay, the world itself must be so too. This may also be inferred from the short date of history, and the late invention of arts.f The formation of the world may be conceived to have happened thus: — a finite number of that infinite multitude of atoms, which, wdth infinite space, constitutes the universe, falling fortuitously into the region of the world, were in consequence of their innate motion collected into one rude and indigested mass. In this chaos the heaviest and largest atoms, or col¬ lections of atoms first subsided, whilst the smaller, and those which from their form would move most freely, were driven upwards. These latter, after many reverberations, rose into the outer region of the world, and formed the heavens. Those atoms, which were by their size and figure suited to form fiery bodies, collected themselves into stars. Those which were not capable of rising so high in the sphere of the world, being dis¬ turbed by the fiery particles, formed themselves into air. At length from those which subsided was produced the earth. By the action of air, agitated by heat from the heavenly bodies upon the mixed mass of the earth, its smoother and lighter particles were separated from the rest, and water was produced, which flowed, by its nature, into the lowest places. In the first combination of atoms, which formed the chaos, various seeds arose, which, being preserved and nourished by moisture and heat, after¬ wards sprung forth in organised bodies of different kinds. Of the animal productions of the earth, some may be conceived to have been produced imperfect, and therefore incapable of life, but others would come forth more perfect. These, after the earth was exhausted of its seminal virtues, would respectively continue their species. The world is preserved by the same mechanical causes by which it was framed; and from the same causes it will at last be dissolved. The in¬ cessant motion of atoms, which produced the world, is continually ope¬ rating towards its dissolution, for nothing is solid and indissoluble but atoms. Whence it may be concluded that the time will come when no¬ thing will remain but separate atoms and infinite space. Atoms being * Lucret. 1. ii. v. 381. 1. iv. v. 527. 1. vi. v. 225. J. iii. v. 860. Laert. 1. x. sect. 52. Plut. adv. Col. t. iii. p, 411. Sext. Emp. Pyrrli. 1. iii. c. 17. sect. 137. adv. Math. 1. x. sect. 183. 227. t Laert. 1. x. sect. 54. 76. 88. Lucret. 1. i. v. 1020. 1. v. 166, &c. 319, &c. Cic. de Nat. D. 1. i. c. 8, 9, 10. 1. ii. c. 17. Lactant. 1. vii. c. 5. Plut. Plac. Ph. 1. i. c. 4. 1 Laert. 1. x. sect. 76. 88. Lucret. 1. iv. v. 304, &c. 420, &c. 450, &c. 474, &c. 1. v. 166, &c. 319, &c. 799, &c. 1. i. 1020. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. i. c. 4. Cic. de N. D. 1 i. c. 8, 9. 1. ii. c. 17. Lactant. i. vii. c. 5. 272 OF THE EPICUREAN SECT. Book 11. infinite, and capable of moving through infinite space, the number of worlds may be infinite.* * * § The earth, which was formed of heavy particles, subsiding to the lowest place, is situated in the middle of the world. Not that there is any point within the earth which is the centre of gravity, for all heavy bodies fall in nearly parallel lines, there being, as in the universe so in this world, one region above, from which they fall, and another region below, towards which they fall. The doctrine that there are upon the earth antipodes is therefore false. The earth is in form a circular plane : it is preserved from falling towards the lower region by the air, with which it is con¬ genial, and upon which therefore it does not press, their mutual action destroying the effect of gravity. Earthquakes are caused by the agitation of internal winds and water, or by the decay and sudden fall of columns, by which portions of the earth’s surface are supported ; or the internal winds may be converted into fires, which may cause sudden and violent eruptions, as in Mount Etna.:]: All rivers flow into the sea, and mingle with a vast ocean, which surrounds the whole habitable world. The waters passing out of the sea into the crevices of the earth undergo a filtration, by means of which the particles of salt which they had received from the bed of the sea are sepa¬ rated. The overflowing of the Nile may be caused, either by winds from the north, or by rain or snow from the regions of Ethiopia. Water in wells is cold in summer and warm in winter, because in summer the earth being rarefied exhales the particles of heat, and becoming colder, com¬ municates its coldness to the wmter, and the reverse in winter. Ice is pro¬ duced when the round particles of water, which cause heat, are protruded by the condensing power of the external cold, and other particles, which from their form are more easily entangled, are from the same cause brought nearer together, and at length united. § Fossils and plants are produced by the necessary impulse of nature ; that is, by the motion of atoms, causing continual transposition, accretion, or diminution, in individual bodies. They have no vital principle, and therefore can only be said analogically to live or die. The loadstone or magnet attracts iron, because the particles which are continually flowing from it, as from all other bodies, have such a peculiar fitness in form, to those which flow from iron, that upon collision they easily unite ; so that some passing towards the mass of iron, and others towards the magnet, and striking upon their surfaces, they are respectively entangled with the particles of the body upon which they strike, and in rebounding carry back the body along with it. The mutual attraction of amber and light bodies may be explained in the same manner. || Animals having been once formed, at the beginning of the world, by the casual conjunction of similar atoms, the production of animal bodies is still continued in a consistent and determinate order ; Nature by degrees acquiring an uniformity in her operations, which appears artificial. The parts of animals were not originally framed for the uses to which they are now applied ; but, having been accidentally produced, they were afterwards • Laert. 1. x. sect. 77, &c. Lucret. 1. i. v. 1102, &c. 1. ii. v. 1092, &c. 1144, &c. 1021, &c. 1. V. V. 252. 381, &c. Cic. de N. D. 1. i. c. 8. PJut. PI. Ph. 1. ii. c. 4. 1. i. c. 5. in Brut. t. v. p. 711. Cic. de Divin. 1. ii. c. 63. t Lucret. 1. i. v. 1051, &c. 1. v. v. 538, &c. 1. ii. v. 652, cScc. t Lucret. 1. vi. v. 533. Sen. Qu. Nat. 1. vi. c. 20. Laert. 1. x. sect. 105. § Lucret. 1. vi. v. 613, &c. 635, &c. 714, &c. 11 Lucret. 1. vi. v. 538, &c. Laert. 1. x. sect. 95, 96. Plut. de PI. Ph. 1. v. c. 25. Chap. 15. OF THE EPICUREi\N SECT. 273 accidentally employed. The eye, for example, was not made for .seeing, nor the ear for heai-ing ; but the soul, being formed within the body at the same time with these organs, and connected with them, could not avoid making use of them in their respective functions.* * * § The soul is a subtle corporeal substance, composed of the finest atoms \ for if it were not corporeal, it could neither touch nor be touched, and consequently could neither act nor suffer. By the extreme tenuity of its particles it is able to penetrate the whole body, and to adhere to all its I parts. Notwithstanding the subtlety of its texture, it is composed of four distinct parts; — fire, which causes animal heat; an ethereal principle, which is moist vapour ; air ; and a fourth principle, which is the cause of sensa¬ tion. This sentient principle differs essentially from the three former, but is, like the rest, corporeal, because it is capable both of acting and being acted upon by bodies.-j- These four parts are so perfectly combined as to form one subtle substance, which whilst it remains in the body is the cause of all its faculties, motions, and passions, and which cannot be separated from it without producing the entire dissolution of the animal system. The soul is only capable of exercising its faculties of sensation by means of the bodily organs ; and although, whilst they are united, the body partakes of the sensations of the soul, upon their separation it becomes wholly insen¬ sible; whence it appears that sensation is the result of their union. That sensation is thus produced from the combination of elementary parts in themselves insensible, is to be ascribed to the peculiar magnitude, figure, motion, and arrangement of those parts ; that is, sensation is to be con¬ sidered, not as a primary property of atoms, but as the effect of a peculiar combination and contexture of certain atoms disposed by their nature to produce it.;]: Different sensations are the casual effects of the different organs which the soul in its union with the body is capable of employing, and of the dif¬ ferent properties and qualities of external objects. These become sensible by means of certain species, or images, which are perpetually passing, like thin films, from bodies, in form similar to the surfaces of the bodies them¬ selves, and striking upon organs fitted to receive them. Thus the species, or images, of visible bodies consist in certain small particles, of a peculiar magnitude, figure, and motion, which having passed in a certain situation from a body, penetrate the organ of sight, and affect it in a peculiar man¬ ner. Thus also, hearing is the effect of an efflux of certain particles from the body which is tlie cause of the sound, so formed and arranged as when , they strike upon the ear to become audible. The sensations produced by means of the other senses admit of a similar explanation. The species, or images, which produce these effects are inconceivably small, and therefore do not, in passing away, perceptibly diminish the body ; and, from the in¬ nate tendency to motion in the atoms of which they are composed, they fly with inconceivable velocity from the object to the organ of sensation. § The Mind, or Intellect, that nameless part of the soul in which consists the power of thinking, judging, and determining, is formed of particles most subtle in their nature, and capable of the most rapid motion. In * Lucret. 1. iv. v. 816, &c. Lactant. I. iii. c. 17. De Opif. c. 7. Galen de Usu Part. 1. i. c. 21. t Lucret. 1. ii. v. 129. 162, &c. 1. iii. v. 233, &c. Plut. de Plac. Ph. 1. iv. c. 3. adv. Colot. Laert. 1. x. sect. 63, 64'. X Lucret. 1. ii. v. 285. v. 972, &c. 1. iii. v. 290. 324. Laert. sect. 64, 65. § Lucret. 1. ii. v. 422. 434. 1. iv. v. 245, &c. 645, &c. 677, &c. Laert. 1. -X. sect. 49. 52. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. iv. c. 19. adv. Colot. t. iii. p. 410. Sext. Emp. Pyirh. Hyp. 1. i. c. 14. sect. 94. T 274 OF THE EPICUREAN SECT. Book 11. whatever part of the body the intellect resides, it exists as a portion of the soul, with which it is so conjoined as to form one nature with it ; at the same time it retains its own distinct character — the power of thinking. The intellect has this peculiar property, that when the soul or sentient principle feels pleasure or pain, the intellect or mind always partakes of it ; but the intellect may be affected with passions which are not diffused through the whole soul. The seat of this most excellent part of the soul seems to be in the middle of the breast, or the heart, which we perceive to be the region of those affections which are excited by cogitation. Thought is produced by subtle images, which find their way through the body, and, when they arrive at the intellect, move it to think.* * * § The affections and passions of the soul may be reduced to two — pleasure and pain ; the former natural and agreeable, the latter unnatural and troublesome. Whilst all the parts of the soul remain in their natural state, it experiences nothing but pleasurable tranquillity ; but from the various motions which take place either in ourselves, or in the objects around us, the soul is liable either to be dilated by the approach of images suitable to its nature, and therefore pleasant, or to be contracted by contrary impres¬ sions. Voluntary motion is the effect of images conveyed to the mind, by which pleasurable or painful conceptions are formed, and subsequent desires or aversions are produced, which become the immediate springs of action, j- Sleep is produced when the parts of the soul which are at other times diffused through the body are repressed or separated by the action of the air, or of food. Dreams are the effect of images casually flying about, which from their extreme tenuity penetrate the body and strike upon the mind, exciting an imaginary perception of those things of which they are images. Death is the privation of sensation, in consequence of the sepa¬ ration of the soul from the body. When a man dies, the soul is dispersed into the corpuscles or atoms of which it was composed, and therefore can no longer be capable of thought or perception. It is with the soul as with the eye, which, when it is separated from the organised machine to which it belonged, is no longer capable of seeing. J The knowledge of things which belong to the regions above the earth, whether aerial or celestial, is to be pursued for no other purpose than to free the mind from imaginary fears, and settle it in a state of tranquillity. This end may be accomplished in different ways; because phenomena admit of different explanations, all however depending upon the simple principles upon which the terrestrial phenomena have been explained.§ In the heavens, or ethereal regions, the sun, moon, and stars appear to be fiery bodies ; or they may be smooth mirrors, from which bright fiery par¬ ticles flowing through the ethereal region are reflected to the earth ; or they may be deep vessels, containing fires ; or they may be circular plates, heated like mortar, or stones in a furnace. The apparent motion of the heavenly bodies may arise from the revolution of the whole heaven in which they are fixed, like nails in a solid body ; or by the revolution of the bodies them¬ selves through the heaven as a fluid and permeable medium. The cause • Lucret. 1. iii. v. 94. 104. 180. 187, &c. 1. iii. v. 400. 422, &c. 1. iv. 728. Plut. de PI. Ph. 1. iv. c. 8. Cic. de Fin. 1. i. c. 6. f Lucret. 1. y. 289, 8cc. 1. iv. 856. 879. Laert. 1. x. sect. 34. 127. 139. J Lucret. 1. iv. 758. 914. 959, &c. 1. iii. v. 507. 844. 991. Laert. sect. 65. Ps. Orig. Philosophum, c. 22. § Laert. 1. x. sect. 85. 113. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. ii. c. 13. 20. Stob. Eel. Pliys. p. 53. 55, 56, Cic. de N. D. 1. i. c. 10. 1. ii. c. 17. Chap. 15. OF THE EPICUREAN SECt. 1^75 of the motion of heavenly bodies may either be, an internal necessity in the natures of the bodies themselves, or the external pressure of some ethereal fluid; but to assert any thing positively upon these subjects only becomes those who affect an ostentatious display of knowledge.* It cannot be contradicted that there are in the universe divine natures ; because nature itself has impressed the idea of divinity upon the mind of men : for where is the nation or race of men which has not, without instruc¬ tion, a natural preconception of the existence of the gods? This opinion is not established by custom, law, or any human institution, but is the effect of an innate principle, producing universal consent; it must therefore be true, j- This universal notion has probably arisen from images of the gods, which have casually made their -way to the minds of men in sleep, and have afterwards been recollected. But it is inconsistent with our natural notions of the gods, as happy and immortal beings, to suppose that they incumber themselves with the management of the world, or are subject to the cares and passions which must necessarily attend so great a charge. We are therefore to conceive that the gods have no intercourse with man¬ kind, nor any concern with the affairs of the world. Nevertheless, on account of their excellent nature, they are proper objects of reverence and worship, j; Because the human figure is the most perfect, and the only form that admits of reason and virtue, w^e must conceive that the gods resemble men in their external shape ; but we are not to suppose them to be gross bodies; consisting of flesh and blood, but thin ethereal substances, endued with sensation and intellect, and, from their peculiar nature, incapable of decay. The place of their residence is unknown to mortals ; but we may be assured that, wherever it be, it is the mansion of perfect purity, tranquillity, and happiness. § It will be impossible for an intelligent reader to contemplate the Epi¬ curean System, as it is stated in the preceding summary, without perceiving that it is a feeble and unsuccessful effort to explain the phenomena of na¬ ture upon mechanical principles. The author of the system deserts, at the ' outset, his own principle of advancing nothing which cannot be supported by natural appearances; for nothing \vas ever more perfectly hypothetical than his doctrine of indivisible atoms of various forms and magnitude ; nor can anything be more contrary to the knowm law of nature, than that atoms i impelled only by a single force should deviate from the right line. Indeed, Epicurus discovers, through the whole detail of his philosophy, a degree of ignorance with respect to the phenomena of nature which proves him to ‘ have been ill qualified for the task of solving the grand problem concerning the origin and formation of the world. But the greatest defect in his sys¬ tem is, that it attempts to account for all the appearances of nature, even those which respect animated and intelligent beings, upon the simple prin¬ ciples of matter and motion, without introducing the agency of a Supreme Intelligence, or admitting any other idea of fate, than that of blind necessity inherent in every atom, by which it moves in a certain direction. Hence he leaves without explanation those appearances of design which are so manifest in every part of nature, and falls into the gross absurdity of sup- * Laert. sect. 91, &c. Plut. PI. Ph. 1. ii. c. 22. Lucret. 1. v. v. .592. 659. 750, &:c. 1. vi. V. 218. 450. 498, &c. t Lucret. 1. v. v. 1182, &c. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. ix. sect. 25, 26. Cic. de N. D. 1. i. c. 17. 30. Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 13. De Legib. 1. i. c. 8. ;J; Lucret. 1. v. v. 1108, 1232, &c. Laert. 1. x. sect. 76. 123. 133, 134. Stoboei Serm. 39. p. 137. Cic. de N. D. I. i. c. 17, 18, 19. Lactant. de Ira Dei, c. 10. Plut. n. Ph. 1. i. c. 6. § Cic. 1. c. Senec. de Belief. 1. iv. c. 19. 276 OF THE EPICUREAN SECT. Book II. posing that the eye was not made for seeing, nor the ear for hearing : and although he professes to admit the existence of gods into his system of nature, and this upon the ground of an innate principle common to all mankind, the idea which he gives of their nature, as similar to that of man, and of their condition, as wholly separate from the world, and enjoying no other felicity than that which arises from inactive tranquillity, falls infinitely short of the true conception of Deity, as the Intelligent Creator and Governor of the world. It is difficult to determine precisely what was the idea of Epicurus con- 3 cerning the divine natures which he admitted into his system. Finding it^ wholly inconsistent with his fundamental principles to suppose the existence c of immaterial beings, yet wishing to ascribe to the gods an incorporeall nature, he seems to have had recourse to an abstract notion of a peculia^ substance, in the form of man, of such tenuity as to be intangible, indi^ visible, and indissoluble, and which he supposed to be endued with percep¬ tion and reason. What this peculiar nature of Epicurus’ divinities was] which was not a body, yet was like a body, we own ourselves unable to explain. The truth seems to have been, that Epicurus, reduced to inex tricable difficulties by the absurdity of his system, that he might not wholly discard the idea of divinity, had recourse to the common asylum of igno¬ rance, words without meaning. The doctrine of Epicurus concerning nature differs from that of the Stoics chiefly in these particulars; that while the latter held God to be the soul of the world, diffused through universal nature, the former admitted no Primary Intelligent Nature into his system, but held atoms and space to be the first principles of all things ; and that, whilst the Stoics con¬ ceived the active and passive principles of nature to be connected by the chain of fate, Epicurus ascribed every appearance in nature to a fortuitoi^ collision and combination of atoms. The science of Physics was, in the judgment of Epicurus, subordinate to that of Ethics ; and his whole doctrine concerning nature was professedly ^ adapted to rescue men from the dominion of troublesome passions, and to lay the foundation of a tranquil and happy life.* His Moral Philosophy, ^ which is unquestionably the least exceptionable part of his system, andl-i which, when fairly rescued from the misrepresentations of his adversaries. will be found for the most part consonant to reason and nature, may be ^ reduced to the following Summary : — J The end of living, or the ultimate good which is to be sought for its j own sake, according to the universal opinion of mankind, is happiness ; yet J men, for the most part, fail in the pursuit of this end, either because they > Chap. 16. OF THE PYRRHONIC SECT. 287 must be maintained, which is an occasion of endless dispute.* Equally I, useless are divisions into whole and part, or into genus, species, and acci¬ dent. For example, genus and species are either merely nominal, or real- * ities. If they are nominal only, they partake of the uncertainty of the mind which conceives them; if they are realities, species cannot be com¬ prehended in genera, because they would not then have a distinct subsist¬ ence ; and if they are not so comprehended, the entire nature of genus and species is lost.-f- The forms of logic for the refutation of sophisms . are also useless ; for though it be desirable to refute sophistical reasoning, this must be done, not by the artificial arguments of syllogisms, but by ; acquiring a probable knowledge of the nature of things, and opposing the evidence of the senses and appearances to the quibbles of sophistry. As the Sceptic admits nothing certain in the instrumental part of phi¬ losophy or logic, he conceives that there may be equal room for doubt in I all philosophical disquisitions concerning Nature. With respect to the Deity, he asks, since the Dogmatists are not deter¬ mined whether God be corporeal or incorporeal ; whether he be endued with a human form or not ; whether he be in place or not ; or if he be in place, whether he is in the world or beyond it ; what can be certainly known concerning a being of whose form, subsistence, and place, we are ignorant ? That an efficient cause exists, may be inferred with probability from the productions and dissolutions which take place in nature ; for how can these changes happen without a cause ? On the other side it may be urged, that if any cause be admitted, some cause must be assigned for that cause, and so on in infinitum. Each opinion may be supported by proba- i ble arguments ; whence the question roust remain doubtful. J ■ Material Principles must also, according to the Sceptics, be pronounced I incomprehensible, as is sufficiently manifest from the disagreement among ; philosophers concerning their nature ; for this disagreement shows that ! there are no common axioms on this subject, in which all are agreed, and I which need no proof. The idea of body is incomprehensible ; for it is ! said to consist of length, breadth, thickness, and a power of resistance ; ! but these properties considered in themselves are nothing, and can only , exist as qualities of body ; and yet if these be taken away, the whole idea of body is destroyed. Bodies are said to be composed of primary ele¬ ments, but this must either be by contact, or by mixture. It cannot be by contact ; for either the parts of body in contact must touch, or the whole : the whole cannot touch, for then they would no longer touch, but become coincident ; nor can the parts touch, for each part is a whole with respect to its own parts ; if therefore any parts of bodies touch, wholes would touch, which is absurd. The formation of bodies by contact is therefore inconceivable ; and their formation by mixture is equally so. For mixture must be of the entire substance of the primary elements, else the effect would be contiguity, and not mixture ; but a small portion of elementary matter cannot be mixed with a larger substance, without be¬ coming equal in magnitude, which is absurd. We can therefore form no conception of the composition of bodies from primary elements. § Upon the question concerning motion, the Sceptics not being able to refute the arguments which have been urged against its existence, nor to reject the phenomena by which its existence becomes evident, suspend their judgment. On similar grounds they hesitate concerning the possibility * Sext. Emp. ]. ii. c. 16. sect. 205. 211, 212. f Ib. c. 20. sect. 219, &c. 22. sect. 236. X lb. 1. iii. c. i. sect. 2 — 11. 17. 24. Adv. Phys. 1. i. sect. 33. 49. Pyrrh. 1. ii. c. 13. § lb. 1. iii. c. 4. sect. 30, &c. c. 5. sect. 38, &c. c. 6. sect. 56, &c. 288 OF THE PYRRHONIC SECT. Book II; of increase or diminution, transposition or change of any kind ; for since J a whole, as distinct from all parts, is nothing, adding, taking away, or changing the position of parts, affects nothing. Again, that which is changed must be changed in some time either past, present, or future; but it cannot be changed in any time past or future, for nothing can either act or suffer in a time that does not exist ; nor can it be changed in the pre¬ sent time ; for the present instant is an indivisible point of duration, in which nothing can be done.* Place, or the part of space occupied by J body, must be either of one dimension, or of all the three ; if the former, it is not commensurate with the body whose place it is ; if the latter, body, which consists of three dimensions, is its own place, and the thing con¬ taining is the same with the thing contained : both these suppositions are I absurd ; yet the phenomena seem to prove the existence of place, there¬ fore the Sceptic does not determine this, rather than that, to be true. Time is neither a corporeal nor incorporeal substance ; but besides this nothing can be conceived ; therefore time seems to be nothing : on the contrary, experience seems to prove its existence ; therefore the Sceptic determines nothing concerning it.-j- On the subject of Morals, the Sceptic sect suspended their judgment concerning the ground of the distinction admitted by the Stoics, and other, dogmatists, between things in their nature good, evil, or indifferent. The arguments on which they insist are such as these : — The different opinions concerning good sufficiently prove that philosophers are ignorant of its nature. Different men are differently affected by things which are called good, and therefore these things in themselves cannot be good. Desire] itself is not good, else we should be contented with it, and not endeavour to obtain its object ; nor can the external object of desire be good, because it is external : there appears therefore to be nothing really good, and con-, sequently nothing really evil. Since different men judge and act differently,, concerning these things, some approving what others condemn, and some avoiding what others pursue, there can be nothing in nature really good, evil, or indifferent. Hence it follows that ethics can have no foundation in nature. The art of living well is not innate to man ; for if it were, allj men would be virtuous ; nor can it be taught, for that which is to be] li ! taught, is doubtful ; no one is himself sufficiently instructed to become a teacher ; nor are there any means of demonstration, or testimony, by which it can be taught ; or if this art could be taught, it would only prove the occasion of endless perturbation of mind, arising from the eager desire and pursuit of things supposed to be good. Tranquillity is best obtained by giving up all expectation of arriving at truth, and sitting down in a statejt of total indifference with respect to opinions.;}; Besides these, which are the chief grounds of Scepticism, as given byA the historian and admirer of the sect, Sextus Empiricus, there are others,4 neither less subtle, nor more satisfactory, than the idle quibbles of the) dialectic schools. Indeed nothing is more evident than that the Sceptic sect owed its existence to the disputatious spirit of the Dogmatists ; and^- that the followers of Pyrrho were more desirous to put an end to the fri¬ volous contests of others, than to establish even their own doctrine of in¬ credulity. In order to accomplish their end, they' made no scruple to turn back upon their adversaries their own weapons, by making use of specious * Sext. Emp. I. iii. c. 8. sect. 64. c. 9, 10. sect. 82, &c. c. 12. sect. 98, &c. c. 14; sect. 109, &c. c. 15. sect. 115, &c. + lb. c. 16. sect. 125, &c. c. 17. sect. 136 — 144. J Ib. 1. iii. c. 18. sect. 153, &c. c. 21. seqt. 172, &c. c. 23. sect. 179, &c. c. 24. sect. 191. 195. 206. 235. c. 25- — 31. Couf. Laert. 1. ix. sect. 61. 108. Chap. 16. OF THE PYRRHONIC SECT. 289 arguments, distinctions merely verbal, and other artifices of sophistry. It would not be difficult to expose the fallacies of those reasonings, if they deserve the name, by which the ancient Sceptics endeavoured to under¬ mine the foundations of truth, and to overturn every scientific, moral, and religious principle. But the nature and extent of our historical under¬ taking will not permit us to enter into this important field of argument. Referring our readers to those able advocates of truth, which modern times have produced, we must therefore content ourselves for the present with briefly remarking that the Sceptics have advanced nothing upon the im¬ portant question respecting the existence and providence of a Supreme Being, which may not, with the greatest confidence, be referred to mere verbal quibbling, or to the acknowledged imperfection of the human in¬ tellect, which, whilst it embraces, on the clear and certain ground of final causes in nature, the doctrine of the existence of a Deity, must always confess itself unequal to the full comprehension of his nature and opera¬ tions. It must be added, that whilst the Sceptics classed the question concerning the existence of the Deity among those speculations, upon which they thought it impossible to decide with certainty eitlier in the affirmative or negative, they not only joined in the popular worship of the gods, but confessed that there appeared to be in the human mind a natural instinctive principle of religion ; a concession which sufficiently invali¬ dates all their futile reasonings on the side of infidelity. If the history of the Sceptic sect be compared with that of the Academy, the two sects will be found to be nearly allied. The chief points of differ¬ ence between them were these :* the Academics laid it down as an axiom that nothing can be known with certainty ; the Pyrrlionists perceived the absurdity of this position, and maintained that even this ought not to be positively asserted. The Academics admitted the real existence of good and evil ; the Pyrrlionists suspended their judgment upon this point. The Academics, especially the followers of Carneades, allowed different degrees of probability in opinion ; but the Sceptics rejected all speculative conclu¬ sions, drawn either from the testimony of the senses or from reasoning, and contended that we can have no ground for affirming or denying any proposition, or embracing any one opinion rather than another. Carneades admitted that by the impressions of external objects upon the senses, we are necessarily inclined to one opinion more than another ; Pyrrho whilst he acknowledges that men are necessarily impelled to action by their feelings, denied that they are capable of forming any judgment. In common life, the Academics followed probability ; the Sceptics, law, custom, and the natural impulse of appetite. After all, these two sects differed more in appear¬ ance than in reality. Both invaded the strongholds of truth ; but the Academics did it covertly and with modesty, whilst the Sceptics assaulted them with open violence, as if they had forsworn all allegiance to reason. Before we take our leave of this sect it may be of some importance briefly to remark the gradual progress of Scepticism through the several stages of the Greek philosophy. The confession of ignorance and uncer¬ tainty, which so frequently fell from the lips of Socrates, amounted to no more than a general acknowledgment of the imbecility of the human un¬ derstanding. In this modest acknowledgment he was followed by Plato and others. But, as soon as the Greek philosophers began to employ themselves in constructing systems of philosophy, they admitted a tenet which was favourable to incredulity; nanTely, that nature is perpetually fluctuating, so that no sensible object remains for any single moment * Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. Hyp. 1. i. c. 33. iEncsid. apiid Phot. Cod. 213. u 290 OF THE PYRRIIONIC SECT. Book ii: perfectly the same. Pythagoras and Plato, Heraclitus, Democritus and' Epicurus, who were among the most celebrated dogmatists, embraced this] tenet ; but in order to provide some stable foundation for science, the two! former devised their world of intelligibles, denominated by Plato, Ideas,! and by Pythagoras, Numbers ; and the two latter introduced the doctrine] of immutable Atoms, These doctrines, which were rather hypothetical than demonstrable, still left sufficient room for doubt and uncertainty^ After this the Eleatic and Megaric sects, who admitted into their schools the most childish quibbles aud absurd cavilling, and the Sophists, whoj professedly undertook either side of any question, and disputed solely for, conquest, without regarding truth, afforded no small advantage to the] rising cause of Scepticism. Pyrrho and others, who were more inclined to] doubt than to dogmatise, when they saw by what frivolous arguments] opinions were, in these schools, supported or confuted, were led to conclude] that the whole philosophy of the dogmatists rested upon the same preca¬ rious ground. Hearing the leaders of different sects traducing each other’s systems as false, puerile, absurd, and hostile to the truth, and remarking, particularly, the violent contentions which arose among the followers of Aristotle, Zeno, and Epicurus, it was not without some appearance of reason that they looked upon the whole mass of dogmatic philosophy as an ill constructed edifice, raised upon the sand, which must soon fall to the ground. Where the prejudice which these circumstances would create in favour of Scepticism was aided by a natural feebleness of judgment, and instability of temper, it was no wonder if it produced universal uncertainty. That these were the natural infirmities of those who distinguished them¬ selves as leaders in the Sceptic sect, is sufficiently seen in the weak reason¬ ings, and puerile trifles, which are piled up in the memoirs of this sect, so industriously collected by Sextus Empiricus. And whatever may have been urged to the contrary by modern advocates for Scepticism, it cannot be reasonably doubted that the true causes of the continuance of this sect, through every age, have been, that indolence which is inimical to every mental exertion ; that kind of intellectual imbecility which, in various degrees, incapacitates men for discerning the true nature and condition of things ; or, lastly, that propensity towards subtile refinement, which hinders the most vigorous mind in estimating different degrees of proba¬ bility, and accurately distinguishing truth from error.* We have now completed the First Period of the History of Philoso- c phy. Barbaric and Grecian. The latter we have followed from its infancy, /; through every stage of its growth, till it was transferred to Rome ; and, as far as the numerous difficulties and obscurities which, after every effort to clear them away, still hang over the subject, would permit, we have deli¬ neated the peculiar features of the several sects, and given a summary of their respective systems. It only remains that we conclude this part of * Vidend. Huet de la Foiblesse, &c, Jons. Scr. H. Ph. 1. ii. c. 3, 4. Fabr.iBib. Gr. V. ii. p. 674. 818. Bayle. Sexti Disp. Anti-Scept. ap. Fab. Bib. Gr. v. xii. p. 617. Morhoff. Polyh. t. ii. 1. i. c. 6. Fabr. Syl. Scr. de Ver. c. 23. sect. 4. Heunisch. Diss. de Phil. Scept. Arnhem, de Sect. Pyrrh. Misc. Lips. t. v. Obs. cxi. p. 240. Le Vayer, Op. t. v. p. 213. Bierling. de Pyrrh. c. i. sect. 3. Stollii Hist. Mor. p. 198. ; Gassend. de Vit. Epic. 1. v. c. 3. Voss, de Sect. p. 110. Pasch. Introd. in Rem. Lit. / Mor. Vet. p. 717. Crousaz, Log. p. iii. c. 9. sect. 12. Budd. de Scepticismo Morali, t sect. 2. Ann. Hist. Ph. p. 210. sect. 23. p. 238. Floucqiiet, de Epoch. Pyrrh. Tub. J 1758. 1 Chap. 16. OF THE PYRllHONIC SECT. 291 our work with remarking, in a few words, the fate of the Grecian philo¬ sophy in countries foreign to Greece, where it was disseminated and pro¬ fessed, excepting among the Romans, among whom the success it expe¬ rienced through a long course of years is so interesting as to require a particular discussion. The Grecian philosophy w'as at first confined, as we have seen, within the limits of Greece, and the neighbouring regions, except the Italic school, in¬ stituted by Pythagoras in Magna Grcecia. Several eminent philosophers, it is true, travelled into Egypt ; but it was chiefly in the infancy of philo¬ sophy, and rather for the purpose of acquiring, than of communicating knowledge. But after Egypt, and almost all Asia, was brought under the Grecian yoke by the conquests of Alexander, the Grecian philosophy passed, as might naturally be expected, from the conquerors to the nations whom they had subdued. Alexander himself, who had been early initiated into philosophical studies, and inspired with respect for philosophers by his master Aristotle, enlarged the boundaries of philosophy,* by carrying with him, wherever he went, a train of philosophers, (among whom was Callis- thenes and Anaxarchus,) whom he treated with great respect, and em¬ ployed in conciliating the affections of the people to their conqueror. Notwithstanding the reverence which the orientalists unquestionably en¬ tertained for their ancient doctrines, there can be little doubt that, when Alexander, in order to preserve, by the arts of peace, that extensive empire which he had obtained by the force of arms, endeavoured to incor¬ porate the customs of the Greeks with those of the Persian, Indian, and other eastern nations, the opinions as well as the manners of this feeble and obsequious race would, in a great measure, be accommodated to those of their conquerors. This influence of the Grecian upon the oriental philosophy continued long after the time of Alexander, and was one prin¬ cipal occasion of the confusion of opinions which we shall find in the sub¬ sequent history of the Alexandrian and Christian schools. It was in Alexandria chiefly that the Grecian philosoph}’’ was ingrafted upon the stock of ancient oriental wisdom. The Egyptian method of teaching by allegory was peculiarly favourable to such a union. We have already seen that the philosophy and religion of the Egyptians early under¬ went a material change of this kind, when Cambyses, in conquering this - country, introduced the doctrine and theology of the Persians. Under the government of the Greeks, there were similar innovations ; the priests of Egypt endeavouring, as well as they were able, to form a coalition between the ancient religion of their country and the doctrine and philosophy of their conquerors. Alexander, when he built the city of Alexandria, with a determination to make it the seat of his empire, and peopled it with emigrants from various countries, opened a new seat of philosophy, which emulated the fame of Athens itself. A general indulgence was granted to the promiscuous crowd assembled in this rising city, whether Egyptians, Grecians, Jews, or others, to profess their respective systems of philosophy and religion with¬ out molestation. The consequence was, that Egy])t was soon filled with religious and philosophical sectaries of every kind ; and particularly, that almost every Grecian sect found an advocate and professor in Alexandria. -j- The family of the Ptolemies, who after Alexander obtained the * Plutarch, de Fort. Alex. t. ii. p. 34C. t. v. p. 450. Amnion, in Vit. Arist. t Plut. 1. c. Justin. 1. 38. c. 9. Athen. 1. iv. p. 184. Porph. Vit. Plot. c. 16. Arrian, 1- iii. Q. Curt. 1. iv. c. 8. Strabo, 1. xvii. .\rnni. Marcell. 1. xxii. c. C. Joseph, coiur. Ap. 1. ii. De Bell. J. 1. ii. c. 36. U 2 292 OF THE PYRRHONIC SECT. Book II government of Egypt, from motives of policy encouraged this new estab- j lishment. Ptolemy Lagus, who had obtained the crown of Egypt by ^ usurpation, was particularly careful to secure the interest of the Greeks^ in his favour; and, with this view, invited people from every part of'j Greece to settle in Egypt, and removed the schools of Athens to Alexan- , dria. This enlightened prince spared no expense to raise the literary, as , well as the civil, military, and commercial credit of his country. In order ' to provide in Alexandria a permanent residence for learning and philoso¬ phy, he laid the foundation of a library, which after his time became- exceedingly famous ; granted philosophers of every class immunity from j public offices; and encouraged science and literature by royal munificence. : Demetrius Phalereus, who was eminent in every kind of learning, espe-| cially in philosophy, assisted the liberal designs of the prince by his judi- j cious advice and active services. Ptolemy Philadelphus adopted, with j great ardour, the liberal views of his predecessor, and afforded still further] aid to philosophy, by enriching the Alexandrian library with a vast codec- j tion of books in every branch of learning, and by instituting a college ofj learned men, who, that they might have leisure to prosecute their studies, '[ were maintained at the public expense.* Under the patronage, first, of the Egyptian princes, and afterwards ofJ the Roman emperors, Alexandria long continued to enjoy great celebrityl as the seat of learning, and to send forth eminent philosophers of every? sect to distant countries. It remained a school of learning, as well as at commercial emporium, till it was taken, and plundered of its literary^ treasures, by the Saracens. Philosophy, during this period, suffered a grievous corruption, from the] attempt which was made by philosophers of different sects and countries,] Grecian, Egyptian, and Oriental, who were assembled in Alexandria, to frame, from their different tenets, one general system of opinions. The respect which had long been universally paid to the schools of Greece, and the honours with which they were now adorned by the Egyptian princes, ; induced other wise men, and even the Egyptian priests and philosophers; themselves, to submit to this innovation. Hence arose an heterogeneous 1 mass of opinions, of which we shall afterwards take more particular notice : under the name of the Eclectic philosophy ; and which we shall find to have ■ been the foundation of endless confusion, error, and absurdity, not only in the Alexandrian school, but among Jews and Christians ; producing among the former that spurious kind of philosophy, which they called their Cab¬ bala, and among the latter innumerable corruptions of the Christian faith. * Died. Sic. 1. xviii. Pausan. in Alt. Phot. Cod. 92. iElian, 1. iii. c. 17. Clem. Alex. Stro. 1. i. p. 341. Philostr. Vit. Soph. 1. i. c. 22. Laert. 1. viii. c. 46. Aul. Gell. ). iv. c. 2. Chap. 1. OF THE I’HILOSOPHY OF THE ROMANS. 293 BOOK III. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ROMANS. CHAPTER I. OF THE STATE OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. In relating the history of Philosophy during the first period, we Lave traced its rise and progress, in every age and country in which it has appeared, from the earliest times to the era of the establishment of the schools of Alexandria. The Second Period, on which we are now en¬ tering, will comprehend the whole series of philosophical history, from the era just mentioned to the revival of letters; and will exhibit the forms under which philosophy successively appeared among the Romans; among the eastern nations, particularly the Jews and Saracens ; and among the Christians. The history of philosophy among the Romans, in the infancy of their state, has been already briefly considered, under the general head of Bar¬ baric philosophy ; and we have little to add to what has been related re¬ specting this epocha; for, from the building of Rome, through the whole period of the regtil government, and many years after the consular power was established, the Romans discovered little inclination to cultivate any other kind of knowledge than that which was barely necessary for the ordinary purposes of life, and for their military operations. The rise of philosophy in Rome may be dated from the time of the embassy, which was sent from the Athenians to the Romans, deprecating a fine of five hundred talents, which had been inflicted upon them for laying waste Oropii, a town of Sicyonia. The exact time of this embassy, which has been already mentioned, is unknown, but it is probable that it happened about the 156th Olympiad, or towards the close of the sixth century from the building of Rome, that is, 156 years before Christ.* The immediate effect of the display which these philosophical mission- ariesj- made of-their wisdom and eloquence was to excite in the Roman ■ youth of all ranks an ardent thirst after knowledge. Lselius, Furius and Scipio, young men of the first distinction and highest expectations, dis¬ covered an earnest desire to enlist themselves under the banners of phi¬ losophy; and much was to be hoped for from their future patronage, when they should occupy important offices in the state. But Cato the Censor, whose inflexible virtue gave him an oracular authority among his country¬ men, disapproved this sudden innovation in public manners, and philosophy was sternly dismissed, Not that Cato was himself illiterate, or wholly untinctured with philosophy ; for he wrote a celebrated treatise upon agri¬ culture. When he was a young man, in the service of Fabius Maximus, at the taking of Tarentum, he is said to have conversed with Nearchus, j one of the disciples of Pythagoras ;§ and, at an advanced age, whilst he * Cic. Ac. Qii. l.iv. c. 45. Plut. in Caton. Maj. Cic. de Senectute, c. 6. Aul. Gell. 1. XV. c. 11. Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. iv. c. 2. t Carneades, Diogenes, and Critolaus ; see p. 143. I Plut. 1. c. § Ib. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. 291. was pretor in Sardinia, he was instructed in the Greek, language by Ennius.* But he was apprehensive that the introduction of philosophical studies into Home would effeminate the spirit of its young men, and enfeeble those hardy virtues which were the foundation of their national glory. By this visit of the Grecian philosophers a spirit of inquiry was, how¬ ever, raised among the Roman youth, which the injudicious caution of Cato could not suppress. The struggle between philosophy and voluntary ignorance was, indeed, for some time maintained ; for we read that, in the consulship of Strabo and Valerius, a decree of the Senate passed, probably in consequence of repeated visits from Grecian philosophers, requiring the pretor Pomponius to take care that no philosophers were resident in Roinc.-j- Some years afterwards, the censors, as if resolved at once to i shut the door against philosophy and eloquence, issued a similar edict : against rhetoricians, in terms to this effect : “ Whereas we have been I informed that certain men, who call themselves Latin rhetoricians, have instituted a new kind of learning, and opened schools, in which young men i trifle away their time day after day; we, judging this innovation to be inconsistent with the purpose for which our ancestors established schools, contrary to ancient custom, and injurious to our youth, do hereby warn both those who keep these schools, and those who frequent them, that ( they are herein acting contrary to our pleasure.’’ J And this edict was i aferwards revived in the year of Rome 662, § under the consulate of qj Pulcher and Perpenna. But at length, philosophy, under the protection of those great commanders who had conquered Greece,* prevailed, and Rome opened her gates to all who professed to be teachers of wisdom and eloquence. Scipio Africanus was one of the first among the Roman youths of patrician rank who, in the midst of military glory, found leisure to listen i to the precepts of philosophy. Whatever time he could spare from mili- 1 tary operations he devoted to study : his companions were Polybius, i, Panaetius, and other men of letters ;1| and he was intimately conversant d with the best Greek writers, particularly Xenophon. Panaetius was per- t| fectly qualified to assist his illustrious pupil in acquiring a general know- A ledge of philosophy ; for, although himself a Stoic, he held the writings of i Plato in high estimation, and was thoroughly acquainted with the systems j of other philosophers. And the exalted character of Scipio leaves no room | to doubt that he imbibed from his preceptors the wisdom, without suffering i himself to be tinctured with the extravagances of stoicism. LiELius and 1 Furius were also great admirers of Greek learning.^ The former, whilst ; he was young, attended the lectures of Diogenes the Stoic, and afterwards j those of Pan2etius. The circumstance chiefly worthy of admiration in these ^ great men is, that, although they did not join themselves to the band of J philosophers, but sought for glory in the offices of civil or military life, 1 they made use of the lessons of philosophy in acquiring the most exalted j! merit : so that, as Cicero relates,** by the happy union of natural dispo- ji sitions the most excellent and noble with habits formed by diligent | * Cic. Cato Maj. c. 1. 8. Lucullus, c. 2. Quintil. 1. xii. c. 11. Aurel. Vic. de Vir. Illustr. c. 47. I Aul. Cell. 1. XV. c. 11. Suet, de llliet. c. 1. Plin. Nat. Hist.d. xxix. c. 1. Conf. I Bayle, P. Cato. % Aul. Cell, et Suet. 1. c. § B. C. 91. II Velleius Patercul. 1. i. c. 13. 17, 18. Cic. de Fin. 1. iv. c. 9. Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 38. ‘ 1. ii. Orat. pro Mura-ua. De Orat. 1. ii. De Fin. 1. ii. j Orat pro Archia. Chap. 1. THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. 295 cultivation, these three illustrious men attained a degree of perfection in moderation, sobriety, and every other virtue, scarcely to be paralleled. Animated by such examples, many other persons of eminence in Rome attached themselves to the study of philosophy, particularly among those who^were devoted to the profession of the law. Quintius Tubero,* a nephew of Scipio Africanus, who was at this time one of the most cele¬ brated masters of civil law, was also conversant with philosophical learn¬ ing, and professed himself a follower of the Stoic sect. The moral doctrine of this sect was peculiarly suitable to his natural temper, and to the habits of temperance and moderation w'hieh he had learned from his father, one of those excellent Romans, who, in the highest offices of the state, retained the simplicity of rustic manners. Confirmed in these habits by the pre¬ cepts of Panmtius, when Tubero was called upon, as pretor, to give a public entertainment in honour of his uncle,-!- he provided only wooden couches covered with goat skins, earthen vessels, and a frugal repast. The people, who expected a splendid feast, were dissatisfied, and dismissed him from his office : but the action reflected no discredit either upon the lawyer or the philosopher ; for it was, as Seneca remarks,:}; an instructive lesson of moderation to the Romans, who, when they saw the sacred tables of Jupiter served with earthern vessels, would learn that men ought to be contented with such things as the gods themselves did not disdain to use. Pansetius dedicated to his pupil a treatise upon patience, and advised him to commit to memory the discourses of the Academic Crates concerning grief ; § Tvhence it appears that Tubero studied the Stoic philosophy chiefly with a view to the conduct of life. Lucullus was at this time an active patron of philosophy. Whilst he was questor in Macedonia, and afterwards, wffien he had the conduct of the Mithridatic war, he had frequent opportunities of conversing with Grecian philosophers, and acquired such a relish for philosophical studies, that, as Cicero relates, he devoted to them all the leisure he could command, jj Plis constant companion was Antiochus the Ascalonite, who was univer¬ sally esteemed a man of genius and learning. This philosopher, though a pupil of Philo, who, after Carneades, supported the doctrine of the Middle Academy, was a zealous advocate for the system of the Old Academy, and was often called upon by Lucullus, who himself favoured that system, to argue, in the private disputations which were carried on at his house, against the patrons of the Middle Academy, among whom was Cicero. This is the reason why Cicero, in the fourth book of Mx?, Academic Questions, assigns to Lucullus the office of defending the Old Academy. In order to promote a general taste for learning and philosophy, Lucullus made a large collection of valuable books, and erected a library, with galle¬ ries and schools adjoining, to which he invited learned men of all descrip¬ tions, and which, particularly, aflPorded a welcome retreat to those Greeks who at this time sought in Rome an asylum from the tumults of war.^ This place became the daily resort of men of letters, where every one en¬ joyed the benefit of reading or conversation, as best suited his taste. Lu¬ cullus himself frequently appeared among his friends, (for by this noble act of public munificence he had made all the lovers of science and literature * Pro Mursena. Tacit. Ann. 1. xvi. Aul. Cell. 1. xv. t Senec. Ep. 95. Val. Max. 1. vii. c. 5.1. iv. c. 4. Cic. pro Mur. J Kp- 9G. 99. § Cic. de Off. 1. iii. Fragm. Tuber. Fabric. Bib, Lat. t. i. p. 828. 11 Acad. Qu.'Est. 1. iv. c. 4. Plut. Lucull. 11 Plut. 1. c. et Vit. Ciceronis. Cic. in Lucull. Ac. Qu. 1. iv. Epist. ad Fam. ix, Ep. 8. 1. xiii. Ep. 1. 296 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. his friends,) and conversed with them in a manner whieh showed him to be 4 \ not only a patron of philosophers, but himself a philosopher. Others 4-' were stimulated, by this example, to afford countenanee and protection, in similar ways, to learning of every kind ; so that this period may be considered as the first age of philosophy in Rome. The Greek philosophy having been thus transplanted to Rome, the ' exotic plant flourished with vigour in its new soil. Partly through the instructions of those Grecian philosophers who resided in Rome, and partly by means of the practice, which was now commonly adopted, of sending young men from Rome to the ancient schools of wisdom for education, science and learning made a rapid progress, and almost every sect of phi- ?! losophy found followers and patrons among the higher orders of the Roman eitizens. If, however, we apply the term philosopher to those who specu-. * lated in Rome, it must be in a sense somewhat different from that in which we have hitherto used it with respect to the Greeks. Among them we have ..a seen, that a philosopher was one who professionally employed his time in M studying and teaching philosophy ; and several of these, about the time of » which we are now treating, became resident, in this capacity, at Rome. >]A But among the Romans themselves there were scarcely any who were philosophers by profession. They who are spoken of under this denomir A nation were, for the most part, men of high rank, invested with civil or military offices, and occupied in public affairs. They studied philosophy, as they cultivated other liberal arts, rather as a means of acquiring ability, H and obtaining distinction in their civil capacities, or as an elegant amuse-f ment in their intervals of leisure, than as in itself an ultimate object of m attention. This circumstance will serve to account for a fact, which, at first view, ■ may seem surprising, that, notwithstanding the high spirit of the Roman people, they chose rather to pay homage to a conquered nation, by adopt¬ ing the dogmas of their sects, than to attempt from their own stores to form , for themselves a new system of philosophy. They did not want ability for , undertakings of this nature, but they wanted leisure. They wished to en- • joy the reputation and the benefit of wisdom, and therefore studied philoso- phy under such masters as accident cast in their way, or their particular \ profession and turn of mind led them to prefer. Thus the Stoic philosophy was, on account of the utility of its moral doctrine, peculiarly adapted to , the character and office of lawyers and magistrates; the Pythagoric and ■>/ Platonic suited the taste of the gloomy and contemplative; and the Epicu- rean was welcome to those selfish spirits, who were disposed to prefer.,*, ignoble sloth to public virtue. Every one found, in the doctrine of some \ one of the Grecian sects tenets which suited his own disposition and situation ; and therefore no one thought it necessary to attempt farther ^ discoveries or improvements in philosophy. Perhaps, too, it may be added, that the Romans looked up to the schools of Greece with a degree of respect which would not suffer them to undertake any thing new in a walk in which so many eminent men had exerted their talents. Despairing of doing more than had been already done by the illustrious founders of the 1 several sects of philosophy, they thought it sufficient to make choice of some one of these as their guide. Hence Greece, which had submitted to the arms, in her turn subdued the understandings of the Romans ; and, contrary to that which in these cases commonly happens, the conquerors . adopted the opinions and manners of the conquered. The ancient Italic, or Pythagorean school, does not appear to have extended beyond that part of Italy formerly called Mayna Grcecia. And Chap. 1. THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. 297 though afterwards the fame of this singular sect, and of the marvellous actions, and mysterious doctrines of its founder, reached the Romans,* and excited some degree of superstitious veneration among an ignorant people, it does not appear that Pythagoras had any followers in Rome before the seventh eentury from the building of the city, unless the poet Ennius be reckoned such, concerning whom Persius intimates, that he adopted the Pythagorean doctrine of metempsychosis, and supposed the soul of Homer to have passed, after several migrations, into his body. Cor jubet hoc Enni, postquam destertuit esse Maeonides Qufntus pavone ex Pythagoreo.f (a) Publius Nigidius, surnamed Figulus, who M'as a contemporary and friend of Cicero, was a professed advocate for the doctrine of Pythagoras. Cicero ;}; speaks of him as an accurate and penetrating inquirer into nature, and ascribes to him the revival of that philosophy which formerly, for several ages, flourished in the Pythagorean schools, both in Italy and Sicily. He was a considerable proficient in mathematical and astrono¬ mical learning, and, after the example of his master, applied his knowledge of nature to the purposes of imposture. § He held frequent disputations with Cicero and his friends on philosophical questions. In civil affairs he attached himself to the party of Pompey ; and, upon Caesar’s accession to the supreme power, he was banished from Rome.]] After his time the Pythagorean doctrine was much neglected, few persons being now able to decipher, with accuracy, the obscure dogmas of this mysterious sect.^ The philosophy of the Old Academy, as it was revived and corrected by Antiochus, found many advocates at Rome. Among these, besides Lucullus, was the illustrious defender of Roman liberty, Marcus Brutus. Plutarch says of him,** that there was no Greek philosopher on whom he did not attend, nor any sect wdth whose tenets he was not conversant ; but that he, for the most part, embraced the doctrine of Plato, and followed the Old, rather than the New or Middle Academy; and, on this account, was a great admirer of Antiochus the Ascalonite, and admitted his brother Arislo into his confidence. Cicero relates the same, and adds,f f that “ Brutus, excelling in every kind of merit, so successfully transplanted the Greek philosophy into the Latin tongue, as to render it almost unneces¬ sary to have recourse to the original in order to gain a competent know¬ ledge of the subject.” Notwithstanding his civil and military engage¬ ments, he wrote treatises, on Virtue, on Patience, and on the Offices of Life; which, though in point of style concise even to abruptness, contained an excellent summary of ethics, framed partly from the doctrines of Plato, and partly from those of the stoical school for Brutus, after his master Antiochus, was disposed to favour the union of these two sects. * Liv. 1. i. c. 8. Plin. Hist. N. 1. xxxiv. c. 6. f Sat. vi. v. 10. (a) - - In Ennius’ deathless strains — Strains, in the mould of sober reason cast, When all his transmigrating dreams were past. Brewster. t De Universitate, c. 1. § Apul. Apol. Aul. Gell. 1. x. c. 11. 1. xi. c. 11. 1. vi. 14. Dio. 1. xlv. p. SOG. Suet, in Aug. c. 94. Lucan. Phars. 1. i. v. 639, &c. Macrob. Sat. 1. vi. c. 8. 1. ii. c. 12. II Dio et Suet. 1. c. Aul. Gell. 1. xi. c. 11. Plut. in Ciceron. Cic. 1. c. et Pain. Ep. 1- iv. ep. 31. Euseb. Chron. 183, 184. Val. Max. 1. iv. c. 3. In Brut. t. V. p. 688, &c. ft In Bruto, c. ult. Ac. Qu. 1. i. c. 3. It Plut. 1. c. Cic. Ep. Fain. 1. ix. cp. 15. Ad Attic. 1. xii. ep. 46. Dialog, de Caus. corr. eloq. Tusc. Ciu. 1. v. c. 1. De Fin. 1. i. c. 3. Sen. Cons, ad llelv. c. 9._ 298 OF THE PHILOSOFHY OF Book III. It reflects immortal honour upon the memory of Brutus, that he was a philosopher in actions as well as in words. His gentle manners, his noble mind, his entire self-command, and his inflexible integrity, rendered him beloved by his friends, and admired by the multitude, and would not suf¬ fer even his enemies to hate or despise him. If it be thought that he tarnished the lustre of his merit by lifting up his hand against Ctesar, it should be remembered, that in the soul of a Roman, whilst Roman virtue remained, every private passion was lost in the love of his country. The ardour of his patriotic spirit would not suffer him to survive that public liberty which he could no longer preserve ; and, after the example of his uncle Cato, he fell by his own hand : an action which, though nothing can justify, such a situation may be allowed in some measure to excuse.* Another ornament of the Old Academy was M. Terentius Varro, who was born at Rome in the 638th j- year of the city. Cicero, in a let¬ ter in which he recommends him as questor to Brutus, j: assures the com¬ mander that he would find him perfectly qualified for the post, and parti¬ cularly insists upon his good sense, his indifference to pleasure, and his patient perseverance in business. To these virtues he added uncommon abilities, and large stores of knowledge, which qualified him for the highest offices of the state. He attached himself to the party of Pompey, and in the time of the triumvirate was proscribed with Cicero ; and, though he escaped with his life, he suffered the loss of his library, and of his own writings ; a loss which would be severely felt by one who had devoted a great part of his life to letters.§ Returning, at length, to Rome, he spent his last years in literary leisure. He died in the 727th year of the city. His prose writings were exceedingly numerous, and treated of various topics in antiquities, chronology, geography, natural and civil history, philosophy and criticism. He was, besides, a poet of some distinction, and wrote in almost every kind of verse. His piece De re Rustica, “ On Agriculture,” and a few fragments, are all that is extant of his works. || To Varro we may add M. Piso, whom Cicero introduces as maintain¬ ing at large the opinion of the Old Academy concerning moral ends ; not, however, without a mixture of the Peripatetic doctrine, which he had learned at Athens from Staseas, a Peripatetic preceptor.^ The Middle Academy, no less than the Old, had its patrons at Rome. A small degree of attention to the state of philosophy at this time will be sufficient to discover the cause. The systems of the dogmatic philosophers lay open to so many objections, and in many particulars rested upon so precarious a foundation, as to afford great encouragement to scepticism. Many wise men, when they observed the contradictory opinions which were advanced by diflPerent sects, and the plausible arguments by which opposite doctrines were supported, were inclined to look upon truth as a treasure, which lies too deep to be fathomed by the line of the human un¬ derstanding, and contented themselves with such probable conclusions as were sufficient for the practical purposes of life. The Middle Academy, therefore, which was founded upon a conviction of the imbecility of human reason, without running, with the Pyrrhonists, into the extravagance of an • Plut. 1. c. p. 706. Floras, 1. iv. c. 7. Dio, lib. 47. f B. C. 115. X Ep. Fam. 1. xiii. ep. 10. § Aul. Gell. 1. iii. c. 10. Plin. N. Hist. 1. xxix, c. 4. Sen. ad Helv. c. 8. Arnob. adv. Gent. 1. v. p. 158. Aug. de Civ. D. 1. iv. c. 1. 1. vi. c. 2. 1. xii. c. 4. 1. xix. c. 1. Quint. Inst. 1. X. c. 1. Lact. 1. i. c. 6. II Cic. Ac. Qu. I. i. c. 2, 3. Quint. 1. i. c. 4. Fabric. Bib. Lat. t. i. 1. i. c. 7. p. 76. ^ Cic. de Fin. 1. v. c. 1. Chap. 1. THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. 299 entire suspension of opinion, became a favourite sect among the Romans. It was peculiarly suited to the character of a public pleader, as it left the field of disputation perfectly free, and would inure him to the practice of collecting arguments from all quarters, on opposite sides of every doubtful question. Hence it was that Cicero, under the instruction of Philo, ad¬ dicted himself to this sect, and without difficulty persuaded others to follow his example. This illustrious Roman, who eclipsed all his contem¬ poraries in eloquence, has also acquired no small share of reputation as a pliilosopher.* * * § It will therefore be necessary that we enter into the parti¬ culars of his life, so far as may enable us to form a judgment concerning his real merit in this capacity. Marcus Tullius Cicero was born at Arpinum, in the 647th f year 1 of the city, j: During his childhood he distinguished himself in literary contests with his companions, and studied under several masters, among whom he particularly mentions Plotius, a Greek preceptor, Phaedrus, an Epicurean philosopher, and Archias, the poet. He made several juvenile attempts in poetry ; but, if we may judge from the few fragments of his verses which remain, with no great degree of success. After he had finished his puerile studies, he applied his mature judgment to philosophy under Philo of Larissa ; a philosopher who was held in the highest esteem among the Romans, both for his learning and manners. From the same preceptor he also received instruction in rhetoric ; for, from the first, Cicero made philosophy subservient to eloquence. § In the eighteenth year of his age Cicero studied law under the direction of Mucius Scaevola, an eminent augur, to w'honi he was introduced by his father, when he put on the manly dress, with this advice, never to lose an opportunity of conversing with that wise and excellent man.|| After a short interval, in which he engaged in military expeditions, first under Sylla, then under Pompey, he returned with great impatience to his studies.^! At this time he put himself under the constant tuition of Diodotus, a Stoic, chiefly for the sake of exercising himself in dialectics, which the Stoics considered as a restricted kind of eloquence, but not without an assiduous attention to many other branches of study, in which this learned philosopher was well qualified to instruct him. About the age of twenty years he translated into the Latin tongue Xenophon’s (Economics, and several books of Plato. A specimen of his version of the Timaeus of Plato is preserved in his works.** Having thus prepared himself for his profession by indefatigable study, Cicero made his first appearance in public at twenty-six years of age, and pleaded in defence of^Roscius against the accusation of Sylla. Soon after¬ wards, under the plea of recruiting his strength, which he had impaired by the violence of his oratorical exertions, but perhaps chiefly through fear of Sylla, whom he had opposed, he withdrew to Athens. Here he attended on Antiochus the Ascalonite ; but not approving his doctrine, which difiered from that of the Middle Academy, he became a hearer of Posidonius the * Conf. Lact 1. i. c. 15. iii. 14. Quint. 1. x. c. 1. Macrob. in Somn. Scip. 1. i. c. 17. 27. Plut. in Cicer. t. vi. p. 55. Erasm. ep. 1. xxvii. ep. 1. 1. ii. ep. 26. Horn. Hist. Phil. 1. iv. c. 5. MorhofF. Polyh. t. i. 1. iv. c. 11. sect. 7. Fabr. Bib. Lat. t ii. p. 165. t B. C. 106. j Aul. Gell. 1. XV. c. 28. Cic. in Brut, et Ep. ad Fam. 1. vii. 5. 1. xiii. 41. § Plut in Cic. Sueton. de Clar. Rhet. c. 2. Cic. Orat. pro Archia, c. 1. De Orat. 1. iii. c. 28. Tusc. Qu. 1. ii. c. 2. Voss, de Poet. Lat. p. 16. Fabr. B. Lat. t. i. p. 129. II Cic. de Amic. c. 1. Plut. 1. c. ^ Ib. et Cic. Philipp, xii. 11. ** In Brut. c. 90. Ep. ad Fam. I. xiii. ep. 16. et in Lucullo. De Oil’. 1. ii. c. 24. Quint. 1. i. c. 2. 1. iii. c. 1. Hieron. Praef. in Euseb. Cliron. 300 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book iir. Rhodian. By frequenting the schools of these and other preceptors, he acquired such a love of philosophy, that after his return to Rome, amidst the business of the forum and the senate, he always found leisure for the speculations of the schools. Upon his second appearance in public, he met with some discouragement from a prevalent opinion that he was better qualified for the study of philosophy than for the business of active life. But his superior powers of eloquence soon subdued every prejudice against him, and raised him to the highest distinction among his fellow-citizens. In the successive offices of questor, edile, and pretor, he acquitted him¬ self with great reputation. In the consulate he obtained immortal honour by his bold and successful opposition to the machinations of Catiline and his party, and received the glorious title of the Father of his Country.* The popularity which Cicero had acquired during his consulship exposed him to the envy of his rivals. Soon afterwards, his unsuccessful attempt to bring Clodius to public justice brought upon him the resentment of that daring and seditious profligate ; and, notwithstanding all the efforts of the senate to protect him, the affair terminated in his banishment from Rome.f Leaving Italy, he passed over into Greece, and visited his friend Plancius at Thessalonica, who afforded him a hospitable asylum. All good men lamented his disgrace, and many Grecian cities vied with each other in offering him tokens of respect. But nothing could alleviate the dejection which he suffered, whilst he lay under a sentence of banish¬ ment from the country which had been the seat of all his former honours. He remained inconsolable, till, after an interval of sixteen months, the Clodian party was suppressed by Pompey, and, by the unanimous voice of the senate and people, he was recalled. J In Cicero’s subsequent questorship in Cilicia his conduct was highly meritorious ; for he exercised his authority with exemplary mildness and integrity, and, in the midst of war, cultivated the arts of peace. On his return, he called at Rhodes, and made a short stay at Athens, where he had the satisfaction of revisiting the places in which his youthful feet had wandered in search of wisdom, and of conversing with many of his former preceptors and friends. § When the flames of civil dissension between Pompey and Ceesar began to burst forth, Cicero used his utmost influence with each party to bring them to terms of accommodation. 1| Finding every attempt of this kind unsuccessful, he long remained in anxious deliberation, whether he should follow Pompey in a glorious and honourable, but ruined cause ; or should consult his own safety, and that of his friends, by following the rising for¬ tunes of Caesar. Had the latter motive preponderated, he would have listened to the counsel of Caesar, who advised him, if on account of his advancing years he were averse to military life, to retire into some remote part of Greece, and pass the remainder of his days in tranquillity. But he could not persuade himself to desert the ancient constitution of his country, which he had hitherto honestly defended, and therefore deter¬ mined to join the party of Pompey. Afterwards, however, when he found that Pompey slighted his friendship, he repented of his resolution ; and, after the memorable battle of Pharsalia, instead of accepting the charge, of the armament, which lay at Dyrrachium, as Cato advised, he met Caesar on his return from Asia, and accepted his friendship.^f » Orat. pro Roscio. Aul. Cell, 1. xv. c. 28. Quint. I. xii. c. G. Pint. 1. c. Cic. in Brut, c. 91. Orat. pro Plane, in Pis. pro Sext. in Cati). f Dio, 1. xxxviii. Velleius P. 1. ii. + Plot. 1. c. Cic. Orat. pro donio sua. ^ Plut. 1. c. 11 Ep. Fam. 1. vi. ep. 6. 1. vii. ep. 3. 1. xiii. ep. 11. ^ Pint. 1. c. Chap. 1. THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. 301 From tills time Cicero, no longer able to serve his country in the manner he wished, retired from public affairs, resolving to devote himself wholly to the study of philosophy. He employed the unwelcome leisure, which the ruin of the republic afforded him, in reading or writing; and he found more satisfaction in conversing with the dead in his valuable library at Tusculum, than in visiting Rome to pay homage to Caesar. His tranquillity was, how¬ ever, soon interrupted by domestic vexations and afflictions. From causes M-hich are not fully explained, he divorced his wife Terentia : and his daughter Tullia, who was married to Lentulus, died in childbed.* * * § Soon after the death of Caesar, although it does not appear that Cicero had any concern in the conspiracy, he fell a sacrifice to the resentment of Antony, who could not forget the severe Philippics which the orator had delivered against him. When the triumvirate was formed, and it was reci¬ procally agreed that some of the enemies of each party should be given up, Antony demanded the head of Cicero. Accordingly, after much conten¬ tion, and on the part of Octavius a delay of three days, Cicero was regis¬ tered among the hundred and thirty senators who were doomed to destruc¬ tion by this sanguinary proscription. Apprised by his friends of the danger, he fled from place to place for safety ; always thinking, as was natural in such a situation, any other place more secure than the present. His last retreat was to a small farm which he had at Caieta. The house was surrounded by the appointed executioners of the bloody commission. After an unsuccessful attempt of his attendants to save him by conveying him away on a litter towards the sea, Popilius Lgenas, a military tribune, in whose behalf Cicero had formerly pleaded when he was accused of parri¬ cide, came up to the litter, and struck off his head, while some of the sol¬ diers, who were standing by, cut off his hands. These mangled remains of this great man were conveyed to Antony, who, in triumphant revenge, placed them upon the rostra of that pulpit from which the orations against him had been delivered ; not however without exciting much indignation in the populace, who bitterly lamented the tragical end of this father of his country. His death happened in the 710th •j' year of the city, and in the sixty-fourth year of his age.:}; From the whole history of the life of Cicero it appears that, though exceedingly ambitious of glory, he wanted strength of mind sufficient to sustain him in its pursuit. Perpetually fluctuating between hope and fear, he was unable to support with equanimity the convulsions of a disordered state and the commotions of a civil war; and therefore was always attempting to reconcile the contending parties, when he ought to have been maintaining, by vigorous measures, the cause which he approved. He was, in his natural ; temper, so averse to contention, that his spirits were depressed, more than became a wise man, by private injuries and domestic vexations. On many public occasions he discovered a surprising degree of timidity. When, under the immediate apprehension of danger from popular tumult, he un¬ dertook the defence of Milo, his panic was so great that he was seized with a universal tremor, and was scarcely able to speak ; so that his client, notwithstanding his innocence, was sentenced to exile.§ Flis chief delight was in the society and conversation of learned men ; and many elegant specimens remain of his ability in relating, or framing philosophical * Plut. 1. c. Cic. Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 1. De Off. 1. ii. c. 1, 2. Ep. Fam. 1. xiii. ep. 77. I. ii. ep. 5. 1. i. ep. 7. 1. vi. ep. 19. 1. ix. ep. 11. Val. Max. I. viii. c. 13. t B. C. 4.3. t Plut. 1. c. Vicl. Liv. apud Sencc. App. Dion. Veil. Paterc. 3ic. Mart. 1. iii. ep. G6. § Dio, 1. xlvi. plut. 1. c. 302 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III; conferences. But in his private intercourse with his friends, as well as in the forum and the senate, he discovered a degree of vanity scarcely to be reconciled with true greatness of mind. From these circumstances, com¬ pared with the general character of his writings, it seems reasonable to conclude that Cicero’s chief excellences were fertility of imagination and readiness of invention ; and that his talents were better adapted to the splendid offices of eloquence, than to the aecurate and profound investi¬ gations of philosophy. What kind and degree of service Cicero rendered to philosophy will in ■ some ^measure appear from a distinct enumeration of his philosophical writings. On the subject of the philosophy of nature, his principal works are, the fragment of his translation of Plato’s Timaeus, entitled De Uni- versitate, “ On the Universe and his treatise De Natura Deorum, “ On the Nature of the Gods,” in which the opinions of the Epicureans and Stoics concerning the divine nature are distinctly stated and examined; To the same class may be referred the books “ On Divination and Fate,” which are imperfect, and “ The Dream of Scipio” (commented upon by Macrobius), which is founded upon the Platonic doctrines concerning the soul of the world, and the state of human souls after death. On moral phi-| losophy Cicero treats in several distinct works. In his treatise De Finihus^ “ On Moral Ends,” which is a history of the doctrine of the Grecian philoso phers concerning the ultimate ends of life, he states the different opinions of the several sects upon this subject, enumerates the leading arguments by which they were supported, and points out the difficulties which press upon each opinion. In his Qucestiones Tusculance, “ Tusculan Questions,” he treats of the contempt of death ; patience under bodily pain; the remedies of grief, anxiety and other painful perturbations of mind; and the suf ficiency of virtue to a happy life. In the dialogues entitled Cato and Leelius he discourses concerning the consolations of old age, and concern¬ ing the duties and pleasures of friendship. His explanation of “ Six Stoical Paradoxes” seems rather to have been written as a rhetorical exer¬ cise, than as a serious disquisition in philosophy. His treatise De OJftciis,' “ On Moral Offices,” addressed to his son Marcus, contains an excellent summary of practical ethics, written chiefly upon Stoical principles, but not without some mixture of the Peripatetic. The grounds of jurispru-'i dence are explained in his book De Legihus^ “ On Laws,” which is not entire. Cicero no where so clearly discovers his own opinions as in his Qucestiones Academicce, “ Academic Questions,” of which only two books are extant, the seeond inseribed with the name of Lucullus. In this work ,. „ he raises up the whole edifice of Grecian doctrine, that, after the inannefK of the Academic sect, and particularly of Carneades, he may demolish it.^ As a storehouse of materials for a history of the Grecian sects, this pieces is of great value. It is much to be regretted that, among the philoso-^’^ phical works of Cicero we do not now find his Hortensius, or “ Exhor- ■ tation to the Study of Philosophy,” which Augustine confesses operated upon his mind as a powerful stimulus to the pursuit of wisdom. His “ Qiconomics” and “ Republic ” are also lost. Upon the most cursory inspection of Cicero’s philosophical writings, it; must appear that he rather related the opinions of others, than advanced',' any new doctrine from his own conceptions. It may, however, be of some' importance to inquire, more particularly, how a man, who devoted so much of his leisure to study, philosophised, and what tenets he espoused. Although, for reasons already explained, Cicero attached himself chiefly to the Academic sect, he did not neglect to inform himself of the doctrines Chap. 1. THE HOMAN UEPUBUC. 303 of other sects, and discovered much learning and ingenuity in refuting their dogmas. In the sects which he rejected, he could easily distinguish those parts of their doctrine which were most valuable ; and he had the good sense and candour to profit by wisdom wherever he found it. He was an admirer of the doctrine of the Stoics concerning natural equity and civil law ; and adopted their ideas concerning morals, as he himself informs his son,* not with the servility of an interpreter, but with that freedom which left him the full exercise of his own judgment. That he held Plato in high respect, especially for his philosophy of nature, appears from his own words, f and from the labour which he bestowed upon the Timieus. As he conceived the Peripatetic philosophy to differ but little, on the sub¬ ject of ethics, from the Socratic and Platonic doctrine, he paid it some respect in his moral writings, j; although in other places it fell under his censure. The sect to which he was most averse, notwithstanding that one of his earliest preceptors, and several of his intimate friends, belonged to this school, was the Epicurean ;§ and the contempt in which he held the doctrine of this sect led him to listen with too much credulity to the calumnies with which the character of its founder was loaded. Upon the whole, there can be no doubt that Cicero belonged to that class of Academics, who, after Carneades, whilst they confessed the imbecility of the human understanding, admitted opinions on the ground of probability. “ I do not,’’ says Cicero, || “ rank myself among those who suffer their minds to wander in error, without any guide to direct their course. For of what use is the human intellect, or rather, of what value is human life, if all principles, not only of reasoning but of action, be taken away ? If I can¬ not, with many philosophers, say that some things are certain and others uncertain, I willingly allow that some things are probable, others impro¬ bable.” It may be easily perceived, from the general cast of Cicero’s writings, that the Academic sect was best suited to his natural disposition. Through all his philosophical works he paints in lively colours, and with all the graces of fine writing, the! opinions of philosophers ; and relates, in the diffuse manner of an orator, the arguments on each side of the question in dispute : but W'e seldom find him diligently examining the exact weight of evidence in the scale of reason, carefully deducing ac¬ curate conclusions from certain principles, or exhibiting a series of argu¬ ments in a close and systematic arrangement. On the contrary, we frequently hear him declaiming eloquently instead of reasoning conclu¬ sively, and meet with unequivocal proofs that he was better qualified to dispute on either side with the Academics, than to decide upon the question with the Dogmatists. In fine, Cicero appears rather to have been a warm admirer, and an elegant memorialist of philosophy, than himself to have merited a place in the first order of philosophers.^ The reader will easily perceive from what has been advanced that, not- Avithstanding the great number of philosophical writings which Cicero has left, it would be in vain to attempt a delineation of his philosophical doc¬ trines ; for, following the Academic method of philosophising, he instituted no system of his own, but either employed himself in opposing the tenets of other sects, or, where he chose to dogmatise, selected from different sects such opinions as, he apprehended, could be most plausibly supported or Avould most easily admit of rhetorical decoration. In Physics, if we except * De Off. 1. i. c. 2. f Tusc. Qu. 1. i. c. 21. + De Off. 1. i. c. 3. § De Oral. 1. iii. H De Off. 1. ii. c. 2. Tusc. Qu. 1. ii. c. 2. 1. iv. c. 4. Aug. de Civ. Dei, 1. ii. c. 27. Ileuman. Act. Pliil. p. 459. 304 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book iir/f : V ■« r i his translation of the Timceus of Plato, and what he has written in the 1 j Platonic manner in “ Tlie Dream of ScijDio,” Cicero has advanced nothing’ll in his writings which is not purely academical, and adapted to overturn the systems of the Dogmatists. In ethics, however, especially upon subjects V[' of practical morality, he made Panaetius and other Stoics his chief guides, ^ and after them adopted a preceptive tone, and a systematic arrangement.;*^"^ But it is wholly unnecessary to enter into detail of his moral doctrine, which is of the same colour with that of the Stoic School, except where V| it takes a slight tincture from the Peripatetic. With respect to theology, ‘gj there is little reason to doubt that Cicero, whilst he suspended his judg- ment concerning the subtle questions which had agitated the Grecian schools, adhered to the fundamental principles of religion on the ground w of probability, as naturally dictated by reason, and therefore commonly jp embraced by mankind.* Wj The Stoic as well as the Academic School was patronised by many*; eminent men in the Roman republic. The most distinguished lawyers Jlj were, as we have seen, inclined towards this sect, on account of the fitness of its moral doctrine to the purposes of civil policy. Q. Lucilius Bal- Bus became so eminent a master of the Stoic philosophy, that Cicero, in ^ his dialogue “ On the Nature of the Gods,” j- appoints him to the office of J defending the Stoical theology. Several of the most zealous and able sup* \ porters of the tottering republic derived no small part of their strength I from the principles of Stoicism. But the man, who above all the rest I claims our notice, as a Stoic in character as well as opinion, is the younger ■, Cato. J Cato of Utica, so called from the last memorable scene of his life, was a descendant of Cato the Censor, whose rigid virtue, as we have seen, ? opposed the first admission of Grecian learning into Rome. From his childhood he discovered in his countenance and language, and even in his \ sports, an inflexible spirit. He had such a natural gravity of aspect, that [ his features were scarcely ever relaxed into a smile. He was seldom ! angry, but when provoked was not without difficulty appeased. In ac¬ quiring learning, he was slow of perception, but his memory faithfully ' , retained whatever it received. Being in early life elected to the office of ? di flamen of Apollo, he made choice of Antipater, a Tyrian, of the Stoic ■ | sect, as his preceptor in morals and jurisprudence, that in his sacred cha- * 3 racter he might exhibit an example of the most rigid virtue. His language, ^ both in private and public, was a true image of his mind, free from all ^ affectation of novelty or elegance; plain, concise, and somewhat harsh; but enlivened with strokes of genius, which could not be heard without ! pleasure. He inured himself to endure, without injury, the extremes of heat and cold. To express his contempt of effeminate and luxurious manners, he refused to wear the purple robe which belonged to his rank, and often appeared in public without his tunic, and with his feet uncovered ; [| and this he did, not for the sake of attracting admiration, but to teach his fellow-citizens that a wise man ought to be ashamed of nothing which is Hi not in itself shameful. J ’ i In the civil war, Cato carried his virtues with him into military life, and |i exhibited before his fellow commanders an example of unusual moderation, i S sobriety, and magnanimity. Whilst he was in Macedonia, in the capacity of military tribune, it happened that his brother Caepio, whom he had )f * Lib. iii. De Nat. D. -f- L. i. c. 4. i I I Plut. in Cat. Val. Max. 1. iii. c. 1. Cic. Orat. pro Muraena, c. 29. Ep. Fam. xv. 5, il Chap. 1. THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. S05 always loved, perished in shipwreck. Cato, upon this occasion, forgot his Stoical principles, and so far yielded to the impulse of nature, as to em¬ brace, with many tears and lamentations, the dead body which had been cast upon the shore, and to bury it with splendid sepulchral honours. So difficult is it, by any artificial discipline of philosophy, to subdue the feel¬ ings of nature.* During his residence in Greece, Cato having heard of an eminent Stoic, Athenodorus Cordyliones, who had rejected the prof¬ fered friendship of several princes, and w'as now passing his old age in retirement at Pergarnus, resolved if possible to make him his friend ; and, as he had no hopes of succeeding by message, undertook for this sole purpose a voyage into Asia. Upon the interview, Athenodorus found in Cato a soul so congenial w’ith his own, that he was easily prevailed upon to accompany him into Greece, and, after the term of Cato’s military service was expired, to reside with him, as his companion and friend, at Horae. Cato boasted of this acquisition more than of all his military exploits. After his return, he devoted his time either to the society of Athenodorus, and his other philosophical friends, or to the service of his fellow-citizens in the forum, j- When Cato had, by diligent study, qualified himself for the duties of magistracy, he accejited of the office of questor. He corrected the abuses of this important trust, which negligence or dishonesty had introduced, and by his upright and steady administration of justice merited the highest applause. In every other capacity he manifested the same inviolable regard to truth and integrity. Whilst he was engaged in the business of the senate, he was indefatigable in the discharge of his senatorial duty ; and even when he was among his philosophical friends at his farm in Lucania he never interrupted his attention to the welfare of the state. It was during a recess of this kind that he discovered the danger which threatened the republic from the machinations of Metellus ; and, with a truly patriotic spirit, he instantly determined that private enjoyment should give way to public duty. That he might be in a capacity to oppose with effect the designs of Metellus, he offered himself candidate for the office of Tribune of the people ; and being chosen, executed the office (notwithsfanding the illiberal jests which Cicero, inconsistently enough with his general pro¬ fessions and character, on this occasion cast upon his Stoical virtue) with a degree of probity, candour and independence, which fully established the public opinion of his superior merit, j; At a period when the Roman affairs were in the utmost confusion, and powerful factions were repeatedly formed against the state, Cato with¬ stood the assaults which were made upon liberty by Marcellus, Pompey, Caesar, and others, with such a firm and resolute adherence to the prin¬ ciples of public virtue, that no apprehension of danger to himself or his family could ever induce him to listen to any proposal, which implied a treacherous desertion of his country. Whilst some were supporting the interest of Caesar, and others that of Pompey, Cafo, himself a host, with¬ stood them both, and convinced them that there was another interest still existing — that of the state. When he saw that the necessity of the times required it, in order that, of two impending evils, the least might be chosen, he persuaded the senate to create Pompey sole consul, that, if possible, he might crush the growing power of Caesar, which threatened destruction to the freedom of the republic. It was with this design alone * Pint, in Caf. f I lut. ib. t Plu'. lb. Cic. Prsef. para'.l. Epist. Fam. xv. 5. Orat. pro Mir. anin, c. 29. X 306 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. that, upon Caesar’s approach towards Rome, he declared himself on the side of Pompey, and that he afterwards became a companion of his flight, and at the head of an army supported his cause. The same public spirit afterwards prompted him to endeavour to save his country from the last extremities of civil war by proposing a reconciliation between the contend¬ ing powers. And when Pompey treated the proposal with negleet, and seemed to distrust the adviser, Cato, still true to the cause of freedom, at the battle of Dyrrachium roused the languid spirit of the soldiers by anj, animated address ; but afterwards when, in the course of the engagements^ he saw his countrymen butchering one another, he bitterly lamented th'i^i fatal effects of ambition.* After the battle of Pharsalia, which at once cut off the hopes of PoniS^ pey, Cato, with a small band of select friends, and fifteen cohorts, of which* Pompey had given him the command, still attempted to support the expiring cause of liberty. His determination was to follow Pompey into Egypt, and there share his fate : but when he arrived upon the African coast, he was met by Sextus, Pompey’s younger son, who informed him of his father’s death. Cato, upon hearing these tidings, marched the small force which was under his conimand into Libya, to meet Scipio, Porapey’s father-in- law, and Varus, to whom Pompey had given the government in Africa, and who were paying their court to Juba. Though strongly importuned, he refused to take the command of the African forces from those officers, to whom it had been legally appointed ; but, at the request of Scipio, and of the inhabitants, he took the charge of Utica. -j- The defeat of Scipio and Juba, in the battle of Thapsus, contracted the remaining strength of the Roman republic within the walls of this small city. Here Cato, as his last effort in the service of his country, convened his little senate to deliberate upon measures for the public good. Their consultations proved ineffectual; and Cato despaired of being longer able to serve his country. He therefore advised his friends to provide for their safety by flight, but, for his own part, resolved not to survive the liberties of Rome. At the close of an evening, in which he had conversed with more than usual spirit on topics of philosophy, he retired w ith great cheer¬ fulness into his chamber, where, after reading a portion of Plato’s Phcedo, he ordered his sword to be brought. His attendants delayed ; and his son and friends importuned him to desist from his purpose. The stern philo¬ sopher dismissed them from his apartment, and again took up the book. After a short interval, he executed his purpose by stabbing himself below the breast. By those who have been better instructed, this action Avill, doubtless, be deemed criminal, and will be imputed to rashness, or to weak¬ ness. But it should be remembered that the situation of Cato, in concur¬ rence with his Stoical principles, strongly impelled him to this fatal deed; and that whatever censure he may deserve on this account, he supported, through his whole life, a character of indexible integrity, and uncorrupted public spirit. Whilst he lived, he held up before his fellow-citizens a pattern of manly virtue ; and when he died, he taught the conquerors of the world that the noble mind can never be subdued.;]; - Cuncta terrarum subacta, Prceter atrocem aniinum Catonis.§ (a) • Pint, in Cat. Veil. Flor. Dio, &c. Sen. Ep. 9o. 14. f Pluf. I Pint. 1. c. Conf. Floras, 1. iv. c. *2. Senec. Ep. 20. 24. 2G. De Providentia, c. 2. Arr. Epict. 1. 1. Diss. 9. 24. § llor. Carm. 1. ii. Od. i. v. 24. Conf. Lucan. 1. ii. v. 385. 1. ix. 581, &c. (a) - I see the world subdued, All but the mighty soul of Cato. Cliap. 1. THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. 307 The Peripatetic Philosophy found its way into Rome, in the time of Sylla, with the writings of Aristotle and Theophrastus. That tyrant, during the siege of Athens, had shown his contempt of the Muses, by sacrilegiously invading their ancient seats, the groves of Academus, and the Lyceum, in order to furnish himself with materials for carrying on the assault : and when the city fell into his hands, among other articles of plun¬ der, he became possessed of the library of Apellicon, who, as we have , before related, had purchased the writings of Aristotle and Theophrastus from their illiterate descendants, in whose hands they had long lain con¬ cealed. This rich prize was brought to Rome, and soon engaged the attention of those who knew the value of Greek learning, Tyrannio, an eminent grammarian and critic, whom Lucullus had brought as a captive \ from Pontus, and whose learning and genius soon procured him liberty and raised him to distinction, obtained permission to peruse, and, where- ever he chose, transcribe the manuscripts. His first care was to bring to light the writings of Aristotle and Theophrastus. When Andronicus Rhodius, who was not ignorant of the fame of these philosophers, was in- : formed of Tyrannio’s good fortune, he was exceedingly desirous of pos- I sessing the writings of these philosophers, and engaged Tyrannio to give , him an exact copy of the originals. Finding upon perusal that they were . in many places imperfect, through the decay of the materials upon which they were written, he supplied the deficiencies by conjecture, and at the ; same time attempted to illustrate obscure passages by notes. In this i corrected, or rather adulterated state, these works of Aristotle and Theo- : phrastus were dispersed among the Romans.* The obscurity of the writings of Aristotle greatly obstructed the pro- ; gress of the Peripatetic philosophy. Cicero, in the preface to his Topics, written after the death of Caesar, relates, f that Trebatius, a celebrated ■ lawyer, meeting with Aristotle’s treatise on Topics in Cicero’s library, at¬ tempted to read it, but was obliged to call in the assistance of a skilful ! rhetorician ; and, after all, complained to Cicero that he was unable to ■ understand the work. Cicero replied, “ I am not at all surprised that your rhetorician could not explain to you the writings of this philosopher, who is understood by very few even of the philosophers themselves.” But, ' notwithstanding these difficulties, the doctrine of Aristotle was not without its admirers and patrons in Rome. Cato, though entirely devoted to the I Stoic philosophy, had among his philosophical friends Demetrius, a Peri¬ patetic, and conversed with him a little before his death. J Crassus paid 1 some attention to the Aristotelian philosophy, and employed Alexander . Antiochenus, of this school, as his preceptor. § Piso, whom Cicero repre¬ sents as well read in philosophy, had with him many years a Peripatetic of some note, named Staseas.|| .The father of Roman eloquence himself, notwithstanding his predilection for the Academic sect, gave sufficient proof that he had some respect for the Peripatetic philosophy, by under¬ taking to explain the Topics of Aristotle ; by mixing several things from his school with the Stoical doctrine of morals, in his Offices, and, above all, by committing the charge of his son’s education at Athens to Cratippus, the Peripatetic, whom he pronounces to be, in his judgment, not only the first of all the Peripatetics, but the most excellent philosopher of his age.^[ Plut. in Sylla et Luciillo. Ilesycli. et Suidas in Tyran. I’orpliyr. Vit. ^ Trebatiuin. J Pint, in Cat. § Id. in Crasso. II Cic. de Fin. 1. v. c. 1. De Orat. 1. i. c. 22. . H De Univ. c. 1. Do. Oil'. 1. iii. c. 2. 1. i. c. 1. Ep. Fam. 1. xvi. Ep. 21. in Cic. ^ ' Plotin. Plat. X 2 308 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. Brutus, when he passed with his army into Greece, during his stay at Athens attended upon Theomnestus the Academic, and Cratippus the Peripatetic, and conversed with them upon philosophy.*' And Pompey, after his defeat at Pharsalia, meeting with Cratippus at Mitylene, dis¬ coursed with him concerning divine providence.'!' The Epicurean Philosophy, in consequence of the violent opposition ■ which it had met with in Greece from the Stoics, and the irregularities which had been practised by some of its followers, entered Rome under a heavy load of obloquy. This was greatly increased by the vehemence with which Cicero inveighed against this sect, and by the easy credit which he gave to the calumnies industriously circulated against its foun¬ der. Nevertheless, there were many persons of high distinction in Rome to whom the character of Epicurus appeared less censurable, and who ! were of opinion that true philosophy was to be found in liis garden. i Among these were Torquatus, Velleius, Trebatius, Piso, Albutius, Pansa, i and Atticus ;§ men of respectable characters in Rome, several of whom ^ lived in habits of intimacy with Cicero.]| Atticus, particularly, was his bosom friend, to whom he wrote many confidential letters, afterwards col- 1 lected in sixteen books, and preserved among his w'orks. Fond of literary leisure, Atticus withdrew from the disturbances of the state of Athens, ^ where he was highly respected by the citizens of every rank. Here he i studied the doctrines of Epicurus, under Phasdrus and Zeno the Sidonian. That he entirely devoted himself to this school, appears from many passages in the writings of Cicero, and from the particulars of his life ! given by Cornelius Nepos. C. Cassius, too, according to Plutarch, is to I be added to the list of Epicureans. Several Greek philosophers of this sect enjoyed the patronage of illustrious Romans, among whom may be particularly mentioned Patro, whom Cicero recommended to the protec- ■ tion of Memmius.** Some admirers of Epicurus attempted to introduce his philosophy into Rome in the Latin tongue. Amafanius, Catius Insuber, and others, bor- > rowing their notions of pleasure, not from the founder of the school, but from some of his degenerate followers, under the notion of Epicurean doctrine wrote precepts of luxury. Quintilian j”!- speaks of Catius as an amusing tritler : Horace thus ridicules him Unde et quo Catius? non est inihi tempus aventi Ponere signa novis preceptis, qualia vincant Pythagorani, Anytique reuin, doctunique Platona. (a) The true doctrine of Epicurus was not fully stated by any Roman writer till Lucretius, with much accuracy of conception and clearness of method, as w'ell as with great strength and elegance of diction, unfolded the Epicu¬ rean system in his poem De Rerum Natura; “ On the Nature of Things.” That T. Carus Lucretius was a Roman is certain, but it is doubtful * Plut. in Bruto. f Id. in Pomp. Cic. de Fin. 1. ii. Tu.sc. Qu. 1. i. 3. Fam. Ep, xiii. 1. Orat. in Pisonem, c. 28. § Gassend. de Vit. Epic. 1. i. c. G. || Ac. Qu. 1. iv. ^ Plut. in Brut. t. v. p. C90. 711. Cic. Pliil. ii. ■** Fain. Kp. xiii. c. 1. f j- Inst. 1. i. c. 1. 1+ Sat. i. ii. sect. 4. {(() Wlience comes my Catius ? whither in such liaste ? I have no time in idle prate to waste : [ must away, to treasure in my mind A set of precepts novel and refin’d ; Such as I ythagoras could never reach, \or Socrates, nor scienced I’lato teach. F.cancis. Chap. 2. S. 1. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 309 whether he was of the ancient and noble family of the Lucretii. lie was born, according to Eusebius, in the year of Rome six hundred and fifty- nine.* Of his parentage and education little is known ; but it is probable that he was sent to Athens, and there studied philosophy under Zeno the Sidonian, and Phaedrus. Towards the close of his life he was often insane ; and it was during his lucid intervals that he wrote his celebrated poem. It is addressed to his friend and patron Memmius: it was revised bj^ Cicero, and is still extant. Lucretius died by his own hand, in the forty- fourth year of his age, and in the seven hundred and third year of Rome.j- The Pyrrhonic or Sceptic sect was not followed among the Romans; I not because the method of philosophising adopted by this sect had no ad- ! mirers, but because it was superseded by the Academic philosophy, which 1 pursued the same track, but with greater caution and sobriety. The ! heights of extravagance, to which the Sceptics had by this time advanced, ! both in theory and practice, had brought such a general odium upon the sect, that although TEnesidemus attempted to revive Pyrrhonism at Alex¬ andria, and inscribed his works to Lucius Tubero, an illustrious Roman, it does not appear that Rome gave any public countenance to the Sceptic philosophy.+ CHAPTER II. OF THE STATE OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 5 SECTION I.— OF THE GENERAL STATE OF PHILOSOPHY UNDER THE EMPERORS. In the midst of the commotions and changes which took place in the Roman state, at the period when it lost its liberty, and became subject to the arbitrary control of a monarch ; whilst almost every thing else assumed anew aspect, philosophy still retained its station, and appeared with in-- creasing lustre. This is perhaps chiefly to be ascribed to the cultivated taste and elegant manners of the Augustan age. Many persons of the * R. C. 9 k f Euseb. Chron. Vick Lambin. Gifan. Bayl. de Vit. Lucr. Voss, de Poet. Lat. p. 15. B. C. 50. + Cic. de Fin. 1. ii. Vidend. Heuniann. Act. Phil. v. iii. p. 63. Gaudent. de Pliil. apud Rom. initio, &c. Pis. 1643. Cellarii, Diss. de Stud. Rom. Budd. de Stud. Lib. ap. Rom. Falster. Qu. Rom. Schilter. Manud. Phil. Mor. ad Jurisprud. Everard. Otto de Stoica Juriscons. Ph. Horn. Hist. Piiil. 1. iv. c. 4, 5. Voss, de Hist. Lat. I. i. c. 7. 16. P. Blount, Cens. Auth. p. 60. Cozzand. de Magisterio Antiq. Phil. 1. iii. p. 231. Huet de la Foiblesse, &c. I. i. c. 14. seet. 25. Scaligeriana Prim. p. 1 16. Ciceronis Vita a Mylseo, Bullingero, A. de Scarparia, Const. Felice, C. Preysio, Corrado. P. Hamo, Lambino, Brantio, llerbesto, Chytrmo, Vallamberto, Cappello, Sagittano, Masenio, Middleton. Kircher in Latio, c. ii. Reimman. Syst. Ant. Idt. p. 496. Pe- rizonius de Erud. et Indust. Cic. Franeq. 1682. blorliofp. Polyh. Lit. t. iii. I i- c. 17. t. i. 1. iv, c. 11. sect. 17. Jasonis de Nores Instit. in Cic. Phil. Pat. 1597. Lips. 1721. Buscheri Ethic. Cic. Parker’s Apology, Lond. 1702. Wopken’s Lection. 'Pull. Amst. 1730. Voss, de Poet, Lat. p. 15. Suidas. Bayle. 310 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. ' first distinction in Rome, with Augustus himself, were patrons of litera- ture and science. During the reign of this prince, so generally prevalent , was the study of philosophy, that almost every statesman, lawyer, and ' man of letters, was conversant with the writings of philosophers, and dis¬ covered a bias towards some ancient system. And this taste continued through several succeeding ages, even under those emperors who were more addicted to pleasure than to wisdom ; till, in process of time, the ■ distinction of sects was confounded in that monstrous production of, monkish ignorance, the Scholastic philosophy. The sentiments and language of almost all the Roman Poets were ; tinctured with the philosophy of some Grecian sect. Virgil, whose immortal works remain a perfect model of poetic liar- ■ mony and elegance, was in his youth instructed by Syro in the doctrine of • Epicurus; and the spirit of this doctrine appears in seveial parts of his ; writings. It is true, that after the usual practice of poets, and other writers of this period, he introduces allusions to the dogmas of different sects, ^ where he judged that they might serve to illustrate and adorn his subject. , Thus, in the fourth Georgic, he derives the origin of things, after the i Stoics, from a divine principle pervading the whole mass of matter:* j His quidam signis atque hsec exempla secuti, } Esse apibus partem divinse mentis, et haustus iEtherios dixere : deum namque ire per omnes Tefrasque, tractusque maris, coelumque profundum. Hinc pecudes, arinenta, vires, genus omne ferarum, Quemque sibi tenues nascentem arcessere vitas. Scilicet hue reddi deinde, ac resoluta referri Omnia: nec morti esse locum, sed viva volare Sideris in numerum atque alto succedere coelo. (a) In another place j- the poet introduces Anchises philosophising upon the same principles : Principio coslum, ac terras, camposque liquentes Lucentemque globum lunce, Titaniaque astra, Spiritus intus alit, totamque infusa per artus Mens agitat molem, et magno se corpore miscet, &c. (b) Virgil’s whole doctrine concerning a future state, divested of its mytho¬ logical clothing, proceeds, indeed, upon the Stoic, rather than the Platonic . ' or Pythagoric system. It must not, however, be hence inferred that he was himself a Stoic. In the passages just quoted he relates the opinions of others, and expressly introduces the former as such : His quidam signis. * V, 220. (a) Led by such wonders, sages have opin’d That bees have portions of a heav'nly mind; That God pervades, and like one common soul. Fills, feeds, and animates the world’s great whole ; That flocks, herds, beasts, and men from him receive Their vital breath, in him all move and live ; • That souls discerpt from him shall never die. But back resolved to God and heaven shall fly, And live for ever in the starry sky. J. VVarton. t JEn. vi. V. 724. (b) Know first a spirit with an active flame Pervades and animates the mighty frame, Huns through the watery worlds, the fields of air, The pond’rous earth, the depths of heav’n, and there Glows in the sun and moon, and burns in every star; Thus mingling with the mass, the general soul Lives in the parts and agitates the whole. Pitt. Chap. 2. S. 1. THE ROMAN EMPIRE'. 311 But in other parts of his works he makes use of the doctrine and language of the Epicurean school : for example :* — Namque canebat, uti maf^num per inane coacta Semina terrarumque, animaeque marisve fuissent Et liquid i simul ignis ; ut Ids exordia primis Omnia, et ipse tener mundi concreverit orbis. (a) And again :f — Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas, Atque metus omnes et inexorabile fatum Subjeeit pedibus, strepitumque Acberontis avari! (i) The predilection of Virgil for the Epicurean system may be also inferred from his intimate acquaintance with the poem of Lucretius, to which, in the course of his works he is frequently indebted. It must not be omitted that Virgil, in the fifty-second year of his age, set out for Greece, with the design of putting the finishing hand to his iEneid, and then devoting the remainder of his days to the study of philosophj'^ ; but that, being seized with illness upon his journey, he returned to Brundisium, and died. He was buried, according to his request, at Naples. j: Horace through all his writings breathes the Epicurean spirit, and sometimes appears to confess his partiality to this school. § But we are not to suppose that he entertained a very serious attachment to any system of philosophy. He was rather disposed to ridicule the folly of all the sects, than to become a strenuous advocate for any one of them. He had indeed, when young, studied philosophy in the Academy at Athens.|| Adjecere bonae paulo plus artis Athenae; Scilicet ut possem curvo digiioscere rectum, Atque inter sylvas Academi quaerere verum. (c) But he expressly asserts his independence, and disclaims subjection to the authority of any master : ^ Quid verum atque decens euro, et rogo, et omnis in hoc sum ; Condo, et compono, quae mox depromere possim ; Ac ne forte roges, quo me duce, quo lare tuter ; Nullius addictus jurare in verba inagistri. Quo me cunque rapit tempestas, deferor hospes. Nunc agilis fio, et mersor civilibus undis ; ; Virtutis verae custos rigidusque fatelles, Nunc in Aristippi furtim praecepta relabor, {d) * Eel. vi. V. 31, &c. (a) He sung, at universal nature’s birth. How seeds of water, fire, and air, and earth. Fell thro’ the void ; whence order rose, and all 'I'he beauties of this congregated ball. J. Warton. t Georg, ii. v. 490, &c. {b) Happy the man, whose vigorous soul can pierce Through the formation of this universe ! Who nobly dares despise, with soul sedate. The din of Acheron, and vulgar fears, and fate. + Donatus de Vit. Virgil, ed. H. Steph. p, G. § Ep. 1. Ep. 4. Carm. ii. od. 34. II Ep. 1. ii. Ep. 2. v. 43. (c) Athens, kind nurse of science, led my youth From error’s maze to the straight path of truth ; In search of wisdom taught my feet to rove Thro’ the learn’d shades of Academus’ grove. ^ Ep. 1. i. Ep. 1. V. H, &c. ( a1 _ > i • ii i.. * .«i._ : himself a follower of Pythagoras,** but chiefly that he might obtain the greater credit to the pretensions which he made to an intimate acquaint¬ ance with the mysteries of nature. Pliny Lj' relates several curious arts, by which he raised the wonder and terror of the ignorant multitude, among which was that of giving a livid and ghastly hue to the countenance by * Senec. Ep. 100. Lips. Manud. ad Phil. Stoic. 1. i. Diss. 17. t Vid. Geogr. 1. i. ii. xiv. xvi. I Sen. de. Tranq. c. 14. § Tac. An. 1. xv. c. 20. 1. xvi. c. 21. Plin. 1. viii. ep. 22. II Vidend. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 815. Bib. Lat. 1. i. c. 4. t. ii. p. 381. 364. Gauden- tius. c. 124. Cudworth, c. v. sect. 4.29. c. iv. sect. 14.20. Stoll. Hist. Mor. Gent, sect. 195. 208. ^ Qu. Nat. 1. vii. c. 32. ** Euseb. Cbron. ft N. Hist. 1. xix. c. 1. 1. xxviii. c. 11.1. xxxv. c. 15. Ira.'n. I. i. c. 7. Epiphan. Ilaer. 34, ill Chap. 2. S. 2. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 315 means of sulphureous flame. It is probable that he practised his decep¬ tions under the notion of supernatural operations ; for he was banished from Italy, by the order of Augustus, for the crime of magic.* * * § Quintus Sextus, aslongas the republic existed, was a zealous supporter of the liberties of Rome ; but when he saw the tyranny and cruelty of the triumvirate, he despaired of being longer able to serve his country, and de¬ termined to devote the remainder of his days to philosophy. Naturally of a gloomy temper, which was increased by the calamities of the times, Sex¬ tus made an attempt to subject his countrymen to a rigorous kind of dis¬ cipline, hitherto unknown among them. The particulars of this attempt, which proved abortive, are not preserved ; but it is more probable that he endeavoured to revive the rigours of the Pythagoric school, than that, con¬ trary to the universal practice of the Romans, he undertook, as Seneca has been understood to assert, the institution of a sect entirely new.-f On ac¬ count of the noble spirit of intrepid virtue which his writings expressed, Seneca ranked him among the Stoics : but this seems rather designed as a rhetorical encomium upon his character, than as an accurate relation of his philosophical principles. From the circumstance of his making choice of Sotion, a Pythagorean, for his preceptor; from his abstaining from animal food, and following the Pythagorean rule of reviewing his actions at the close of every day ; but especially from the nature of the institution which he planned, it appears highly probable that Sextus was a follower of Pythagoras. J But whatever may be thought of his sect, the manner iu which Seneca speaks of his writings leaves little room to doubt that he was an excellent practical moralist. “ You will find,” says he, § “ in his writings, a degree of vigour and spirit seldom to be met within any other philosopher. Other moralists prescribe, argue, cavil ; but they inspire the reader with no ardour, because they themselves possess none. But when you read Sex¬ tus, you say, he is alive, animated, bold, and even rises above humanity. He sends me away full of hardy confidence. Whatever be my disposition when I take up his writings, I confess to you I neverlay them down with¬ out being ready to invite calamity, and to exclaim, Let Fortune do her worst, I am prepared : give me some great occasion for the exercise of my patience, and the display of my virtue. Sextus hath this excellence, that he shows you the value of a happy life, and forbids you to despair of attaining it. You see the prize placed on high, but not inaccessible to him who ardently pursues it: Virtue presents herself in person before you, at once to excite your admiration, and inspire you with hope.” Writings, upon which such an encomium could with any degree of propriety be passed, must have been a valuable treasure. But we hav'e to regret that we can¬ not form a judgment of their merit; for it is very uncertain whether the piece, published under the title of Sententice Sexti Pythagorei, “ Sentences of Sextus the Pythagorean,” be the genuine work of this moralist. || Under the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius flourished Sotion Alex- andrinus,^ the preceptor of Seneca, who says of him, that he inspired him with a great respect for the institutions of Pythagoras, and especially lor the custom of abstaining from animal food. Hence it seems not * Euseb. 1. c. t Sen. ep. 98. 59. Pliii. 1. xviii. c. 28. Sen. Qu. Nat. I. vii. c. 32. Plutarch, de Sent, Virt. Prof. t. i. p. 186. t Euseb. Chron. n. 2010. Lips, ad Sen. ep. 59. Schoeffer de Phil. Ital. c. ult. Gale, Prtef. ad Sententias Sexti, apud Opusc. myth. § Sen. ep. 6. Vid. ep. 73. 108. De Ira, 1. iii. c. 36.. !i labr. Bib. Lat. t. i. p. 732. Galei Opuscula, ]>. 615. ed. Ainst. Sextii Etichir. a Sibero. Lips. 1725. 4to. ^ Euseb. Chron. 316 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. unreasonable to class Sotion among the Pythagoreans, although his moral doctrine, as represented by Seneca,* is tinctured with Stoicism. This may be the more easily admitted, as Zeno himself had raised a great part of his system upon Pythagoric principles. Passages said to have been written by Sotion are preserved in Stobaeus, -f- and in Antoninus and Maximus,;]; but their authenticity is doubtful. Moderatus, who lived in the time of Nero, must also be ranked among the followers of Pythagoras. § He deserves mention, chiefly because he collected, from various ancient records, the remains of the Pythagoric doctrine, and illustrated it in several distinct treatises, particularly in eleven books “On the Tenets of the Pythagorean Sect.” His works were much read and admired by Origen, Jamblicus, Porphyry, and others of the Alexandrian school. Apollonius Tyaneus was another follower of the Pythagoric doctrine i and discipline. The principal circumstances of his life, as far as credit can be given to his fabulous biographer, Philostratus, are as follows :|| Apollonius, of an ancient and wealthy family in Tyaiia, a city of Cap¬ padocia, M'as born about the commencement of the Christian era. At fourteen years of age his father took him to Tarsus, to be instructed by v - Euthydemus, a rhetorician ; but he soon became dissatisfied with the luxury , and indolence of the citizens, and obtained permission from his father to remove, with his preceptor, to Aigas, a neighbouring town, where was a temple of Esculapius. Here he conversed with Platonists, Stoics, Peripa- | tetics, and Epicureans, and became acquainted with their doctrines. But 'j finding the Pythagorean tenets and discipline more consonant to his own j views and temper, than those of any other sect, he made choice of Euxenus 1 for his preceptor in philosophy ; a man who indeed lodged his master’s ] precepts in his memory, but paid little regard to them in practice. Apol- ] lonius, however, was not to be diverted from the strictness of the Pytha- j gorean discipline even by the example of his preceptor. He refrained from ■ ' animal food, and lived entirely upon fruits and herbs. He wore no article i of clothing made of the skins of animals. He went bare-footed and suffered his hair to grow to its full length. He spent his time chiefly in the temple of Esculapius among the priests, by whom he was greatly admired. After having acquired reputation at iEgas, Apollonius determined to ' qualify himself for the office of a preceptor in philosophy by passing through the Pythagorean discipline of silence. Accordingly, he remained five years without once exercising the faculty of speech. During this time i he chiefly resided in Pamphylia and Cilicia. When his term of silence expired, he visited Antioch, Ephesus, and other cities, declining the society - of the rude and illiterate, and conversing chiefly with the priests. At sun¬ rising he performed certain religious rites, which he disclosed only to those i who had passed through the discipline of silence. He spent the morning . in instructing his disciples, whom he encouraged to ask whatever questions they pleased. At noon he held a public assembly for popular discourse. ? His style was neither turgid nor abstruse, but truly Attic. Avoiding all ; prolixity, and every ironical mode of speech, he issued forth his dogmas ■ i with oracular authority, saying, on every occasion. This I know, or. Such is ray judgment; herein imitating the manner of Pythagoras. Being asked why, instead of dogmatically asserting his tenets, he did not still : • * Ep. 108. Lips, in Ep. 49. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 412. f Serm. 98. + Serm. 99. § Plut. Symp. 1. viii. qu. 7. Porpb. Vit. Pyth. n.48. 1 j] Vid. Philostrat. Vit. Apoll. passim. Piideaux’s Life of Apollonius. Cliap. 2. S. 2. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 317 continue to inquire ; his answer was : “ I have sought for truth, when I was young ; it becomes me now no longer to seek, but to teach what I have found.” Apollonius, that he might still more perfectly resemble Pythagoras, determined to travel through distant nations. He proposed his design to his disciples, who were seven in number, but they refused to accompany him. He therefore entered upon his expedition, attended only by two servants. At Ninus he took as his associate Damis, an in¬ habitant of that citj", to whom he boasted that he was skilled in all lan¬ guages, though he had never learned them, and that he even understood the language of beasts and birds. The ignorant Assyrian worshipped him as a god ; and, resigning himself implicitly to his direction, accompanied him wherever he went. At Babylon, Apollonius conversed with the Magi, receiving from them much instruction, and communicating to them many things in return ; but to these conferences Damis was not admitted. In his visit to India, he was admitted to an interview with the king, Phraortes, and was introduced by him to larchus, the eldest of the Indian gymnosophists. Returning to Babylon, he passed from that city into Ionia, where he visited Ephesus, and several other places, teaching the doctrine, and recommending the discipline, of Pythagoras. On his way to Greece, he conversed with the priests of Orpheus at his temple in Lesbos. Arriving at Athens at the time when the sacred mysteries were performing, Apollonius offered himself for initiation ; but the priest refused him, saying, that it was not lawful to initiate an enchanter. He discoursed with the Athenians con¬ cerning sacrifices, and exhorted them to adopt a more frugal manner of living. After passing through some other Grecian cities and the island of Crete, Apollonius went into Italy, with the design of visiting Rome. Just before this time, Nero, probably either because he had been deceived by the pretensions of the magicians, or was apprehensive of some danger from their arts, gave orders that all those who practised magic should be banished from the city.* The friends of Apollonius apprised him of the hazard which was likely, at this juncture, to attend the purposed visit to Rome; and the alarm was so great, that, out of thirty-four persons who were his stated companions, only eight chose to accompany him thither. He nevertheless persevered in his resolution, and under the protection of the sacred habit obtained admission into the city. The next day he was conducted to the Consul Telesinus, who was inclined to favour philo¬ sophers of ev'ery class, and obtained from him permission to visit the temples, and converse with the priests. From Rome Apollonius travelled westward to Spain. Here he made an unsuccessful attempt to incite the procurator of the province of Baetica to a conspiracy against Nero. After the death of that tyrant he returned to Italy, on his way to Greece ; whence he proceeded to Egypt, where Vespasian was making use of every expedient to establish his power. That prince easily perceived that nothing would give him greater credit with the Egyptian populace than to have his cause espoused by one who v'as esteemed a favoured minister of the gods, and therefore did not fail to show him every kind of attention and respect. The philosopher, in return, adapted his measures to the views of the new emperor, and used all his influence among the people in support of Vespasian’s authority, j’ * The credit of this fact rests wholly upon tiie a' thority of Philostratus. t Coiif. Tacip Mist. 1. ii. c. 82. 318 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. I Upon the accession of Domitian, Apollonius was no sooner informed of the tyrannical proceedings of that emperor, and particularly of his pro¬ scription of philosophers,* than he assisted in raising a sedition against him, and in favour of Nerva, among the Egyptians ; so that Domitian i thought it necessary to issue an order that he should be seized, and brought j to Rome. Apollonius, being informed of the order, set out immediately, ] of his own accord, for that city. Upon his arrival he was brought to trial ; | but his judge, the pretor vElian, who had formerly known him in Egypt, , was desirous to favour him, and so conducted the process that it terminated 1 in his acquittal. ! Apollonius now passed over into Greece, and visited the temple of Ju- 1 piter at Olympia, the cave of Trophonius in Arcadia, and other celebrated ; seats of religion. Wherever he went he gained new followers. At length || he settled at Ephesus, and there formed a school in some degree similar to | j the ancient Pythagorean college ; but with this material difference, that in I the school of Apollonius the door of wisdom was open to all, and every j one was permitted to speak and inquire freely. Concerning the fate of Apollonius, after he settled at Ephesus, nothing ; certain is related. The time, the place, and the manner of his death are unknown. It is probable that he lived to an extreme old age', and died in ; the reign of Nerva. Damis, who attached himself to this philosopher at h Babylon, accompanied him in his subsequent travels, and after his death became his memorialist. Philostratus has loaded his account of the life of this extraordinary man with so many marvellous tales, that it is exceed¬ ingly difficult to determine what degree of credit is due to his narrative. ' He relates, for example, that Avhile the mother of Apollonius was pregnant, the Egyptian divinity Proteus appeared to her, and told her q;hat the i child she should bring forth was a god ; that his birth was attended with a celestial light ; that in the Esculapean temple at Aigas he predicted future events ; that at the tomb of Achilles he had a conference with the ghost of that hero ; and that whilst he was publicly discoursing at Ephe¬ sus, he suddenly paused, as if struck with a panic, and then cried out, “ Slay the tyrant,” at the very instant when Domitian was cut off at Rome, j” If to these tales we add the accounts which Philostratus gives of the effi¬ cacy of the mere presence of Apollonius, without the utterance of a single word, in quelling popular tumults ; of the chains of Prometheus, which Apollonius saw upon Mount Caucasus ; of speaking trees, of pigmies, jjhoenixes, satyrs, and dragons, which he met with in his eastern tour; and of other things equally wonderful; it will be impossible to hesitate in as¬ cribing the marvellous parts, at least, of Philostratus’s narrative to his in- genuit}", or his credulity. ^ Different opinions have been entertained concerning the character of Apollonius. Some have supposed the whole series of extraordinary events related concerning him to have been the mere invention of Philostratus and others for the purpose of obstructing the progress of Christianity, and providing a temporary prop for the falling edifice of paganism. Others, remarking that Apollonius had acquired a high degree of celebrity long before the time of his biographer, refer the origin of these tales to the jihilosopher himself ; but with respect to the manner in which this is to be done they are not agreed. Some apprehend that he was intimately ac¬ quainted with nature, and deeply skilled in medicinal arts ; and that he * Sueton. in Domit. c. 10. Aul. Cell. 1. xv. c. 11. Enseb. Chron. n. 210i. Plin. Paneg. c. 47. t Coiif. Suet. Domit. c. 23. Dio, 07. Chap. 2. S. 2. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 319 applied his knowledge and skill to the purposes of imposture, that he might pass among a credulous multitude for something more than human : while others imagine that he accomplished his fraudulent designs by means of a real intercourse with evil spirits. The truth probably is, that Apollo¬ nius was one of those impostors who profess to practise magical arts, and perform other wonders, for the sake of acquiring fame, influence, and pro- lit, among the vulgar. In this light, even according to his own biographer, he was regarded by his contemporaries, particularly by the priests of the Eleusinian and Trophonian mysteries, and by Euphrates, an Alexan¬ drian philosopher. Lucian,* who lived in the time of Trajan, and Apuleius,j' who flourished under Antoninus Pius, rank him among the most celebrated magicians. Origen, who had seen a life of Apollonius, now lost, w'hich was written by Maragenes, prior to that of Philostratus, writes thus : — “ Concerning magic, we shall only say, that whoever is desirous of knowing whether philosophers are to be imposed upon by this art, let him read the memoirs of Apollonius, written by Maragenes, who, though a philosopher, and not a Christian, says, that philosophers of no mean repute were deceived by the magical arts of Apollonius, and visited him as a person capable of predicting future events.’’ Eusebius, in his answer to Hierocles,§ who wrote a treatise, in which he drew a com¬ parison between Jesus Christ and Apollonius Tyaneus, speaks of the latter as a man who was eminently skilled in every kind of human wisdom, but who affected powers beyond the reach of philosophy, and assumed the Pythagorean manner of living as a mask for his impostures. The narra¬ tive of his life, by Philostratus, though doubtless abounding, with Actions, serves at least to confirm this opinion. j] How successfully Apollonius practised the arts of imposture, sufficiently appears from the events which followed. That dominion over the minds of men, which he found means to establish during his life, remained and in¬ creased after his death,' so that he long continued to be ranked among the divinities. The inhabitants of Tyana, proud of the honour of calling him their fellow-citizen, dedicated a temple to his name ; and the same privileges were granted to them as had usually been conferred upon those cities where temples were raised, and sacred rites performed, in honour of the empe¬ rors. Aurelian, out of respect to his memory, showed the Tyaneans pe¬ culiar favour.^ Adrian took great pains to collect his writings, and preserve them in his library : ** Caracalla dedicated a temple to him, as to a divinity among men:-|'-j' and Alexander Severus, in his domestic temple, kept the image of Apollonius, with those of Abraham, Orpheus, and Christ, and paid them divine honours. The common people, in the mean time, ranked Apollonius in the number of deified men, and made use of his name in incantations : and even among the philosophers of the Eclectic sect he was regarded as a being of a superior order, who partook of a middle nature between gods and men.Jj; Of the writings ascribed to Apollonius, none remain, except his “Apo¬ logy to Domitian,” and his “Epistles.” The former is, perhaps, in sub¬ stance genuine, but is strongly marked with the sophistic manner of Philostratus. The latter abound with philosophical ideas and sentiments, * Pseudomant. t. ii. p. 529. f Apolog. p. 218. X Contra Celsum, 1. vi. p. 311. ed. Iloescli. § C. 4, 5. p. 432. ed. Olear. Conf. Plin. Hist. N. 1. xxx. de Magia. II Conf. Olearum in Philost. ed. Lips. 1709. fol. ^ Vopiscus in Aureliano, c. 21. •* Phil. 1. viii. c. 20. ff Dio, 1. Ixxvii. ]). 878. Lamprid. in Al. Sev. c. 29. +I Euseb. Praep. 1. iv. c. 13. p. 150. Mosheini. Diss, de Apoll. ap. Obscrvat. IJist. Ciit. 320 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. and are written in a laconic style, which is a presumption in favour of their authenticity.* * * § A The doctrine of these epistles is for the most part Pythagoric. Apol- Jj lonius appears, however, not to have adhered to the genuine system of Py-*B thagoras concerning the nature and origin of things, according to which* God and matter are primary, independent principles ; but to have adopted the notion of the Heraclitean school, that the primary essence of all things is one, endued with certain properties by which it assumes various forms; ,, and that all the varieties of nature are modifications of this universal es- ‘‘i sence, which is the first cause of all things, or God. Hence Apollonius 4 taught that all things arise in nature according to one necessary and immu- table law, and that a wise man, being acquainted with the order of nature, « can predict future events. -f- In this manner it w'as that Apollonius con- « nected superstition with impiety, and made both subservient to imposture, m Concerning other philosophers of this period who followed the Pythago- £ rean doctrine, little remains to be related. The only names which require £ distinct notice are Secundus the Athenian, and Nicomachus. Secundus m (whomSuidas, with his usual negligence, confounds with Plinius Secundus) m is said in one respect to have carried the Pythagorean discipline further * than it was ever carried by any other philosopher ; preserving from the ■ time when he commenced Pythagorean, to the end of his life, perpetual ' silence. He is chiefly celebrated on account of his SententicB,^ or Answers to questions proposed to him by the Emperor Adrian, the authenticity of “ which, however, there is some reason to question. They are published in • Gale’s Opuscula Mythologica. Nicomachus, |1 a native of Gerasa, in - I Cado- Syria, was the author of two mathematical works, Introductio in ' Arithmeticam^ “ An Introduction to Arithmetic,’’ and Enchiridion Har- '> monicum, “ A Manual of Elarmony,’’ in which the principles of those " sciences are explained upon Pythagoric principles. The exact time in | which these philosophers flourished is uncertain ; but there is no doubt f that it was between the reigns of Augustus and Antoninus. SECTION in.— OF THE STATE OF THE PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY 1 UNDER THE ROMAN EMPERORS. i The Academic sect, which, towards the close of the Roman republic,* had so many illustrious patrons, under the emperors fell into general neglect;* partly through the contempt with wdiich it was treated by the Dogmatists, T and partly through the reviving credit of the Sceptic sect, in which the pe-t culiar tenets of the Middle Academy were embraced. At the same time,!? however, the true doctrine of Plato, which had formerly obtained such? high esteem among philosophers, and which had lately been restofed at? * Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. iv. p; 61. 9 t Epist Apoll. Stob. Serm. 39. 82. 90. 98. 117. 120. 133. 224. 278. V J Suid. in Sec. § Ed. Rom. 1638, Lugd. Bat. 1639. 12mo. Fabr. B. Gr. v. xiii. p. 565. ; II Euseb. Hist. Ec. 1. vi. c. 19. Phot. -Cod. 187. Fab. 1. c. Suid. Vidend. Schcefier de Pbil. Ital. c. ult. GaleJ Praef. ad Sent. Sexti. Gaudentius de i Phil. Rom. c. 66. 73. Siberus in Sext. Lips. 1725. V’oss. de Sectis, c. 21. sect. 8, | Jons. Scrip. Hist. 1. iii. c. i. 5. Suidas. Bayle. Cudworth, c. iv. sect. 14, 1-5. Pearson. Prolog, in Hierocl. Mosheim. Diss. de Existimatione Apoll. Prideaux’s Life of Apol¬ lonius. Tillamont. Vit. Apoll. Arpe de Talisman, p. 2.i. Naude Apologie, p. 238. ] Huet. Dem. Ev. p. ix. c. 147. sect. 4. de Math. p. 37. 94. Chap. 'i. S. 3. THE ROMAN EMPIRE, 321 Athens by Antiochus, resumed its honours. Among the genuine fol¬ lowers OF Plato we find, at this period, several illustrious names. Under the emperors Augustus and Tibei’ius flourished Thrasyllus,* * * § a Mendasian. Though, according to Porphyry, he was an eminent Platonist, he so far conformed to the practice of the Pythagoreans, as to become an adept in the art of astrology. He long imposed upon the credulity of Tibe¬ rius, and enjoyed his confidence, but at last fell a sacrifice to his jealousy.-j- Not long after the time of Thrasyllus lived Theon of Smyrna. Ptolemy the astronomer, who flourished under Antoninus Pius, refers to his astro¬ nomical observations. His mathematical treatises, which were written on purpose to elucidate the writings of Plato, sufficiently prove that he is to be classed in the Platonic school. At the same time, his discourses, which treat of geometry, arithmetic, music, astronomy, and the harmony of the universe, may serve to cast some light upon the Pythagorean system, Alcinous, whose age is uncertain, but is commonly placed about the beginning of the second century, wrote an Introduction to Plato, contain¬ ing a summary of his doctrine, which shows him to have been well read in his philosophy. It is translated into Latin by Ficinus ; and an English version of the work is given in “ Stanley’s Lives of the Philosophers.”§ Favorinus, a native of Arles, lived in the reigns of Trajan and Adrian. The latter esteemed him highly for his learning and eloquence, and fre¬ quently disputed with him, after his usual manner, upon subjects of litera¬ ture and philosophy. To many other learned men who were inclined to do justice to their own talents, this unequal contest proved injurious, and to some even fatal ; but Favorinus, who perceived that it was the emperor’s foible not to endure a defeat in disputation, upon every occasion of this nature prudently ceded to the purple the triumph of conquest. One of his friends reproaching him for having so tamely given up the point in a debate with the emperor, concerning the authority of a certain word, (for the emperor was ^ great philologist,) Favorinus replied, “ Would you have me contest a point with the master of fifty legions ? ” Favorinus was instructed in the precepts of philosophy by that illustrious ornament of the Stoical school, Epictetus ; but his writings, and manner of living, proved him unworthy of so excellent a master. None of his works are extant. || Under the reign of Antoninus Pius flourished Calvisius Taurus,^ of Beryta, who is mentioned as a Platonist of some note. Among his pupils was Aulus Gellius, a man of various learning, who has preserved several specimens of his preceptor’s method of philosophising. He examined all sects, but preferred the Platonic : in which he had at least the merit of avoiding the infection of that spirit of confusion, which at this period seized almost the whole body of the philosophers, especially those of the Platonic school. In a work which he wrote concerning the differences in opinion among the Platonists, Aristotelians, and Stoics, he strenuously opposed the attempts of the Alexandrian philosophers and others, to combine the tenets of these sects into one system. He wrote several pieces, chiefly to illustrate the Platonic philosophy. He lived at Athens, and taught, not in the schools, but at his table. A. Gellius, w'ho was frequently one of his guests. * Schol. Juv. Sat. vi. v. 576. Porphyr. Vit. Plot- c. x. n. 9. t Suet, in Tib. Tac. Annal. 1. vi. c. 20. + Suidas. Ptol. Math. Synt. 1. ix. c. 9. 1. x. c. 1. Theon. ed. Par. 1644. § Fabric. Bib), v. iv. p. 40. Conf. v. ii. p. 42. Alcin. ed. Par. 1573. Oxon. 1667. II Spartian. in Hadrian, c. 15. Dio, 1. 69. Philostr. Vit. Soph. 1. i. c. 8. sect. 1. Suidas. Aul. Gel). 1. xi. c. 5. K Suidas. Euseb. Chron. 148. Syncelliis, p. 351. Y 3^22 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. and whose Nodes Atticcz, “Attic Evenings,” are doubtless much indebted to these philosophical entertainments, gives the following account of the manner in which they were conducted :* “ Taurus, the philosopher, com¬ monly invited a select number of his friends to a frugal supper, consisting of lentils, and a gourd, cut into small pieces upon an earthen dish ; and | during the repast, philosophical conversation upon various topics was^ introduced. His constant disciples, whom he called his family, were ex-'ra pected to contribute their share towards the small expense which attended^ these simple repasts, in which interesting conversation supplied the place j of luxurious provision. Every one came furnished with some new subject ' of inquiry, which he was allowed in his turn to propose, and which; during a limited time, was debated. The subjects of discussion, in these„, conversations, were not of the more serious and important kind, but suchV;; elegant questions as might afford an agreeable exercise of the faculties in^ the moments of convivial enjoyment ; and these Taurus afterwards fre-^ quently illustrated more at large with sound erudition.” 'S The same period produced Lucius Apuleius,-]- of Medaura, a city in*t Africa, on the borders of Numidia and Getulia, subject to Rome. From some particulars which occur in his writings, it is probable that he lived ii- under the Antonines. With considerable ability he united indefatigable ' industry, whence he became acquainted with almost the whole circle of ■ sciences and literature. His own account of himself is, that he not only tasted of the cup of literature under grammarians and rhetoricians at Car- : i thage, but at Athens drank freely of the sacred fountain of poesy, the clear s stream of geometry, the sweet waters of music, the rough current of dia- l i lectics, and the nectareous but unfathomable deep of philosophy; and, in i short, that, with more good will indeed than genius, he paid equal homage j to every muse. J Upon his removal to Rome, he studied the Latin tongue t with so much success, that he became an eminent pleader in the Roman : courts. He expended a large patrimony in his travels, v^hich he undertook > chiefly for the sake of gaining information concerning the religious rites and customs of different countries.§ In order to repair his fortune, he married a rich widow of Oea in Africa.|| A rumour was upon this circulated that he had employed magical incantations to obtain her love. It was to refute this report that he wrote his Apology, a work replete with learning. Al¬ though it may be easily believed that this was a false accusation, Apuleius was commonly ranked among the professors of magic, and was probably no mean proficient in those arts of imposture, which he had learned from priests of different countries. This opinion is confirmed by his Milesian fable, or the Metamorphosis of Lucius into an Ass, commonly known under the title of “ The Golden Ass.” Apuleius chiefly owes his celebrity to this fanciful work, in which the story of Cupid and Psyche is a curious philoso¬ phical romance. In philosophy, his principal piece is De Dogrnate Plato- 7iis, “ A summary View of the Doctrine of Plato which may he read with great advantage, together with the Introductions to the Platonic sys¬ tem, written by Alcinous and Albinus. Apuleius also wrote an interpreta¬ tion of Aristotle’s treatise De Mundo ; “ An Apology for Socrates ;” and a work entitled Florida^ which, though rather rhetorical than philosophi¬ cal, .serves in many particulars to illustrate the history of philosophy.^ Noct. Att. 1. vi. c. 13. Conf. 1. i. c. 26. 1. ii. c. 2. 1. vi. c. 13. 1. xii. c. 5. 1. xvii. c. 8. 1. xviii. c. 2. -}• Apul. Apol. p. 203. ed Pet. Scriv. Apul. Flop. c. IS. p. 366. Apol. p. 190. 370. Meiamorph. 1. i. c. 5. § Apol. p. 203. Met. I. iii. p. 47. 1. xi. p. 177. 183. || Apol. Met. 1. ii. p. 18. ^ Apol. p. 204, 205. 216. Florid, p. 362. r'abric. Bibl. Lat. t. i. p. 516. 518. Chap. 2. S. 3. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 323 Another Platonist, who flourished under M. Aurelius Antoninus, was Atticus ; chiefly memorable for the laudable pains he took to ascertain the exact points of difference between the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle. Several fragments of his works are preserved by Eusebius, in which he argues against Aristotle concerning the ultimate end of man, providence, the origin of things, the immortality of the soul, and other topics. Plotinus, in the Eclectic school, held the writings of Atticus in high estimation, and recommended them as exceedingly useful in obtaining an accurate know¬ ledge of the Platonic system. Atticus pronounced it impossible for those who had imbibed the Peripatetic notions to elevate their minds to a capa¬ city of understanding and relishing the sublime conceptions of Plato.* Numenius, of Apamea in Syria, was a writer of the same class with Atticus. Eusebius ranks him among the Platonists ; and Origen and Plotinus mention him with respect : but none of his works are extant, except some fragments preserved by Eusebius.-f- Maximus Tyrius, though chiefly distinguished by his eloquence, has obtained some degree of celebrity as a philosopher. According to Suidas he lived under Commodus ; according to Eusebius and Syncellus, under Antoninus Pius. The accounts of these chronologers may be reconciled, by supposing that Maximus flourished under Antoninus, and reached the time of Commodus. Although he was frequently at Rome, he probably spent the greater part of his time in Greece. Several writers suppose him to have been the preceptor, of whom the emperor Marcus Antoninusspeaks i under the name of Maximus ; but it is more probable that this was some other philosopher of the Stoical sect. That Maximus Tyrius possessed the most captivating powers of eloquence, sufficiently appears from his elegant Dissertations; they are for the most part written upon Platonic ' principles, but sometimes lead towards scepticism. J To these ornaments of the Platonic school in Rome must be added two • other celebrated writers, who, though they studied philosophy, are com¬ monly ranked among the Platonists, Plutarch and Galen. That Plutarch § ought to be admitted among the philosophers of his ! time, no one will doubt who is conversant with his writings. He was a native of Chaeronea in Boeotia,|| but was far from partaking of the pro¬ verbial dulness of his country. The time of his birth is not exactly known ; it is certain, however, that he flourished from the time of Nero to that of Adrian.^ His preceptor w'as Ammonius, a learned philosopher, some¬ times confounded with Ammonius Sacca, the father of the Eclectic sect, who lived a century later.** ' As soon as Plutarch had completed his juvenile studies he was engaged in civil affairs. He was first appointed, by a public decree, legate to the proconsul, and afterwards undertook the office of archon or pretor. The emperor Trajan, a friend to learned men, patronised him, and conferred * Syncell. p. 353. Euseb. Chron. sub Aurel, A. 179. Praep. 1. xv. c. 4, &c. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 54. t Porph. Vit. Plot. c. 17. Euseb. Praep. 1. xi. c. 9. 1. xiii. c. 5. 1. xiv. c. 5. Orig. contr. Cels. 1. iv. p. 204. 1. v. p. 276. Conf. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 342. Theodoret. Tlierap. 1. ii. + Max. Tyr. Diss. xi. Suidas. Euseb. Chron. M. Ant. de Seipso. 1. i. sect. 15. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 33. Stollii Hist. Ph. Mor. sect. 254. p. 572. edit. Heins. Lugd. Bat 1614, 8vo. Davis, Cantab. 1703. § Suid. Vit ap. Oper, ed. Rualdi, Par. 1624. D. Celer. Par. 1617. II De Curios, t. ii. p. 237. *11 Photius, Cod. 145. p. 642. Plut de Delph. Inscr. t. i. p. 555. Apophthegm. Traj. t. i. p. 322. Syncellus, p. 349. ** Juniusad Eunap. Voss, de Sect. c. 21. sect. 6. y 2 324 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. upon liim the consular dignity. Under Adrian he was appointed pro¬ curator of Greece.* Civil occupations did not, however, prevent Plutarch from devoting a great part of his time to literary and philosophical studies. He both taught philosophy, and was a voluminous writer. A catalogue of his works, drawn up by his son Lamprius,'|’ is still extant, from which it appears that more of his pieces have been lost than have been preserved. Those of his writ¬ ings w'hich remain are a valuable treasure of ancient learning, serving to (] illustrate not only the Grecian and Roman affairs, but the history of phi¬ losophy. They abound with proofs of indefatigable industry and profound erudition ; and, notwithstanding the harshness of the writer’s style, they will always be read with pleasure, on account of the great variety of valuable and amusing information which they contain. But it is in this view chiefly that Plutarch is to be admired. In extent and variety of learning he had few equals ; but he does not appear to have excelled as much in depth and solidity of judgment. Where hq expresses his own conceptions and opinions, he often supports them by feeble and slender arguments ; where he reports and attempts to elucidate the opinions of others, he frequently falls into mistakes, or is chargeable with misrepre¬ sentation. In proof of this assertion, we may particularly mention what he had advanced concerning Plato’s notion of the soul of the world, and concerning the Epicurean philosophy. To this we must add, that Plutarch is often inaccurate in method, and sometimes betrays a degree of credulity unworthy of a philosopher. On moral topics he is most successful. His didactic pieces not only abound with amusing anecdotes, but are enriched with many just and useful observations. Plutarch appears to have derived his philosophical tenets from various sources. Aristotle was his chief guide in ethics : his doctrine of the soul he borrowed from the Egyptians, or more probably the Pythagoreans : in metaphysics, he principally followed Plato and the Old Academy. We sometimes find him asserting with the Dogmatists, and sometimes doubting ' with the Pyrrhonists ; but he always wages open war wdth the Epicureans and the Stoics. The truth seems to be, that Plutarch had not digested i for himself any accurate system of opinions, and was rather a memorialist and interpreter of philosophers, than himself an eminent philosopher. He died about the fourth or fifth year of the reign of Adrian ; that is, about the year 119 or 120. J Galen, § whom, wdth Plutarch, we have ranked among the Platonic philosophers, w as born in the year one hundred and thirty-one, at Perga- mus in Asia. In his childhood he was well instructed by his father, and other preceptors, in useful and ornamental leai’ning. He studied philoso¬ phy, first under Caius a Platonist, and afterwards under Albinus ; whilst, at the same time, he prosecuted the study of medicine under various masters. After travelling to Corinth, Alexandria, and other places, for improvement in medical and philosophical knowledge, he began to practise surgery about the twenty-eighth year of his age. The countenance which was at this time given to learned men by Marcus Antoninus induced Galen to take up his residence at Rome. Here he obtained great repu¬ tation in his profession, and enjoyed the favour of the emperor, and the friendship of many illustrious Romans. He remained at Rome, excepting * Praecept. de ger. Rep. t. ii. 457. Sympos. 1. vi. 2. 8. t. iii. p. 239. Suidas. + Vit. Deniosth. t. iii. p. 21. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v.iii. p. 233. Plut. Op. Ed. Franc. 1620. Par. 1524. J Num Seni ger. Rep. t. ii. p. 448 & F-iiseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. ult. Suidas. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iii. p. 509. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. S25 Chap. 2. S. 4. a few interruptions, till his death, which happened about the year two hundred. Galen wrote many books, not only upon medical but philo¬ sophical subjects. Among the latter are a treatise, “ On the best Doctrine,” against Favorinus ; “ A Dissertation on the Opinions of Hippocrates and I Plato “A Commentary on the Tiraaeus of Plato,” and several pieces “ On Dialectics.’’ This writer has been frequently censured for impiety; : but his Demonstration of Divine Wisdom, from the structure of the human body, in his treatise De Usit Partium corporis humani, “ On the Uses of the Parts of the Human Body,” is a sufficient refutation of this j calumny.* SECTION IV.— OF THE ECLECTIC SECT. Upon the foundation of the Platonic philosophy, with an abundance of heterogeneous materials, collected from every other sect, was erected an I irregular, cumbrous, and useless edifice, called the Eclectic School. j The founders of this sect formed the flattering design of selecting, from 1 the doctrines of all former philosophers, such opinions as seemed to ap- 1 proach nearest the truth, and combining them into one system. But in ? executing this plan, they did nothing better than pile up a shapeless and i incoherent mass, rudis indigestaque moles not unlike that chaos, which i they admitted as an essential article in their doctrine of nature. In some 1 particulars, indeed, they attempted to adorn and enrich the system with : fancies of their own ; but with what little success will sufficiently appear i in the sequel. 1 The Eclectic sect took its rise at Alexandria in Egypt ; a country which, in more remote periods, had admitted foreign dogmas and superstitions, ■ particularly after the invasion of the Persians. Egypt having in conse- ‘ quence of the conquests of Alexander become a part of the Grecian eni- ; pire, the Egyptian priests accommodated themselves, not only to the laws i and manners, but even to the speculative tenets of their conquerors. That they might not appear inferior to the Greeks in learning, they affected to t admire and adopt their philosophy. The Pythagoric and Platonic systems, especially, gained an easy admission into the Egyptian schools, on account of the respect which they paid to religion, and the opportunities which they afforded of reconciling vulgar superstitions and vernacular traditions : with systematic science. , The confusion of opinions which arose from this cause w’as doubtless ' increased by the promiscuous concourse of strangers, who at this period { flocked from all quarters to Alexandria, bringing with them, from their I respective countries, their different tenets in philosophy and religion. And I the evil was aggravated by the return of a body of Alexandrian philoso- I j phers, who, under the troublesome and oppressive reign of Ptolemy Physcon, had been dispersed through Asia,'f and who had there learned : a new species of Oriental philosophy, chiefly derived from the Persian 1 * Vit. ap. Op. Bas. 1562. Vit. ap. Arker. de Afiectuutn Cognitione, Rudolstadt, r 1715. Cleric. Hist. Med. Labbei, Elog. Chron. in Gal. Par. 1660. Vidend. Jons, de > . Scrip. H. Ph. 1. iii. e. 3. 7. 9, 10. Voss, de Hist. Gr. 1. iv. c. 10. 16. Meursad Nicom. * p. 166. Schmid. Diss. de Hipparchone, Theon. Sect. ii. p. 14. Voss, de Sc. Math, c. 43. sect. 13. Gaudent. de Phil. Rom. c. 93. Petav. Rat. Temp. I. v. c. 9. Bayle. Blount, Cens. Auth. p. 143. 170. Warb. Div. Leg. Mos. t. ii. p. 117. Mosheim. ^Hist. Chr. ante Constant. Sec. iii. sect. 21. , t Athen. 1. iv. p. 184. Conf. Justin. 1. xxxviii. c. 9. 326 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. Zoroaster, which they found it not difficult to incorporate with the doc¬ trines of Plato and Pythagoras. The present state of the several Grecian sects was in no small degree fa¬ vourable to the coalescing plan of the Eclectic philosophy. The Dogmatists had now so long engaged in undecided contests, as sufficiently to betray their weakness to their common adversaries, the Academics and Sceptics. Scepticism, on the one side, was seen to contradict the common sense and experience of mankind, and to threaten the world with universal uncer¬ tainty and confusion. In these circumstances, nothing could be more natural than the design of separating from each former system its purest and best supported tenets, and forming them into a new institute of phi¬ losophy, in which truth might be seen under a fairer and more perfect form than she had hitherto been able to assume. The Christian religion, too, which had now found its way to Alexandria, became incidentally the occasion of encouraging and promoting this coalition of opinions : for when the Heathen philosophers perceived that this new establishment, supported by the splendour of its miracles, and the purity of its doctrines, was daily gaining credit even in the schools of Alexandria ; and saw that, like the rising sun, it was likely soon to eclipse every inferior light; despairing of being able either to refute its claims by argument, or to stem its progress by authority, they determined to oppose it by every effort of ingenuity and artifice. In order to support the declining credit of their own schools, they incorporated Christian ideas and principles into their new system. Several fathers of the Christian church themselves, such as Pantoenus, Clemens Alexandrinus, and the author of the work called the Shepherd of Hermas, by studying philosophy in the Alexandrian school, injudiciously favoured the views of their opponents, and from their ’ sacred magazine contributed their share towards that confused mass of opinions, Egyptian, Oriental, Pythagoric, Platonic, and Christian, which, about the close of the second century rose up into the Eclectic System. The Eclectic sect is not commonly known among ancient writers under any distinct name ; for this obvious reason, that its most celebrated sup¬ porters chose rather to pass themselves upon the world as Platonists, than to assume a new title ; but, that the sect really existed as such, no one, who attends to the facts by^ which its rise and progress are marked, can entertain a doubt.* The first projector of this plan appears to have been Potamo, a Plato- nist. The practise of philosophising eclectically was indeed known long before his time. It had been formerly adopted, as we have seen, by several of the leaders of the Greek sects, particularly Plato, Zeno, and Aristotle ; it had been not uncommon among the Alexandrian philoso¬ phers from the commencement of their schools ; and it was followed, in the period of which we are now treating, by Plutarch, Pliny, Galen, and others. But Potamo appears to have been the first who attempted to in¬ stitute a new sect upon this principle. Diogenes Laertius relates, f “ that not long before he wrote his Lives of the Philosophers, an Eclectic sect, sKXeicTiKfi rig atpeaig, had been introduced by Potamo of Alexandria, who selected tenets from every former sect.” He then proceeds to quote a few particulars of his system from his Eclectic institutes, respecting the prin¬ ciples of reasoning, and certain general topics of philosophical inquiry; from which nothing further can be learned, than that Potamo endeavoured 'll I * Vicl. Olearii Diss. de Sect. Eclecl. ap. Stanley’s Lives of Phil, et Mosheim. Diss. Hist. Eccl. p. 85. f Proocm. sub. fin. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 327 to reconcile the precepts of Plato with those of other masters. As nothing remains concerning this philosopher besides the brief account just referred to in Laertius, an obscure passage in Suidas,* and another still more ob¬ scure in Porphyr}^,-]- it is probable that his attempt to institute a school upon the Eclectic plan proved unsuccessful. The time when Potamo flourished is uncertain. Suidas places him under Augustus ; but it is more probable, from the account of Laertius, that he began his undertaking about the close of the second century. The complete constitution of the Eclectic sect must be referred to Ammonius, surnamed, from the kind of life which he followed, Sacca. If Plotinus attended both upon his lectures and those of Potamo, as Por¬ phyry intimates, Ammonius flourished about the beginning of the third century. He was born of Christian parents, and was early instructed in the catechetical schools established at Alexandria. Here, under the Chris¬ tian preceptors, Athenagoras, Pantajnus, and Clemens Alexandrinus, by whom this school was successively conducted, and who themselves united Gentile philosophy with Christian doctrine, he acquired a strong pro¬ pensity towards philosophical studies, and became exceedingly desirous of reconciling the different opinions which at that time subsisted among philosophers.;;}; Porphyry relates,§ that Ammonius passed over to the legal establish¬ ment, that is, apostatised to the Pagan religion. Eusebius, |] and Jerom,^ on the contrary, assert that Ammonius continued in the Christian faith to the end of his life. But it is probable that these Christian fathers refer to another Ammonius, who, in the third century, wrote a Harmony of the Gospels, or to some other person of this name ; for they refer to the sacred books of Ammonius; whereas Ammonius Sacca, as his pupil Longinus attests, wrote nothing.** It is not easy to account for the particulars related of this philosopher, but upon the supposition of his having re¬ nounced the Christian faith. It seems improbable that a Christian would have accepted the chair in a Pagan school, or would have been followed by disciples who waged perpetual war against Christianity. That he was well acquainted with the Christian doctrine, and endeavoured to incorpo¬ rate it into his system, will, however, be readily admitted. According to Hierocles, Ammonius was induced to execute the plan of a distinct Eclectic school, by a desire of putting an end to those contentions which had so long distracted the philosophical world. “ Animosities,” says Hierocles, j-f “having hitherto existed among the Platonists, Aris¬ totelians, and other philosophers, which were at this time carried to such a height, that they did not scruple to corrupt the writings of their leaders, in order to furnish themselves with weapons of defence ; Ammonius, a man divinely instructed, abandoning the controversies which had so long dis¬ graced philosophy, and clearing away the superfluities of each system, de¬ monstrated that, in certain great and necessary points, the doctrines of Plato and Aristotle were perfectly harmonious, and thus delivered to his disciples an institution of philosophy free from dispute.” How far the system, which Ammonius and his followers framed, deserved the praise which Hierocles bestows upon it, will afterwards appear. * Suidas in A'lpecris, t. i. p. 656. et in Potam. t. iii. p. 161. t Vit. Plot. c. ix. p. 108. Bibl. Gr. Fabr. vol. iv. p. 108. Olear. Diss. de Ph. Eclec. sect. 2. X Suidas in Ammon, t. i. p- 143. in Plot. t. iii. p. 133. Bayle. § Apud Euseb. Hist. Ecc. 1. vi. c. 19. 1| L. c. p. 221. H De S. E. c. Iv. p. 132. Bib. Eccl. Fabr. ** Compare Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. iv. p. 160. 172. Balt. Defense da S. Peres, 1. i. c. 3. Lardner’s Credibility, Part. ii. c. 36. ff De Fato ap. Phot. Cod. 214. 151. 328 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. Ammonius had many eminent followers and hearers, both Pagan and Christian ; who all, doubtless, promised themselves much iltomination from a preceptor, who undertook to collect into a focus all theWys of ancient wisdom. He taught his select disciples certain sublime’Mc}6trines, and mystical practices, and was called, dsoSi^uKroc, the heaven-taught phi¬ losopher. These mysteries were communicated to them under* a solemn injunction of secrecy. Porphyry relates,* that Plotinus, with the’ rest of the disciples of Ammonius, promised not to divulge certain dogma's which they learned in his school, but to lodge them safely in their purged minds. This circumstance accounts for the fact, already mentioned on the authority of Longinus, that he left nothing in writing. > Ammonius probably died about the year two hundred and forty-three. -f- Among those disciples of Ammonius, who were admitted to the, know¬ ledge of his mysteries, were, Herennius, Origines, Longinus, and Plotinus. Herennius and Origines are memorable for nothing except’ their infidelity to their master, in violating their promise by divulging the secrets of his school. This Origines must not be confounded with Origen, the celebrated teacher of the Christian church in Alexandria; for the former was a Pagan, and seems to have written only two small treatises, which are now lost ; whereas the latter rose to great distinction among the Christian fathers, and was the author of many valuable works. Dionysius Longinus, § a native of Emesa in Syria, was instructed by Cornelius Fronto, a nephew of Plutarch, in rhetoric, and afterwards became his heir. Whilst he was young he visited several celebrated seats of ths muses, particularly Athens, Alexandria and Rome, and attended upon the most eminent masters in language, eloquence, and philosophy. He was a great admirer of Plato,|| and honoured his memory with an annual festival.^ He chiefly followed the Eclectic system of Ammonius. So extensive and profound was his erudition, that he was called the living library.** It is much to be regretted that none of the writings of this celebrated scholar are extant, except one piece, which will be an eternal monument of his genius and taste, ‘‘ A Treatise on the Sublime.” Lon¬ ginus was preceptor in the Greek language to Zenobia, queen of Palmyra, and, having been admitted to her counsels, shared her fortunes. That princess being conquered and taken prisoner by the emperor Aurelian, in the y^ear two hundred and seventy-three, Longinus, her minister, was, by the emperor’s command, put to death. ■j-'j- Longinus had seen the Jewish scriptures ; he quotes a passage from the writings of Moses, as an ex¬ ample of the Sublime ; “ And God said. Let there be light, and there was light.” ++ The school of Ammonius was continued, and the Eclectic system com¬ pleted, by the most celebrated of his disciples, Plotinus, the chief of the Alexandrian Platonists, from whom the school afterwards took its name. For our knowledge of the history and opinions of this philosopher we de¬ pend almost entirely upon the authority of Porphyry, who must, indeed, * L. c. c. 3. -f- Jons, de Scr. Hist. Ph. 1. iii. c. 3. p. 282. J Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iii. p. 120. Porph. 1. c. c. 2. § Suidas. Porph. Vit. Plot. c. xx. c. xiv. || Euseb. Prsep. 1. x. c. 3. ^ The common reading in Eusebius is riAwTir'eto, but we think, with Fabricius, (a) that the passage should be read TlXarcoeta, for it is not probable that Longinus, who was contemporary with Plotinus, and wrote against him, should observe a festival in honour of his memory. Longinus survived Plotinus only a few years. ** Eunapii Vit. Sophist, p. 14. ff Vopiscus in Aurel. c. 30. Gen. i. 3. (a) Bibl. Gr. v. iv. p. 436. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE KOjMAN empire. 329 have been well acquainted with the particulars of his life, having enjoyed an intimate friendship with him for many years ; but whose partiality for his sect, and propensity to fiction, will not suffer us to allow him implicit credit.* The probable truth with respect to this philosopher is as follows : Plotinus was born at Lycopolis in Egypt, in the year two hundred and five. Concerning his parents, family, and early education, nothing is known. About the age of twenty years he began to apply to the study of philosophy. After attending lectures in the different schools with which Alexandria at this time abounded, he attached himself to Ammonius, and continued to prosecute his philosophical studies under this master eleven years ; probably because he found in Ammonius a disposition towards superstition and fanaticism similar to his own. Upon the death of his pre¬ ceptor, having in his school frequently heard the Oriental philosophy com¬ mended, and expecting to find in it that kind of doctrine concerning divine natures which he was most desirous of studying, he determined to travel into Persia and India to learn wisdom of the Magi and Gymnosophists. In this design he was probably encouraged by the success of Apollonius Tyaneus, whose magic arts, said to have been derived from these sources, had obtained him universal fame. It happened opportunely that the em¬ peror Gordian was, at this time, undertaking an expedition against the Parthians. Plotinus seized the occasion, and, in the year two hundred and forty-three, joined the emperor’s army. The affairs of Gordian prov¬ ing unfortunate, and the emperor himself being killed, the philosopher fled, not without hazard to Antioch ; and afterwards came to Rome, where the purple was now possessed by Philip. For some time Plotinus was prevented from laying open the stores of wisdom which he had collected, by the oath of secrecy which he had taken in the school of Ammonius : but, after his fellow-disciples, Herenniusand Origines, had disclosed the mysteries of their master, he thought himself no longer bound by his promise, and became a public preceptor in philoso¬ phy, upon Eclectic principles. During a period of ten years, he confined himself entirely to oral discourse, always conversing freely with his disciples, who were very numerous, and encouraging them to start difficulties, and propose questions, upon every subject. At last he found it necessary, for his own convenience and that of his pupils, to commit the substance of his lectures to writing. Many volumes of metaphysics, dialectics, and ethics, thus produced with haste and inaccuracy in the midst of various engage¬ ments, were suffered to pass into the hands of his pupils without being transcribed. This may in part account for the great obscurity and con¬ fusion which are still found in these writings, after all the pains that Por¬ phyry took to correct them. These books, which are fifty-four in number, are distributed under six classes, called Enneads. Proclus wrote commen¬ taries upon them, and Dexippus defended them against the Peripatetics.-|- Although the novelty of the plan of instruction which Plotinus followed brought him many hearers, through the obscurity and subtlety of his doc¬ trine he had but few disciples. Nothing could exceed the assiduity with which he taught those who were willing to become his followers, or the ardour with which he himself applied to philosophical speculations. It was his frequent practice to prepare himself’ for his sublime contemplations by watching and fasting. In such high reputation was Plotinus for wisdom, * Coiif. Porpb. Vit. Plotin. ap. Fab. Eiinap. p. 1. Suidas in Porph. t. iii. p. 133. t Fabriciiis, V. iv. p. 151. 330 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. that many private quarrels were referred to his arbitration, and parents, | upon their death-beds, often sent for him to intrust him with the charge of * their children. He resided twenty-six years at Rome, where he enjoyed J the friendship of many persons of lugh rank, and particularly of the empe- I ror Galienus. The use which Plotinus made of his interest with that prince • was a memorable proof of the romantic turn of his mind. He requested d the emperor to rebuild a city in Campania, which had been formerly rased, .5' and to grant it, with the neighbouring territory, to a body of philosophers,' y j who should be governed by the laws of Plato, and should call the city4 Platonopolis ; at the same time promising, that he himself, with his friends,’# would lay the foundation of this philosophical colony. The emperor was* himself inclined to listen to the proposal, but was dissuaded by his friends.’H It was another proof of the fanatical spirit of Plotinus that, though well* skilled in the medical art, he had such a contempt for the body, that he® could never be prevailed upon to make use of any means to cure the dis-S eases to which his constitution was subject, or to alleviate his pain. Hea had learned from Pythagoras and Plato that the soul is sent into the bodyM for the punishment of its former sins, and must, in this prison, pass through M a severe servitude before it can be sufficiently purified to return to the ■! divine fountain from which it flowed. Such was his contempt of the cor-M poreal vehicle in which his soul was inclosed, that he would never sufferW the day of his birth to be celebrated, or any portrait to be taken of hisM person. Amelius, one of his pupils, however, desirous of obtaining a picture® of his master, introduced a painter, named Casterius, into the school whichjf any one was at liberty to visit, in hopes that, by attentively observing hisT features, he might be able to delineate the likeness from memory. This* the painter accomplished withgreatsuccess ; and Amelius became possessed f, of a portrait of Plotinus without his knowledge. * By his rigorous abstinence, and determined neglect of his health, Plotinus 1 at last brought himself into a state bf disease and infirmity, which rendered # the latter part of his life exceedingly painful. Forsaken by his friends ^', excepting only Eustochius (for Porphyry was at that time in Sicily), he left ^ Rome, and retired into Campania, to the estate of Zathus, one of his former f disciples, now deceased. By the hospitality of the heirs of this old friend Plotinus was supported till his death. When he found his end approach-^, ing, he said to Eustochius, “ The divine principle within me is now hasten- r ing to unite itself with that divine being which animates the universe herein expressing a leading principle of his philosophy, that the humanf' soul is an emanation from the divine nature, and will return to the source ip whence it proceeded. Plotinus died in the year two hundred and seventy,^: aged sixty-six years. -t Porphyry, in relating the life of Plotinus, represents him as having beeiW possessed of miraculous powers, similar to those \vhich he ascribes to • Pythagoras, and doubtless with the same artful design : but the characters of' fiction are so strongly marked upon the whole narrative, that, after what- has been already said concerning the marvellous parts of the history of Pythagoras, and of Apollonius Tyaneus, it is wholly unnecessary to allow those of Plotinus further notice in the history of philosophy. From the life and writings of this philosopher it clearly appears that he belonged to the class of fanatics. His natural temper, his education, his system, all inclined him to fanaticism. Suffering himself to be led astray by a volatile imagination from the plain path of good sense, he poured forth crude and confused conceptions, in obscure * and incoherent language. * Vid. Eunap. p. 17. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 331 Sometimes he soared, in ecstatic flights, into the regions of mysticism. Porphyry relates* that he ascended through all the Platonic steps of divine contemplation to the actual vision of the Deity himself, and was admitted to such intercourse with him as no other philosopher ever enjoyed. They who are well acquainted with human nature will easily perceive in these flights unequivocal proofs of a feeble or disordered mind, and will not wonder that the system of Plotinus was mystical, and his writings ob¬ scure. The truth seems to be, that this philosopher made it the main scope and end of his life to dazzle his own mind, and the minds of others, with the meteors of enthusiasm, rather than to illuminate them with the clear and steady rays of truth. How much is it to be regretted that such a man should have become, in a great degree, the preceptor of the world, and should, by means of his disciples, have every where disseminated a species of false philosophy, which was compounded of superstition, enthusiasm, and imposture I The muddy waters sent forth from this polluted spring were spread through the most celebrated seats of learning, and were even permitted, as we shall afterwards see, to mingle with the pure stream of Christian doctrine. Not only at Rome, where Plotinus had taught, but first in Alexandria, afterwards in many of the principal cities of Asia Minor, and even at Athens, the ancient seat of wisdom, the system of Ammoniusand Plotinus was embraced and propagated by men who, in learning and abilities, were greatly superior to its founders. We shall trace the progress of the Ploti- nian or Eclectic school through a long series of Pagan professors, reserv¬ ing to a subsequent part of the work the consideration of its influence upon the opinions of Christian writers. Amelius,-)- a Tuscan, who in his youth had been instructed in philo¬ sophy by Lysimachus, a Stoic, and who had, in the course of his studies, acquired a great fondness for the writings of Plato, in the year two hun¬ dred and forty-six became a pupil of Plotinus. His master found his talents and taste so similar to his own, that he soon admitted him to his friendship, and employed him in writing solutions of questions proposed to him by his disciples, and refutations of the objections and calumnies of his enemies. He had been eighteen years with Plotinus, when Porphyry entered the school, and probably assisted him in studying the doctrine of their master. J ’ Before the death of Plotinus he retired to Apamea, where he survived his master a few years. Among the most celebrated preceptors of the Plotinian school and the Alexandrian sect, is Porphyry, a learned and zealous supporter of Pagan theology, and an inveterate enemy to the Christian faith. Porphyry § was, as we learn from himself, a Tyrian. |1 He was born in the year two hundred * L.c. c. 13. 15. 23. t Porph. Vit. Plot. c. 7, &c. Suidas. Fab. Bib. Gr. v, ii. p. 405. Eunap. 1. c. J Suidas had probably no other ground for saying that Porphyry was a disciple of Atnelius. § Eunap. Vit. Soph. p. 17. Suidas in Porph. t. iii. p. 158. Diss. de Vita Porph. Rom. 1C30. 8vo. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iv. p. 207. Porph. Vit. Plot. c. viii. 107. 11 Jerom (a) and Chrysostom (5) call Porphyry a Batanean : whence some have sup¬ posed (c) that he was born in the country of Basan, apart of Trachonites,in Palestine. Itis more probable (d) that Batanea was a part of Syria bordering upon Tyre, in which a colony of Tyrians had settled: and if this was the place of Porphyry’s birth, he might choose rather to call himself a Tyrian, than to derive his appellation from an obscure region. (a) Pref. Epist. ad Galat. (6) Horn. vi. in 1 Cor. p. 58. (c) Caes. Baron, ad A. C. 325, Le Moyne ad var. Sac. t. ii. p. 607. (d) Stephan, in Ethnicis. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. iv. p. 181. 33‘2 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. and thirty-three.* His father very early introduced him to the study of literature and philosophy under the Christian preceptor Origen, probably whilst he vvas teaching at Caesarea in Palestine.'}' His juvenile education was completed at Athens by Longinus, whose high reputation for learning and genius brought him pupils from many distant countries. Under this excellent instructor he gained an extensive acquaintance with antiquity, improved his taste in literature, and enlarged his knowledge of thePlotinian philosophy. It is, doubtless, in a great measure to be ascribed to Longi¬ nus that we find so many proofs of erudition, and so much elegance of style, in the writings of Porphyry. J From this time we have little information concerning this philosopher, till we find him, about the thirtieth year of his age, becoming at Rome a disciple of Plotinus, who had before this time acquired great fame as a teacher of philosophy. § Porphyry was six years a diligent student of the Eclectic system ; and became so entirely attached to his master, and so perfectly acquainted with his doctrine, that Plotinus esteemed him one of the greatest ornaments of his school, and frequently employed him in re¬ futing the objections of his opponents, and in explaining to his younger pupils the more difficult parts of his writings : he even intrusted him with the charge of methodising and correcting his works. |j The fanatical spirit of the philosophy, to which Porphyry addicted himself, concurred with his natural propensity towards melancholy to produce a resolution, which he formed about the thirty-sixth year of his age, of putting an end to his life; purposing hereby, according to the Platonic doctrine, to release his soul from her wretched prison, the body. From this mad design he was, how¬ ever, dissuaded by his master, who advised him to divert his melancholy by taking a journey to Sicily, to visit his friend Probus, an accomplished and excellent man, who lived near Lilybseum. Porphyry followed the advice of Plotinus, and recovered the vigour and tranquillity of his mind.^ After the death of Plotinus, Porphyry, still remaining in Sicily, appeared as an open and implacable adversary to the Christian religion.** Some have maintained that in his youth he had been a Christian ; but of this there is no sufficient proof. It is not improbable that, whilst he was a boy, under the care of Origen, he gained some acquaintance with the Jewish and Christian scriptures. He wrote fifteen distinct treatises against Christianity, which the emperor Theodosius ordered to be destroyed : an injudicious act of zeal, which the real friends of Christianity, no less than its enemies, will always regret ; for truth can never suffer by a fair and full discussion ; and falsehood and calumny must always, in the issue, serve the cause they are designed to injure. The spirit of those writings of Porphyry which are lost may be in some measure apprehended from the fragments which are preserved by ecclesiastical historians. Many able advocates for Christianity appeared upon this occasion, the principal of whom were Methodius, Apol- linaris, and Eusebius.'j”}- So vehementand lasting was the indignation which was excited against the memory of Porphyry, that Constance, in order to cast the severest possible censure upon the Arian sect, published an edict, ranking them among the professed enemies of Christianity, and requiring that they should from that time be branded with the name of Porphyrians. Porphyry, after remaining many years in Sicily, returned to Rome, and * Ib. c. 4. f Euseb. Ecc. H. I. iii. c. 19. t Vit. Plot. c. 21. § Vit. Plot. c. 4, 5. || C. vii. 13. 20. ^ Vit. Plot. c. 1 1. Eunap. p. 14. ** Euseb. et Hier. Conf. Lactant. 1. v. c. 2. tt Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iv. p. 197. et Syllab. Script, de Ver. Ch. Rcl. c. 3. J;!; Socrat. Hist. Eccl. 1. i. c. 9. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 333 taught the doctrines of Plotinus ; pretending to be, not only a philosopher endued wdth superior wisdom, but a divine person, favoured with super¬ natural communications from heaven. He himself relates,* that in the sixty-eighth year of his age he was in a sacred ecstasy, in which he saw the Supreme Intelligence, the God who is superior to all gods, without an image. This vision Augustine f supposes to have been an illusion of some evil spirit : we are rather inclined to believe it to have been the natural effect of a heated imagination ; unless indeed it be added to the long list of fictions with which the writings of Porphyry abound. He died about the year three hundred and four. Of his numerous works, the only pieces which have escaped the depredation of time (except sundry fragments dis¬ persed through various authors) are, his “ Life of Pythagoras a book “ On the Cave of the Nymphs in Homer “ Homeric Questions “ A Fragment on the Stygian Lake “ An Epistle to Anebo, an Egyptian priest “ A Treatise on the Five Predicables,” commonly prefixed to the logical works of Aristotle ; “ Thoughts on Intelligibles “A Treatise on Abstinence from Animal Food and “ The Life of Plotinus,” which con¬ tains also memoirs of Porphyry himself Porphyry was, it must be owned, a writer of deep erudition ; and had his judgment and integrity been equal to his learning, he would have deserved a distinguished place among the ancients. But neither the splendour of his diction, nor the variety of his reading, can atone for the credulity, or the dishonesty, which filled the narrative parts of his works with so many extravagant tales, or interest the judicious reader in the abstruse subtleties and mystical flights of his philosophical M'ritings. The Alexandrian philosophy had, after Porphyry, many learned and able defenders. Among these, one of the most celebrated was his immediate successor, Jamblicus,§ a native of Chalcis in Ccelo-Syria. He flourished, as may be inferred from the age of his preceptor Porphyry, about the beginning of the fourth century. His first instructor was Anatolius, who presided in a Peripatetic school in Alexandria ; but he soon left this school, and became a disciple of Porphyry. He became perfect master of all the mysteries of the Plotinian system, and taught it with such credit and success, that disciples crowded to his school from various quarters. Though he fell far short of Porphyry in eloquence, he won the affections of his followers by the freedom with which he con¬ versed with them upon philosophy, and was, at the same time, careful to excite their admiration, and command their reverence, by high pretensions to theurgical powers. He astonished them with wonders, which he pro¬ fessed to perform by means of an intercourse with invisible beings. Hence he was called, The Most Divine and Wonderful Teacher. The writings of Jamblicus discover extensive reading ; but his style is so deficient in accuracy and elegance, that even his encomiast, Eunapius, acknowledges it more likely to disgust than to allure the reader. He borrows freely from other writers, particularly Porphyry, without the smallest acknowledgment. His philosophical works are exceedingly obscure, but are valuble as authentic documents respecting the Alexan¬ drian school. “ The Life of Pythagoras “ An Exhortation to the Study of Philosophy “ Three Books on Mathematical Learning “ A Commentary upon Nicomachus’s Institutes of Arithmetic and “ A Treatise on the Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldeans, and Assyrians,” * Vit. Plot. c. 23. f De Civ. Dei, I. x. c. 10. + Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. iv. p. 108. § Eunap. Vit. Soph. Fabr. ib. p. 282 334 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book 111:1 are all the writings of Jamblicus now extant. The time and place of his death are uncertain ; but, from a passage of Eunapius, in which he says that his disciple Sopater went, after his master’s death, to the court of Constantine, it appears probable that Jamblicus died before that emperor, that is, about the year three hundred and thirty-three. This Jamblicus must be distinguished from the person of the same name to whom the emperor Julian dedicates his epistles ; for Julian was scarcely born at the time when Porphyry’s successor died. The school of Jamblicus produced many Eclectic philosophers, who were dispersed through various parts of the Roman empire. But the fate of one of their number, Sopater, who was put to death by order of the emperor, (probably for insidious practices against the peace of the state,) and the discredit into which the Pagan theology was now, through the general spread of Christianity, almost universally fallen, induced those philosophers to propagate their tenets, and practise their mysteries, with caution and concealment.* In this state of depression the sect continued through the reigns of Constantine and Constantins. But under the emperor Julian, who apostatised from the Christian faith, the Alexandrian sect revived, and again flourished in great vigour. Many pretenders arose, who, under the cloak of philosophy, practised magical deceptions with great success, and industriously disseminated mysticism and enthu¬ siasm. Their biographer is Eunapius, a writer of the same school, who relates, and seems to have credited, many marvellous stories. The immediate successor of Jamblicus, was 7EDESius,t of Cappadocia. After the example of his master, he pretended to supernatural communi¬ cations with the Deity, and practised theurgic arts. Among the wonderful events which are said to have happened to him, one of the most ludicrous is that in answer to his prayers his future fate was revealed to him in hexameter verses which suddenly appeared upon the palm of his left hand. Towards the close of his life he left his school in Cappadocia to the care of his disciple and friend Eustathius, and removed to Pergamus where he had a numerous train of followers. Of Eustathius, his wife Sosipatra, and his son Antoninus, several tales are related by Eunapius, which only serve to expose the fraud of these pretended philosophers, and the credulity of their biographer. ;j; Eusebius, of Myndus in Caria,§ though one of the disciples of ./Edesius, appears, from a conference which he had with Julian, to have considered all pretensions to intercourse with demons, or inferior divinities, as illusions of the fancy, or tricks of imposture, and to have discouraged them as unworthy of the purity and sublimity of true philosophy. His design seems to have been to restore the contemplation of Intelligibles, or Ideas, as the only real and immutable natures, according to the doctrine of Porphyry, and of Plato himself : but the fanatical doctrine of an inter¬ course between demons and men, and the arts of theurgy founded upon this doctrine, were now too generally established, and found too useful, to be dismissed. Eusebius of Myndus was therefore less acceptable to the emperor Julian than another disciple of A^desius, Maximus of Ephesus. Maximus, according to Eunapius, was, through the recommendation of his master, appointed by Constantius preceptor to Julian : according to the Christian historians, he introduced himself to Julian, during his Asiatic expedition, at Nicomedia. By accommodating his predictions to the I I N * Sozomen. Hist. Ecc. 1. i. c. 5. f Eunap. p. 34. I Eunap. p. 50. &c. Conf. Ammian. Marc. 1. xx. — xxii. § Eunap. p. 86, &c. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 335 wishes and hopes of the emperor, and by other parasitical arts, he gained entire possession of his confidence. The courtiers, as usual, followed the example of their master, and Maximus w'as daily loaded with new honours. He accompanied Julian in his expedition into Persia, and there, by the assistance of divination and flattery, persuaded him that he would rival Alexander in the glory of conquest. The event, however, proved as unfortunate to the philosopher as to the hero; for Julian being slain in battle after the short reign of Jovian, Maximus fell under the displeasure of the emperors Valentinian and Valens, and for the imaginary crime of magic, underwent a long course of confinement and suffering, which was not the less truly persecution because they were inflicted upon a Pagan. At last Maximus was sent into his native country, and there fell a sacrifice to the cruelty of the proconsul Festus.* To the list of Eclectic philosophers, who enjoyed the patronage of the emperor Julian, must be added Priscus of Thesprotium, who also accompanied him into Persia ; and Chrysanthius of Sardis, appointed by Julian high priest of Lydia, who was supposed to possess a power of conversing with the gods, and of predicting future events.j- The emperor Julian is generally acknowledged to have been not only a patron of philosophers, but himself a philosopher. Referring to the civil historians^ for the particulars of his political conduct, we shall mention such incidents as more immediately respect his philosophical character. Julian, in the early part of his life, was carefully instructed in literature and science by Christian preceptors.§ Whilst he was pursuing his studies at Nicomedia, his uncle Constantins strictly charged him not to attend upon the lectures of the celebrated Pagan Sophist, Libanius. This prohibition had no other effect than to awaken the young man’s curiosity, and kindle an earnest desire of visiting the Pagan schools. Notwith¬ standing every precaution, he conversed freely with philosophers, and grew fond of the fanciful system taught by the Alexandrian Platonists. His natural disposition, which was tinctured with enthusiasm, favoured this attachment ; and it was confirmed by the intimacy which, during his residence at Nicomedia, he formed with Maximus of Ephesus. Under his instructions, and those of Chrysanthius and others, he became a great proficient in the abstruse speculations, and in the theurgic arts of this school.|| With the permission of his uncle, he finished his studies at Athens ; where he acquired great reputation in learning and philosophy, and was initiated in the Elusinian mysteries.^ When Julian was called by Constantins to exchange the school of philosophy for the field of war, he made great use of the magic arts, which he had learned from Maximus, in executing his political purposes. Whilst he was at Vienna, he reported that, in the middle of the night, he had been visited by a celestial form, which had, in heroic verse, promised him the possession of the imperial dignity.** As soon as Julian reached the summit of his wishes, he employed his • Amm. Marcell. 1. xxix. c. 1. Socr. et Niceph. 1. c. Theodoret, Hist. Ecc. 1. ii. c. 27. t Eunap. p. 114. &c. Suidas. I Amm. Jlarcell. Victor. Zosimus. Libanus in Orat. &c. § Socr. 1. iii. c. !. 23. Sozomen. 1. vi. 3. 2. Liban. sect. 5. ap. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. vii. p. 228. II Eunap. p. 83. Amm. Marc. 1. xxv. c. 6. 1. xxi. c. 1. 1. xxii. c. 12. 1. xxiii. c. 2. 5. 11. Liban. ib. sect. 9, 10. ^ Sozomen. I. v. c. 2. Soc. 1. iii. c. 1. Liban. sect. 13. p. 233. 238. ** Liban. sect. 34. p. 260. Amm. Marc. 1. xxi. c. 2. 336 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. power in restoring the heathen superstition.* * * § He at this time, however, used no violent measures to compel the Christians to forsake their religion ; rightly judging, that “ false opinions can never be corrected by fire and sword. ’’j" His principal favourites were the Pagan philosophers of the school of iEdesius ; but learned men of every class were encouraged in his court. When he afterwards shut up the Christian schools, it was in hopes of suppressing the Christian religion by involving its professors in® ignorance and barbarism. J w This prince not only encouraged letters by his patronage, but wasM himself a learned writer. It is easy to perceive, from a slight inspection^ of his works, that he strictly adhered to the Alexandrian or Eclectic|| school. He professes himself a warm admirer of Pythagoras and Plato,® and recommends a union of their tenets with those of Aristotle.§ TheH' later Platonists of his own period, he loads with encomiums, particularly]^ Jamblicus, whom he calls The Light of the World, and The Physician of® the Mind. II Amidst the numerous traces of an enthusiastic and bigottedw attachment to Pagan theology and philosophy, and of an inveterate enmity** to Christianity,^ which are to be found in his writings, the candid readeri| will discern many marks of genius and erudition.** Concerning the manners of Julian, Libanius writes, that no philosopher, in the lowest state of poverty, was ever more temperate, or more ready to^ practise rigorous abstinence from food, as the means of preparing his mind for conversing with the gods.f f Like Plotinus, Porphyry, Jam- i blicus, and others of this fanatical sect, he dealt in visions and ecstasies, and pretended to a supernatural intercourse with divinities. Suidas relates, probably from some writings of the credulous Eunapius, now lost, an oracular prediction concerning his death, j;;]; His philosophical character attended him in his military exploits, and accompanied him to the last. After he had received his mortal wound, | he held a conference with the philosophers Maximus and Priscus con-f cerning the soul, in the midst of which he expired, in the thirty-second | year of his age. f.l On the whole, although the emperor Julian must not be denied the place ■ which has long been allowed him among philosophers, it must be owned y| that his philosophy was neither able to preserve him from superstition and|d enthusiasm, nor to raise his mind above the influence of the narrowest § | and most pernicious prejudices. 5 1; We must not in this place omit the biographer of the .^Edesian school, TPS Eunapius, §§ a native of Sardis, and a pupil of Chrysanthius. He followed^ | the profession of a Sophist, and at the same time practised medicine. He'^y appears to have been initiated in all the mysteries of theurgy. His “ Lives,” a mass of extravagant tales, discover a feeble understanding, and anijltl imagination prone to superstition. Eunapius wrote in the reign of-p the emperor Theodosius. h S ! • Sozom. 1. V. c. 3. 16. Am. M. 1. xxv. c. 6. Greg. Naz. Oral. iii. adv. Jul. t Lib. sect. 58. p. 256. I Amm. M. 1. xxii, c. 10. Jul. Epist. 42. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. vi. p. 77. § Orat. Jul. in Cynic, p. 188. Orat. v. in Mat. Deor. p. 162. II Ep. ad Jumblic. 24. 40. 60. ^ The reader will find many proofs of Julian’s aversion to Christianity, and bis inju¬ rious treatment of Christians, adduced in Priestley’s History of the Chr. Church. Per. ix. sect. 2, o, 4. ** Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. vii. p. 78. -j-f Lib. sect. 83. p. 309. H Amm. Marc. 1. xxv. c. 3, 4. §§ Eunap. p. 77. 99. 162. 198. Phot. Cod. 77. ) . I j-f Lib. sect. 83. p. 309. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 337 Towards the close of the fifth century flourished Hierocles, who was born and taught in Alexandria. He suffered severely for his adherence to the Pagan superstitions.* At Constantinople he was cruelly scourged ; and, in the midst of his torture, receiving some of the blood into his own hand, he threw it upon the face of his judge, repeating the following verse from Homer :j' Kii/cAw^, tt), Trie oivov, eireX (pdyes dvSpo/jLea Kpea. (a) Hierocles wrote a treatise “ On Providence,” in which he appears as an advocate for the Eclectic philosophy. He strenuously opposes those writers who had maintained that the opinions of Plato and Aristotle were incon¬ sistent with each other ; and attempts to reconcile their doctrines concern¬ ing Providence, the origin of the world, the immortality of the soul, and other subjects. The same method of philosophising is pursued in his book “ On Fate,” and in his “Commentary on the Golden Verses of Pythagoras.” Little conffdence is therefore to be placed in his representation of the opi¬ nions of ancient philosophers. This Hierocles is not to be confounded with Hierocles of Bithynia, who wrote a book against Christianity, which was answered by Eusebius. J Hitherto we have traced the rise and growth of the Eclectic philosophy in Alexandria, and in various parts of Asia. It remains, that we follow its progress in Europe, and particularly at Athens. Although, after Greece became subject to Rome, its philosophers were dispersed, and its ancient seat of wisdom was for a time neglected, Athens, through the favour of several of the Roman emperors, especially Adrian, and Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, recovered, in some measure, its former honours. § Adrian founded a library, and Aurelius erected magnificent schools, and established professors in rhetoric, and in the principal sects of philosophy. These schools were liberally endowed, and, according to Lucian, II a large sum was annually paid by the public to the Athenian preceptors. Through this imperial munificence Athens was again distin¬ guished by a numerous train of philosophers and scholars.^ The salaries, which had been probably discontinued under the Christian emperors, were renewed by Julian, who appointed Chrysanthius preceptor in Athens. The Athenian schools, during the incursions of the Goths, at the close af the fourth century, suffered great injury. They, however, survived that ha¬ zardous period, and continued to flourish till after the time of Justinian.** It was not till the reign of Julian that the Alexandrian philosophy was publicly professed at Athens. j-f After Chrysanthius, the next professor of this system was Plutarch, the son of Nestorius. j: He was an eminent teacher of philosophy, and a famous master of the theurgic arts : he had a large body of disciples, who bore his name, and continued in his public capacity to an advanced age. He left the charge of his school to Syrian, an Alexandrian. This Plutarch died about the year four hundred and thirty-four. Syrian prosecuted the Eclectic method of philosophising with great ingenuity and industry ; not only combining the doctrines of Plato and • Suidas Phot. Cod. 214. 251. p. 283. 749. f Odyss. 1. ix. v. 347. (a) Cyclops ! since human flesh has been thy feast, Now drain this goblet potent to digest. Pope. t Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iii. p. 41 3. Needham, ed. § Pausan. in Attic. Xiphilin. in M. Ant. || Eunuch, t. iv. p. 160. ^ Eunap. Proseres, p. 138. Chrysanth. p. 198. Philostrat. Vit. Soph. 1. ii. c. 2, 3. ** Meurs. de Fort. Attic, c. 8. Synes. Ep. vi. IMarin. Vit. Procli, c. xvi. p.37. tt Eunap. in Maxim. JJ Suidas. Marin. Vit. Proc. c. 12. Phot. Cod.242. 338 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. Aristotle, but embellishing his complex system with the allegories of Orpheus, Homer, and other ancient poets. “ In less than two years,” says Marinus,* * * § “ Syrian read, with his pupil Proclus, all the works of Aristotle; after which he conducted him to the sacred school of Plato, that he might in his writings contemplate the true mysteries with a pure mind.” He wrote “ A Commentary on the Theology of Orpheus,” and “ A Treatise, on the Agreement of Orpheus, Pythagoras and Plato ;” but nothing remains] of this philosopher, except his “ Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics. ’’j-?) Among his pupils, his chief favourite was Proclus, who always retained aj| warm affection for the memory of his master, and at his death gave orders] that he should be buried in the same grave with Syrian, and that the fol-j| lowing epitaph should be inscribed upon their tomb : ;{i Proclus ego heic Lycius jaceo, tuus, optime, alumnus, Successorque tuus qui, Syriane, fui : Condita commuiii tumulo hoc sunt corpora nostra. Sic et utramque animam ccelica templa tenent. («) Proclus, according to his biographer Marinus, § was a native of Con¬ stantinople, and was born in the year four hundred and twelve. His parents 1 having been inhabitants of Xanthus in Lycia, he is commonly spoken of I as a Lycian. He received the first rudiments of learning at Xanthus, and afterwards studied eloquence and polite literature under Isaurus at Alexandria, with a view to qualify himself for the profession of the law. This design, however, he soon I’elinquished, and wholly devoted himself to philosophy. From Olympiodorus he learned the Aristotelian system com¬ bined with the Platonic ; and he was instructed in Mathematics by Hero. His facility of conception and strength of memory were such, that when his mastei’’s lectures through the rapidity of his utterance, or the abstruse nature of his subject, were not clearly understood by the rest of the pupils, he was able to give an accurate summary of the arguments, in the order|H>. in which they had been delivered ; a circumstance which gained him great! f credit and esteem among his fellow-students. If -: Having spent several years in the Alexandrian schools, Proclus deter-j| t mined to visit Athens. Here he first became acquainted with Syrian,Tji ' who introduced him to Plutarch the son of Nestorius. The old man was’ J delighted with the attainments of this young stranger, and undertook to^^ conduct him into the more recondite mysteries of philosophy. Plutarch,%| dying two years afterwards, left Proclus to the care of his successor Syrian, ^ under whose direction the young man prosecuted his studies with inde¬ fatigable industry. He reaped great benefit from the practice recom¬ mended to him by Plutarch, of writing, from his own recollection, com¬ pendious abridgments of the lectures which he had heard from his preceptor. At the age of twenty-eight, he had written, besides many other pieces, his “ Commentary on the Timseus of Plato,” full of that kind of learning which at this time prevailed in the Platonic schools. In order to reach the point, which was in these schools esteemed the summit of wisdom, Proclus dili¬ gently studied the theology of the sect, both that which respects the * Vit. Proc. c. 12. Suidas. Phot. Cod. 241. f Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. viii. p. 450. % Marin, c. 3G. (a) Here, much loved Syrian, in thy sacred tomb, Thy pupil Proclus seeks a peaceful home : As in one bed now sleeps our mingled clay, So may our souls together wing their way To the blest mansions of celestial day! § Vit. Procli, passim. Suidas. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 339 contemplation of tlie Supreme Deity, and that which was supposed to lead to an intercourse with inferior divinities. He was instructed in the Chaldean arts of divination, and in the use of mystical Avords, and other charms, by Plutarch’s daughter, Asclepigenia, who inherited from her father many secrets of this kind. He was also initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries. By these helps, and by a diligent study of the writings of Plotinus, Por¬ phyry, and Jamblicus, he became, if Marinus may be credited, a complete master, not only of divine science, but of theurgic powers. Thus accomplished, Proclus wasjudged by Syrian worthy to share W'ith him the honours and profits of the Platonic chair. And there can be no doubt, after what has been related, that he was eminently qualified for the office of preceptor in the Alexandrian philosophy. His biographer may be easily credited when he asserts, that Proclus excelled all his predecessors in the knowledge of this system, and that he improved it by many new discoveries, and was the author of many opinions which had never before entered into the mind of man, both on the subject of physics, and in the sublime science of Ideas. The lectures which Proclus delivered in his school were obscure and enthusiastic ; but they suited the genius and taste of the age, and he had many followers. The piety of Proclus is highly extolled by his biographer. Of Avhat sortit Avas may be learned from the superstitious manner in which he con¬ ducted his devotions. Besides his general abstinence from animal food, in which he followed the Pythagorean discipline, he often practised rigor¬ ous fastings ; and he spent whole days and nights in repeating prayers and hymns, that he might prepare himself for immediate intercourse with the gods. He observed with great solemnity the new moons and all public festivals, and on these occasions pretended, or fancied, that he conversed with superior beings, and was able, by his sacrifices, prayers, and hymns, to expel diseases, to command rain, to stop an earthquake, and to perform other similar wonders. Marinus does not scruple to assert that, on these occasions, Proclus partook of divine inspiration, and that a celestial glory irradiated his countenance. He even relates, that God himself appeared to him in a human form, and with an audible voice hailed him as the glory of the city. In his old age his mental infirmities, as might naturally be expected, increased with those of his body ; and he fancied, between sleep¬ ing and Avaking (the season in which these visions commonly happen), that Esculapius approached him in the form of a dragon, and relieved his pain. Without attempting accurately to determine how much of these tales is to be ascribed to the invention of Marinus, and how much to the fanaticism of his master, Ave may perceive in them proofs of superstitious AA'eakness, of artful hypocrisy, or of a strange union of both, abundantly sufficient to justify us in ranking Proclus among enthusiasts or impostors, rather than among philosophers. If the reader require any further evidence on this head, we must refer him to the writings of Proclus, in which he appears at once a man of eru¬ dition and a fanatic. They contain a rude and indigested mass of mate¬ rials, collected, Avith bold variations, from the Chaldaic, Orphic, Hermetic, Pythagoric, Platonic and Aristotelian doctrines, and adorned with fictions and allegories, which, Avhile they involve the subjects upon Avhich the writer treats in thick darkness, discover great luxuriance of imagination. The confusion and obscurity of his works may be in part OAving to the hasty manner in Avhich they were written, but are chiefly to be ascribed to the enthusiastic cast of the writer’s mind, and to the mystical spirit of the system which he e-spoused. Of the Avorks of Proclus Avhich remain, z 2 840 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OP Book III. some are philosophical, as his “ Commentaries upon the Timaeus,” and several other dialogues of Plato ; some theological, as his “ Institutes of Theology some critical, as his “ Chrestomathia,” of which Photius has preserved an Epitome ; and some mathematical, as his “ Paraphrase upon Ptolemy, Euclid,” &c. and his “ Doctrine of the Sphere.” This last piece was in part copied, without acknowledgment, from the Isagoge of Geminus, an astronomer of some distinction in the time of Cicero.* Proclus died of the gout, in the year four hundred and eighty-five. The Eclectic school at Athens was continued by Marinus,-!- a native of Sichem in Palestine, and a convert from the Samaritan to the Gentile religion. If the mathematical writings which bear his name be really his, which has been doubted, they are a sufficient proof of his proficiency in this kind of learning. His life of Proclus rather delineates a picture of a perfect philosopher, than relates the actions and opinions of his hero. The work abounds with ridiculous tales, and destroys its own credibility by manifest contradictions. Towards the close of his life Marinus, per¬ ceiving his health decline, was anxious to find a successor, who might con¬ tinue, with credit, what was called the chain of the Platonic succession, and for that purpose made choice of Isidores, who soon afterwards removed to Alexandria, and left the Athenian school in the hands of Zenodotus,J a pupil of Proclus. IsiDORUS, as we learn from his biographer Damascius, § was a native of Gaza in Palestine, a city which retained the Gentile superstitions long after Christianity had been commonly embraced in the neighbouring countries. At Alexandria, whither he was sent by his parents for education, he was instructed in rhetoric and polite learning by Asclepiodotus, a Platonist; but he neglected these studies, that he might devote himself entirely to sublimer speculations. The fame of Proclus as a preceptor in theology soon induced him to repair to his school at Athens. Bringing with him a mind inured to profound meditation, and an imagination inflamed with enthusiasm, he found it no difficult labour, under the direction of Proclus, to soar into the region of mysticism. After the death of his master he entertained a superstitious reverence for his memorj% and offered sacri¬ fices to him as to a divinity, j] Relinquishing, however, for reasons which do not appear, the chair to which he had been appointed by Marinus, he returned to Alexandri9,. After a short residence in that city, he fled, with several other philosophers, into Persia, to escape the persecution of Jus¬ tinian. About the year five hundred and thirty-three he returned from his voluntary exile.^ As Isidorus had been a pupil of Proclus, he must have been far advanced in life when he left Persia. The exact dates of his birth and death cannot be ascertained ; but it is probable that he was not born later than the year four hundred and sixty-five, and that he did not die before the year five hundred and forty. The succession of the Platonic or Eclectic school in Alexandria termi¬ nated in Damascius,** a native of Syria. He studied both at Athens and Alexandria, and in the latter school was a professor of philosophy, till he was driven into Persia by the severities which, as we have said, were * Voss, de Scient. Math. c. 32. sect. 26. Fabr. de Procli Scriptis. sect. 1 1. Bib. Gr. V. viii. p. 518. t Damascius in Vit. Isidori, ap Phot. Cod. 181. Suida.s. Voss, ib. p. 442. Fabr. viii. t Damasc. ib. p. 563. § Ib. Cod. 181. 242. Suidas. r, Damascius, p. 566. 569, 570. ^ Apatliias de reb. Justin. I. ii. 49. Suidas in TrpeVlSus t. iii. p. 171. Petav. Rat. Temp. 1. vii. c. 8. ** Phot. Cod. 181. p. 212. Cod. 242. p. 566. Suidas. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 341 exercised by the emperor Justinian against the Gentile philosophers. His “Lives of Isidorus and others,” and the few fragments of his philosophy which remain, are strongly marked with the characters of the Eclectic school — obscurity, fanaticism, and imposture. To this list of Alexandrian philosophers must be added the celebrated female, Hypatia,* whose extensive learning, elegant manners, and tra¬ gical end, have rendered her name immortal. Hypatia was the daughter of Theon, a celebrated mathematician of Alexandria. She possessed an acute and penetrating judgment, and great sublimity and fertility of genius, and her talents were cultivated with assiduity by her father and other precep¬ tors. After she had made herself mistress of polite learning, and of the sciences of geometry and astronomy, as far as they were then understood, she entered upon the study of philosophy. She prosecuted this study with such uncommon success, that she was importuned to become a public preceptress in the school where Plotinus and his successors had taught ; and her love of science enabled her so far to subdue the natural diffidence of the sex, that she yielded to the public voice, and exchanged her female decorations for the philosopher’s cloak.f In the schools, and in other places of public resort, she discoursed upon philosophical topics, explaining, and endeavouring to reconcile, the systems of Plato, Aristotle, and other masters. A ready elocution, and graceful address, united with rich eru¬ dition and sound judgment, procured her numerous followers and admirer.s; among whom was Synesius, afterwards to be mentioned. But that which reflects the highest honour upon her memory is, that, though she excelled most of the philosophers of her age in mathematical and philosophical science, she discovered no pride of learning; and though she was in person exceedingly beautiful, she never yielded to the impulse of female vanity, or gave occasion to the slightest suspicion against her chastity. The extraordinary combination of accomplishments and virtues which adorned the character of Hypatia, rendered her house the general resort of persons of learning and distinction. But it was impossible that so much merit should not excite envy. The qualifications and attainments, to which she was indebted for her celebrity, proved in the issue the occasion of her destruction. It happened that at this time the patriarchal chair of Alexandria w'as occupied by Cyril, a bishop of great authority, but of great haughtiness and violence of temper. In the vehemence of his bigoted zeal, he had treated the Jews with severity, and at last banished them out of Alexandria. Orestes, the prefect of the city, a man of a liberal spirit, highly resented this expulsion as an unpardonable stretch of ecclesiastical power, and a cruel act of oppression and injustice against a people, w'ho had inhabited Alexandria from the time of jts founder. He reported the affair to the emperor. The bishop, on his part, complained to the prince of the seditious temper of the Jew's, and attempted to justify his proceed¬ ings. The emperor declined to interpose his authority ; and the affair rapidly advanced to the utmost extremity. A body of about five hundred monks, who espoused the cause of Cyril, came into the city with a deter¬ mination to support him by force. Meeting the prefect, as he w'as passing through the street in his carriage, they stopped him, and loaded him with reproaches ; and one of them threw a stone at his head, and wounded him. The populace, who were by this time assembled on the part of the prefect, routed the monks, and seized one of their leaders. Orestes ordered him to be put to death. Cyril buried his body in the church, and gave in- * Suidas. Socrat. Hist. Eccl. 1. vii. c. 15. f Nicephor. 1. xiv. c. 16. Synesii Epist. ad. Ilypat. 342 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. structions that his name should be registered among the sacred martyrs. Hypatia, who had always been highly respected by the prefect, and who had, at this time, frequent conferences with him, was supposed by the par¬ tisans of the bishop to have been deeply engaged in the interest of Orestes. Their resentment at length rose to such a height, that they formed a design against her life. As she was one day returning home from the schools, the mob seized her, forced her from her chair, and carried her to the Caesarean church ; where stripping off her garments, they put her to death with extreme barbarity; and having torn her body limb from limb, commit¬ ted it to the flames. Cyril himself has, by some writers, been suspected of secretly prompting this horrid act of violence. And if the haughtiness and severity of his temper, his persecution of the Jews, his oppressive and iniquitous treatment of the Novatian sect of Christians and their bishop, the vehemence of his present indignation against Orestes and his party, and, above all, the protection which he is said to have afforded to the immediate perpetrator of the murder of Hypatia, be duly considered, it will perhaps appear that this suspicion is not wholly without foundation. Hypatia was murdered under the reign of the emperor Theodosius H. in the year four hundred and fifteen.* Hence it is certain that she could not have been, as SuidaSj-j- with his usual precipitation, relates, the wife of Isidorus: it is probable that through her whole life she remained in a state of celibacy. Besides the philosophers of the Alexandrian or Eclectic sect who have been enumerated, and others of inferior note, there were many persons who, though not philosophers by profession, espoused the doctrines of Platonism, as they were new modelled in this school. Among these were several celebrated writers ; particularly, Macrobius,J who flourished in the reigns of Plonorius and Theodosius H., and wrote, besides other pieces, “ A Commentary on Scipio’s Dream,” as described by Cicero, a work full of Platonic notions; and also Saturnalia., or “ Learned Conver¬ sations ; ” and Ammianus Marcellinus, an historian of credit, who mentions, with high respect, several philosophers of the Platonic school. § Having thus far taken an historical survey of tlie rise and progress of the Eclectic sect, it remains that we endeavour, somewhat more distinctly, to mark the circumstances which contributed towards its establishment, and to enumerate its peculiar tenets. This is the more necessary, as the doctrines of this school were widely disseminated, and obtained a powerful influence, not only in other philosophical sects, but even in the Christian church. The Eclectic sect took its rise, as we have seen, among the Egyptians, a people peculiarly addicted to superstition, among whom the art of divi¬ nation is said to have originated.|| It was formed in Alexandria, a city colonized from many different nations, whose inhabitants brought with them their respective religious and philosophical tenets. The Pythagoric and Platonic doctrine had been in many respects similar to that of the Egyptians, and therefore obtained an easy admission into their schools, at a time when the philosophy of Greece, already universally celebrated, was introduced under the sanction of conquest. Before the commencement of the Christian era, the return of those philosophers who had, during the reign of Ptolemy Physcon, been dispersed in Asia, and had there learned the Oriental philosophy, increased the chaotic mass of opinions in theology and philosophy, which had been forming in the Alexandrian schools from * Socrat. Hist. Eccl. 1. vii. c. 15. f Hypat. iii. p. 533. I Cod. Theodos. 1. vi. t. 8. § L. xxii. 16. xxiii. 6. xxx. 4. II Ainmian. Marcell. 1. xxii. c. 16. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 343 their first establishment; the confusion and inconsistency of which were now, with much industry, concealed under the veil of allegory. It will clearly appear from an attentive comparison of these circumstances, that the Eclectic method of philosophising began at a period prior to the time of Christ. The violent dissensions which diversity of opinions produced in the Alexandrian schools inclined many to wish for a general coalition of sects. This project appears to have been first formed by Potamo, and to have been carried into execution by Ammonius and his followers. The philoso¬ phy of Plato, already united with that of Pythagoras, was made the basis of this new syetem ; whence the sect was considered as a Platonic school, and its followers have been commonly distinguished by the appellation of the later Platonists. With the doctrines of Plato they attempted to blend those of Aristotle, who from the time of Demetrius Phalereus had been in high estimation in Alexandria. In dialectics, this union was not difficult ; but in physics and metaphysics, the leading dogmas of these philosophers were so widely different, and in many respects even contradictory, that it was impossible to bring them together without distorting and misrepresent¬ ing both, and contriving strange and fanciful hypotheses to reconcile them. One memorable example of these, among many which might be adduced, is the dogma of the Eclectic school concerning the eternal generation of the world in the divine mind, which neither agrees with Plato’s doctrine of Ideas, nor with Aristotle’s notion concerning the eternity of the world. The Stoic system was also in the Eclectic school accommodated to the Platonic; and the moral writings of the followers of Zeno were explained upon the principles of Plato. The Enchiridion of Epictetus, for instance, is Platonised in the Commentary of Simplicius, The only sect with which the Alexandrian school could come to no terms of agreement, was that of Epicurus, whose mechanical principles of nature were contrary to the fun¬ damental doctrines of Platonism. It must be evident, on the most cursoiy view, that a method of philosophising, Avhich thus undertook to combine the tenets of different sects, could answer no other purpose than to con¬ found all former distinctions, and to give birth to new absurdities. Plato having proposed the intuitive contemplation of Intelligibles, and especially of the First Intelligence, the Supreme Deity, as the summit of human felicity, the philosophers of the Eclectic sect were peculiarly am¬ bitious of this sublime attainment, and even carried their notions and pre¬ tensions on this subject further than their master. Not satisfied with arriving at a formal and essential intuition of Divine natures, they aspired after a sort of deification of the human mind. That they might the more easily reach, in imagination, this point of perfection they forsook the dualistic system which Plato had assumed, and adopted from the Ori¬ ental philosophy the system of emanation, which supposed an indefinite series of spiritual natures, derived from the supreme source; whence, con¬ sidering the human mind as a link in this chain of intelligence, they con¬ ceived that, by passing through various stages of purification, it might at length ascend to the First Fountain of intelligence, and enjoy a mysterious union with the Divine nature. They even imagined that the soul of man, properly prepared by previous discipline, might rise to a capacity of holding immediate intercourse with good demons, and even to enjoy, in ecstacy, an intuitive vision of God : a point of perfection and felicity which many of their great men, such as Plotinus, Porphyry, Jamblicus, and Proclus, were supposed actually to have attained. Several circumstances concurred to give this enthusiastic cast to the 344 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III.’ Alexandrian school. The Platonic sect had, from its first institution, leaned towards enthusiasm. That part of their system which these later, Platonists had borrowed from the Oriental school, was wonderfully calcu-,>; lated to cherish the flights of a luxuriant fancy. And the union of the two b characters of philosopher and priest, which, as appears in the lives of.’f Apollonius, Apuleius, and others, was at this period not unusual, whilst it i^ would in some cases be favourable to imposture, would, in others, serve to minister fuel to the fire of enthusiasm. i In order to account still further for some of the more striking features of the Eclectic sect, it is necessary particularly to remark the arts which; the leaders of this sect employed to obstruct the progress of the Christian < religion. By combining into one system all the important tenets, botli^j theological and philosophical, which were at that time received, either in the Pagan or the Christian schools, they hoped to confirm the heathens in their attachment to their old superstitions, and to reconcile the Christians to Paganism. They endeavoured to conceal the absurdities of the ancient religion, by casting over its fables the veil of allegory, and thus represent¬ ing them as founded upon important truths. The numerous train of heathen divinities they represented as emanations from the Supreme Deity,'; through whom he himself was worshipped. That their system might, if possible, rival that which was taught in the Christian schools, they specu¬ lated, after the manner of Plato, upon divine and intelligent natures : they even attempted to incorporate with their own dogmas several of the pecu¬ liar doctrines received among the Christians, and made no scruple to deck themselves with borrowed ornaments by imitating on many occasions the language of the Christian fathers. In hopes of counteracting the credit which Christianity derived from the exalted merit of its Founder, and from the purity of manners which prevailed among his followers, these philoso¬ phers practised rigorous abstinence, by which they professed to purify them¬ selves from every tincture of moral defilement, and passed whole days and nights in contemplation and devotion. With a view to destroy the authority which the Christian religion derived from miracles, or at least to reduce it to a level with their own, they pretended to a power of performing super¬ natural operations by the aid of invisible beings ; and maintained, that the miracles of Christ were wrought by the same magical, or theurgic powers,! which they themselves possessed. Lastly, for the purpose of supporting the credit of Paganism against that of Christianity, they obtruded upon the world many spurious books, under the names of Hermes, Orpheus, and other illustrious ancients. The Eclectic sect, thus raised upon the foundations of superstition, en¬ thusiasm, and imposture, proved the occasion of much confusion and mis¬ chief both to the Christian religion and to philosophy. In the Infancy of the Alexandrian school, not a few among the professors of Christianity suffered themselves to be so far deluded by the pretensions of this sect, as to imagine that a coalition might, with great advantage, be formed between its system and that of Christianity ; and this union seemed the more desirable, as several philosophers of this sect became converts to the Christian faith. But the consequence was, that Pagan ideas and opinions were by degrees mixed with the pure and simple doctrine of the Gospel ; the fanatical philosophy of Ammonius corrupted the pure religion of Christ; and his church became a field of contention, and a nursery of, error. This project for a coalition of systems was not less injurious to philoso-i^ phy. Before this period, although the philosophical world had been divided Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 345 into many sects, and disturbed by endless controversies, still each sect had its peculiar character and tenets ; so that any one, who was desirous of knowing the truth, might form a judgment for himself of their respective merits, and might adopt that system which he judged to be most consonant to reason. But in attempting to combine the leading tenets of each sect into one common system, these philosophers were obliged, in many cases, to understand them in a sense different from that of their original authors; whence it becomes impossible, from their writings, to form an accurate notion either of the Platonic, the Peripatetic, the Stoic, the Egyptian, or the Oriental philosophy. Finding it impracticable to produce an appear¬ ance of harmony among systems essentially different from each other, without casting a veil of obscurity over the whole, they exerted their utmost ingenuity in devising fanciful conceptions, subtle distinctions, airy suppositions, and vague terms ; combinations of which, infinitely diversi¬ fied, they attempted, too successfully, to impose upon the world as a system of real and sublime truths. It is not easy to conceive how many thorns and briars from this time obstructed the path of science. Lost in subtle¬ ties, these pretenders to superior wisdom were perpetually endeavouring to explain, by imaginary resemblances, and arbitrary distinctions, what they themselves probably never understood. Disdaining to submit to the guidance of reason and good sense, they gave up the reins to imagination, and suffered themselves to be borne away through the boundless regions of metaphysics, where the eye labours in vain to follow them. If any one be desirous of proofs or illustrations of these remarks, we refer him to the writings of Plotinus and Proclus, on the subjects of the Deity and inferior divine natures, where he will meet with innumerable examples of egregious trifling, under the appearance of profound philosophy. It would be an undertaking wholly impracticable to frame an accurate delineation of the Eclectic doctrine ; both because its authors were not agreed among themselves in any one system, and because they do not ap¬ pear to have themselves clearly conceived the meaning of many of their own dogmas. We shall, however, lay before the reader a brief specimen of this philosophy ; in metaphysics, from Plotinus ; in theology, from Jarablicus ; and in morals, from Porphyry. In metaphysics Plotinus taught thus : — The First Principle of the uni¬ verse is not the universe, but above all, and the power of all; without which nothing could be ; which, though the fountain of being, is itself incapable of division or increase. This first principle, the cause of intel¬ lectual life, the source of essence and being, is simple, and having no place, has neither motion nor rest. It is infinite, not as being immense, but as it is one, and has nothing by which it can be limited. Because that from which all things proceed can permit nothing to exist better than itself, it is the best of all beings. It is essential good, most fair and beautiful; and because it is in itself lovely, and the author of all that is lovely, it is the beginning and end of beauty. No attribute is to be ascribed to this First Principle in the same sense in which it is ascribed to other beings ; but in a manner wholly inexplicable. Its nature is to be comprehended rather by profound contemplation, than by any act of the understanding.* From this First Principle proceeds Mind, or Intellect, and Soul, or the Active Principle. The primary Essential Good is the centre; Mind, the light emerging from it, and remaining fixed ; Soul, the motion of tiic * Plotin. En. iii. 1. viii. c, 9. En. v. ! ii. c. 1. I. v. c. 10, 11. En. vi. 1. ii. c. 9. I. vii. c. 23. 33. 1. viii. c. 7. Jambl. de Myst. S. viii. c. 2. 346 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. emanating light ; Body, the opaque substance which is illuminated by the soul. In the production of the Second Principle, Mind, no kind of action or will is to be supposed ; for then that action or will, would be the second, and Mind, the third emanation. The first principle, having been always perfect, has always produced the second ; which is inferior to the producing cause, but superior to all other natures. This second principle. Mind, is necessarily united to its source, and is the image of God, bearing such re¬ semblance to him as light bears to the sun : it is produced by the energy of the first principle, and is the exerted power of vision, reflection, or in¬ telligence. This second principle being produced, its energy produces within itself the fair universe of ideas, or intelligible natures ; whence it comprehends a plenitude of all things as essential principles before they exist as material substances. Intelligence is the act of intellect, or mind, contemplating intelligible natures. These natures may be considered as numbers proceeding from the Monad, or first principle, and Duad, or first emanation ; but the first principle, considered in itself, must be dis¬ tinguished from these ; for intellect, being exercised in contemplating intelligible natures within, but distinct from itself, wants that simplicity which is essential to the first principle.* From the emanative energy of Mind is produced Soul, or the Active Principle of life. This Divine principle is the fountain whence all life is derived. It subsists, as well as Intellect, within the divine essence, and is therefore vTrepicou/uioy, supramundane.-j- This is the immediate source of the principle which animates the world, "kyKotTjXLOv, and which is ditfused, in various portions, through animated nature.;}; Matter is the receptacle and subject of forms, but has in itself neither figure, quality, magnitude, nor place, and can therefore only be defined negatively : nevertheless, it is not a mere name, but truly exists as the basis of qualities. Matter exists potentially ; bodies actually, with their peculiar characters.§ There never was a time when matter and form existed separately, or when the universe was not animated. || To suppose the formation of the universe the effect of chance, is absurd. The world is to be conceived as having always existed, and mind as prior to it, not in the order of time, but of nature, and therefore as the eternal and necessary cause, both formal and efficient of its existence.^ The sensible world is produced after the pattern of the intelligible world, by the energy of mind pouring forth some portion of its own nature upon matter, and hereby giving it the first unconscious principle of motion and form.** The world contains superior and inferior regions, the former of which are inhabited by gods and other celestial beings, the latter by men and inferior animals. Because the world includes every thing within itself, so that there is nothing into which it can be changed, nor any external force by which it can be dispersed, it must be perpetual in its duration. -j-j- Among the Celestial Natures there are various orders, possessing dif¬ ferent degrees of perfection, and all entitled to religious worship, Gods, Demons, Genii, Heroes. The souls of men and inferior animals form the common limit between the intellectual and sensible world. * En. ii. 1. ix. c. 1. En. iv. 1. iii. c. 14. 17. En. v. 1. i. c. 4. 6, 7. 1. iv. c. ult. 1. v. c. 1. 12. 1. vi. c. 1, 2. 1. vii. c. 1. 1. ix. c. 6. 8. t En. iii. 1. v. c. 2. En. v. 1. i. c. 7. i. viii. c. 4. I Proclus ill Tim. 1. ii. p. y2, § Plot. En. ii. 1. iv. c. 1 — 6. 1 1, 12. 1. v. c. 2. II En. iv. 1. iii. c. 9. En. iii. 1. i. c. 1. Porphyr. Ant. Nymp. p. 131. Jamb. Myst. .43gypt. s. viii. c. 3. ** From tliis doctrine Ciidworth, in his Intellectual System, derives his Plastic Nature, ff En. iii. 1. i. c, 2, 3, 4, 8 — 10. En. iii. 1. v. c. (5. Chap. 2. S. 4. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 347 The human soul is derived from the supramundane soul, or first prin¬ ciple of life, and is in this respect sister to the soul of the world. Souls are not in the body as their place, nor as their receptacle, nor as their subject, nor as a part of a whole, nor as form united to matter, but simply as the animating principle ; for it is in this respect only that we know the soul to be present with the body. The power of the soul is diffused through every part of the body; and though it be said to reside in its chief instrument the brain, it is incorporeal, and exists entirely every where within the sphere of its energy. Partaking of the nature of real being, it is immutable. It is the principle of motion, moving itself, and communicating motion to bodies. The vices and infelicities of the soul are wholly derived from its union with the body.* Souls, in the periodical revolutions of nature, separate themselves from their fountain, and descend into the lower regions of the world. In their passage they attract to themselves an ethereal vehicle, and at last sink into animal bodies, as into a cavern, or sepulchre. But when, by the power of reminiscence, they again turn themselves to the contemplation of in¬ telligible and divine natures, they regain their freedom, j- God, on account of his greatness, is not known hy intelligence, or sense, but by a kind of intuition superior to science, by means of which the soul can see him in his real nature, as the fountain of Life, Mind, and Being, and the cause of good.J A soul which has attained to this vision of God will lament its union with the body, and will rejoice to leave its prison, and return to the divine nature from which it proceeded. § After death, the souls of men pass into other animals, or ascend into superior regions, and are converted into beings of a higher order, according to their present degree of defile¬ ment or of purification. II The theological doctrine of Jamblicus is briefly this : The human soul has an innate knowledge of God prior to all reasoning, having originally derived its essence from, and subsisted in, the Divine nature. By the intervention of demons, it enjoys communications with the superior divinities, and with God himself. Prayers, hymns, lustrations, sacrifices, are the means by which this intercourse is maintained. Gods, demons, and heroes, appear to men under various forms, in dreams or waking visions, to render them bodily or spiritual services, and to enable them to predict future events. These communications with divine natures are not to be obtained but by the observance of certain sacred rites, whose symbolical meaning is only known to the gods, and to those who are conversant with these mysteries. The signs of divine communication, tvdvcriaafiov, are a temporary suspension of the senses and faculties, the interruption of the ordinary functions of life, and a capacity of speaking and doing wonders, so that the person doth not live an animal, or human, but a divine life.^ Upon the foundation of these enthusiastic notions was raised the ethical system of the Alexandrian school. Their moral doctrine, as it appears in the writings of Porphyry and others, was briefly as follows : — The mind of man, originally a portion of the Divine nature, having fallen into a state of darkness and defilement by its union with the body, is to be gradually emancipated from the chain of matter, and by contemplating real entities, * En. V. 1. i. c. 2. En. iv. I. ii. c. 18. 1. iii. c. 20. 1. i. p. SCO. 1. ii. c. 1. En. ii. 1. ii. c. 18. 1. ix. c. 5. Eti. iv. 1. vii. c. 1, 2. 9. 1 1. t En. iv. ]. iii. c. 12. 1. iv. c. 16. 1. ix. c. 4. En. vi. 1. viii. c. 1. I En. vi. 1. ix. c. 4. 7. _ § C. 8, 9. II En. i. 1. ix. c. 1. En. iii. 1. iv. c. 2. Jamblic. du Mysteriis iEgyptiorum. Ed. Gal. Oxon. 1702. fol. 348 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. to rise to the knowledge and vision of God. The end of philosophy is, therefore, the liberation of the soul from its corporeal imprisonment. For this purpose, it must pass through the several stages of the Human and Divine Virtues. The Human Virtues are physical, economical, and poli¬ tical ; or those which respect the care of the body, and the offices of domestic and civil life. The Divine Virtues are purgative, theoretic, and theurgic : the first class consists in bodily abstinence, and other voluntary mortihcations ; the second comprehends all those exercises of the intellect and imagination by which the mind contemplates abstract truth and intel¬ ligible natures ; the third includes those religious exercises, by which the philosopher is qualified for, and admitted to, an immediate intercourse with superior beings, attains a power over demons, and ascends so far above the ordinary condition of humanity, as to enjoy the vision of God in this life, and to return, at death, to the Divine Mind, whence it first proceeded.* * * § On reviewing the speculative part of the Eclectic system, as it appears in the preceding summary, the reader will easily perceive that the Alexan¬ drian philosophers, though they founded their system chiefly upon the doctrine of Plato, departed from him in many particulars. Their notions of the Divine nature are not strictly Platonic, but the fanciful conceptions of Plato, pursued to a higher degree of extravagance, and blended with the Egyptian and Oriental doctrine of emanation. Those of the Oriental phi¬ losophers, who were called Gnostics, carried this doctrine to so absurd an extreme, as to imagine a long genealogy of divine essences, flowing from the first fountain of existence, and dwelling within the infinite plenitude of the Divine Nature ; to these they gave the name of ^ons. Plotinus maintained, against the Gnostics, that there are only three distinct vTTOffraaelCf subsistences, in the Divine nature. j* He receded from Plato, in supposing one of these, the soul or animating principle, to be a part of the Divine nature, and not a separate and subordinate principle, the soul of the world. Others j; converted this trinity into a quaternity, by con¬ ceiving three principles, Intellect, Ideas, and Soul, to be derived from one common source, the first principle of all existence. In what manner they supposed the intelligible world to subsist in the Divine nature, whilst never¬ theless it retained its simplicity, it may be difficult to explain. But it appears evident that, with Plato, they understood these Ideas to be some¬ thing more than mere conceptions, and imagined them to have a real existence, comprehended with the Divine essence.§ Plotinus expresses his notion of these intelligible natures under the image of waters existing in their fountain before they flow forth in streams. || Another essential difference between the doctrine of Plato himself, and that of the later Pla- tonists, is, that while Plato held the dualistic system, which supposed matter to have existed eternally as a substance distinct from mind, the Alexandrian philosopher conceived matter itself to have proceeded by eternal emanation from the Divine nature. To this we may add, that Plato taught that the universe was formed at a certain finite time, by the voluntary energy of Divine power upon the eternal mass of matter ; but the Alexandrian Platonists, that intelligible forms have been eternally im¬ pressed upon matter, that is, that the universe has existed from eternity. 1 ] ii • Porphyr. de Abstinentiae, et Senteiuiae, &c. Jamb. Serm. Protrept. pass. Conf. Plot. En. iii. 1. ix. c. 9, 10. En. iv. 1. iii. c. 7. En. vi. 1. ult. Amin. Marcell. I. xxv. c. 4. JVIacrob. Som. Sc. 1. i. c. 7. 1.3. Simplic, in Epict. p. 5. f En. ii. 1. ix. c. 1. X Cyril. Alex. adv. Julian. 1. i. p. 35. 1. viii. p. 371. Proclus in Tim. Plat. 1. ii. p. 93. § riot. En. V. 1. i. c. 7. || En. iii. 1. viii. c. 9. Chap. 2. S. 5. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 349 It is wonderful to observe how laboriously these philosophers tortured their imaginations in attempting to solve difficulties which existed only in their own fanciful system, or which lie beyond the reach of the human understanding. They took infinite pains to distinguish between intelligible and intelligent natures ;* to show how Ideas, not in themselves intelligent, but the objects of intelligence, could exist in the divine intellect ; to explain the manner in which the Divine mind acts upon matter ; to make it evident that matter is sent forth by emanation from an immaterial source; and to clear up other imaginary, or inexplicable mysteries. “The Divine mind,” says Plotinus,f “acts upon matter by means of ideas, not externally, after the manner of human art, but internally, as a forming nature ; neither separate from matter, nor mixed with it, he sends forth from himself ideas, or forms, and impresses them upon matter.” “ God,” says Jamblicus, “ produced matter, by separating Materiality from Essen¬ tiality.” But it is wholly unnecessary to dwell longer upon the visionary subtleties of the Alexandrian philosophy. The facts and opinions which we have laid before the reader respecting the Eclectic sect will, we doubt not, be thought abundantly sufficient to justify this general conclusion ; that the Plotinian school, by combining systems which were originally distinct from each other ; by personifying abstract conceptions, and speaking of them as real beings ; by inventing strange fictions concerning the Supreme Being, and concerning subordinate divinities ; and by raising upon these fictions the baseless fabric of enthusiasm and fanaticism, introduced infinite confusion into philosophy, and fatally'obstructed, instead of promoting, the progress of useful knowledge. The pernicious influence of the Eclectic system, both upon opinions and manners, through many succeeding ages, will be seen in the sequel. J SECTION V.— OF THE STATE OF THE PERIPATETIC PHILOSOPHY UNDER THE ROMAN EMPERORS. Whilst Platonism, and the Eclectic sect, which rose out of Platonism, flourished at Alexandria and Athens, and had many advocates in Rome, the other ancient sects still continued to exist in their respective forms, and to be supported by able patrons. The Peripatetic philosophy, which had been introduced into Rome, as wm have seen, by Tyrannio and Andronicus, by wliom the writings of Aristotle and Theophrastus were rescued from oblivion, regained its ancient credit under the Caesars. From the time of Andronicus to that of • Plot. En. 1. viii. c. 4. f En. vi. 1. v. c. 8. En. iii. 1. i. c. 2. J Vidend. Voss, de Sect. c. 21. sect. 23. Heuman. Act. Phil. v. i. p. 327. Gesner. Act. Phil. V. i. p. 851. Mosheim. de Turb. per recent. Plat. Eccl. sect. 8. Selden in Orig. Alexand. p. 147. Oudin. de Scr. Eccl. t. 1. p. 230. 238. Rhodogin. Ant. Lect. 1. xxi. c. 10. Blount, Cens. p. 203. Jons. 1. ii. c. 9. 18. 1. iii. c. 11. 15, 16, 17. Holsten. Vit. Porph. ed. Rom. Basnage, Annal. t. ii. An. 278. Vincent. Lirinensio, Commonit. c. 23. ed. Bal. Pearson, Vind. Ignat, p. ii. c. 1. Huet. Origen, An. 1. i. c. 1. Thomas, Obs. de Porph. ap. Heuman. t. iii. p. 53. Misc. Lips. t. i. p. 317. Clerici Bibl. Anc. et Mod. t. X. Reland. Palaestin. I. i. c. 48. Voss, de Hist. Gr. 1. ii. c. 18. Conring. Ant. Acad. Diss. 1. Schmidii Diss. de Hypatia. Cave Hist. Lit. Sac. p. 251. Voss, de Sc. Math. c. xvi. sect. 9. Bayle. Mosheim. de Studio Ethnicorum Christianos imitandi. Diss. H. E. p. 330. Idem de Causis suppos. lib. ibid. p. 217. Cudwortb, c. iv. sect. 23. 30, &c, cum Notis Mosheim. Fabr. Proleg. in Vit. Procli. De Bleterie, Vie de Julien. Amst. 1735. Rechenberg. de Apost. Jul. Toland’s Tetradymus. We- rensdorf. Diss. 1734. 350 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. Ammonius, the preceptor of Plutarch, that is, till the reign of Nero, the doctrines of tliis sect were taught with great purity in its schools. But after Ammonius it began to experience the influence of that spirit of confusion which prevailed among the Eclectic philosophers ; and the plan of Antio- chus, who had formerly attempted a coalition between Aristotle, Plato, and Zeno, was revived. The Peripatetic sect was from this time divided into two branches ; the one consisting of such as attempted to combine the doctrines of other schools with those of Aristotle ; the other, including those who wished to follow more closely the steps of the Stagirite.* * * § Julius Caesar and Augustus patronised the Peripatetic philosophy ; the former in the person of Sosigines, the latter in that of Nicolaus. Under the tyrannical reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius, it experienced worse fortune, many excellent men of this sect, as well as others, being either banished from Rome, or obliged, through fear of persecution, to remain silent. In the reign of Nero, a fortunate circumstance for a while raised philosophy from the dust. Agrippina, the wife of the emperor Claudius, having formed the design of advancing her son Nero to the imperial power, in order to give the people high expectations concerning him, committed the charge of his education to philosophers of the first eminence, particu¬ larly Seneca the Stoic, and Aigeus the Peripatetic. In consequence of this appointment, philosophers continued, for about five years, to enjoy the patronage of the Imperial Court ; but after that period they shared the fate of the professors of magical arts, or, as they were then called, mathemati¬ cians, and were again banished the city.-j- During the first century of the Roman empire we find few celebrated names among the Peripatetic philo¬ sophers. The principal are Sosigenes, Boethius, Nicolaus, and Aigeus. Sosigenes, a native of Egypt, acquired great celebrity by his acquaint¬ ance with mathematical science, and was employed by Julius Caesar in cor¬ recting the calendar. He wrote a commentary upon Aristotle’s treatise De Ccelo.'^ Boethius of Sidon was a pupil of Andronicus. § Strabo mentions him as his fellow-pupil in the study of the Aristotelian philosophy, and ranks him among the most famous philosophers of his time, || Nicolaus,^ a native of Damascus in Syria, fiourished in the time of Augustus. He was a man of extensive learning, and an illustrious orna¬ ment of the Peripatetic school. Herod the Great made choice of him for his preceptor in philosophy ; and, when he sailed to Rome, for the purpose of visiting the emperor, took him as his companion in the voyage. After¬ wards, interrupting the study of philosophy, that prince prosecuted histori¬ cal learning under Nicolaus, who at his request undertook to write a Universal History. Introduced by Herod to Augustus, he was admitted to his intimate friendship, and received from him many valuable tokens of regard. The integrity and generosity of his spirit, and the urbanity of his manners, obtained him universal respect. Nicolaus wrote several treatises on the philosophy of Aristotle ; “ A Dissertation on the Manners of Various Nations “ Memoirs of Augustus and “ His own Life.” Of these some fragments are preserved by Valesius. 1 * Nunnes. ad Vit. Arist. p. 153. Patricii Disc. Perip. t. i. 1. x. p. 127. xi. p. 145, Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. ii. p. 271. f Plin. Hist. N. 1. xxx. c. 1. I Plin. I. xviii. c. 25. Conf. Patric. 1. x. p, 134. Voss, de Scient. Math. c. 33. § Ammon, in Categ. p. 8. II Menag. ad Laert. 1. vi. sect. 443. Strabo, 1. xvi. p. 757. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 299. ^ .4tben£eus, 1. vi. p. 249. Pint. Symp. 1. viii. qu. 4. Phot. Cod. 189. Suidas. Suet, in Aug. c. 79. Simplic. 1. ii. de Ccelo. Fabr. v. ii. p. 809. Chap. 2. S. 5. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 351 Alexander tEgeus wrote a commentary upon Aristotle’s Meteorology, in the manner of the ancient Peripatetics. He was, as we have said, one of Nero’s preceptors, but gained little credit in this capacity, for he is sus¬ pected of having contributed to the corruption of his royal pupil. This philosopher is sometimes confounded with Alexander Aphrodisius.* About this time Ammonius, the preceptor of Plutarch, attempted to extend the authority of Aristotle beyond the limits of his own sect, by blending the Platonic and Stoic doctrine with the Peripatetic. He taught and died at Athens. From this time many Platonists studied the writings of Aristotle, and commented upon them ; and thus the way was prepared for the formation of the Eclectic sect under Ammonius Sacca, who flou¬ rished about a century later than Ammonius the Peripatetic.-j- After this time, however, we still meet with several genuine followers of Aristotle, of whom the most celebrated was Alexander Aphrodisius, so called from a town in Caria which gave him birth. J This philosopher ; penetrated, with so much success, into the meaning of the most profound speculations of his master, that he was not only respected by his contem¬ poraries as an excellent preceptor, but was followed by subsequent Aristo¬ telians among the Greeks, Latins, and Arabians, as the best interpreter of ' Aristotle. On account of the number and value of his commentaries, he ; was called, by way of distinction. The Commentator. Under the emperor Septimius Severus he was appointed public professor of the Aristotelian : philosophy, but whether at Athens or Alexandria is uncertain. He flou¬ rished about the year two hundred. Several of his works are still extant, among which is a learned and elegant treatise “ On Fate,”§ wherein he supports the doctrine of Divine Providence. Upon this head he leaned towards Platonism, but on most other subjects he adhered strictly to Aris¬ totle. In his book concerning the Soul, he maintains that it islt^o'c titou awfiaroc opynyiKov, kui ovk overiav avrrjv Kad' auTti^, not a distinct substance by itself but the for7n of an organized body. |1 Many of the Eclectic philosophers undertook to explain and illustrate : the writings of Aristotle, particularly on the subject of dialectics, which Plato had left imperfect. Besides Porphyry, Jamblicus, Plutarchus, Nes- torius, and others already mentioned,, we may reckon Dexippus, Themistius, ' Olympiodorus, and Simplicius, among the Eclectic commentators upon Aristotle. ^ Dexippus was a disciple of Jamblicus; but though he gave his name to the Platonic school, he was more inclined to the doctrine of Aristotle than to that of Plato, as appears from his “Reply to the Objections of Plotinus against Aristotle’s Categories,” a work still extant.** Themistius, who was born in an obscure town of Paphlagonia, fixed his residence at Constantinople, and taught eloquence and philosophy with great success. He had many disciples, both Pagan and Christian ; among ' the former was Libanius ; among the latter, Gregory Nazianzen. He en¬ joyed the favour of the emperors, by whom he was admitted to the highest honours. Constantius, in the year three hundred and fifty-five, received him into the senate, and afterwards, in return for an eloquent eulogium, ' * Suidas. Fabr. v. ii. p. 273. v. iv. p. 63. f Eunap. Procem. Vit. Soph. p. 5. Suidas. Plut. de Ei Delph. Fabr. v. ii. p. 274. v. iii.p. 330. v. iv. p. 171. J Suidas. Aplirod. de Aniin. Praei. 1. i. De Fato, init. Topic. 1. ii. p. 72. De Anim. 1. i. 11. 1. ii. 144. 1. hi. c. 7. p. 138. § Ed. Lond. 1658. 1| Qu. et Sol. 1. ii. c. 8. ^ Euseb. Fee. Hist. 1. vii. c. 32, Nicepb. 1. vi. c. 36. Hieron. Cat. Script, c. 73. Porph. Vit. Plot. c. 14. ** Simplic. in Categ. p. 1. Suidas. 352 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. presented him with a brazen statue. Julian received him as a friend, and frequently corresponded with him. In the year three hundred and sixty- two he was appointed by this emperor prefect of Constantinople. He enjoyed equal distinction under the succeeding emperors, from whom he obtained by his eloquence whatever he wished. Theodosius the Great, during his visit to the Western empire, entrusted Themistius with the care and education of his son Arcadius. His eloquence, wisdom, and ability in public affairs, united with uncommon gentleness of temper and urbanity of manners, were the foundation of that long course of civil honours by which his life was distinguished. About the year three hundred and eighty-seven Themistius withdrew, at an advanced age, from public busi¬ ness, and soon after died.* * * § A memorable example of the liberal spirit of Themistius is related by ecclesiastical historians. The emperor Valens, who favoured the Arian party, inflicted many hardships and sufferings upon the Trinitarians, and daily threatened them with still greater severities. Themistius, to whom these measures were exceedingly displeasing, addressed the emperor upon the subject in an eloquent speech, in which he represented the diversity of opinions among the Christians as inconsiderable, compared with that of the Pagan philosophers ; and pleaded that this diversity could not be displeas¬ ing to God, since it did not prevent men from worshipping him with true piety. By these and other arguments Themistius prevailed upon the emperor to treat the Trinitarians with great lenity. ; Themistius illustrated several of the works of Aristotle, particularly the ’ Analytics, the Physics, and the book on the Soul, in Commentaries written' with great perspicuity and elegance. His “ Orations” are strongly marked) with the same characters. Pie is to be distinguished from Themistius, ai Christian deacon of Alexandria, who lived after the council of Chalcedon, held in the year five hundred and fifty-one, and was the head of the sect; of the Agnoetae ;§ so called, because they taught that Christ, the Xdyoe, was ignorant of many things. There is nothing in the writings of Themis¬ tius the philosopher from which it can be inferred that he ever deserted the Pagan schools. In the following century, about the year four hundred and thirty, flou¬ rished Olympiodorus, an Alexandrian philosopher, celebrated for his knowledge of the Aristotelian doctrine. Proclus, before he was twentyj years of age, attended upon his school. This philosopher is to be distin-^ guished from a Platonist of this name, whose Commentary upon Plato is preserved among the manuscripts in the king’s library at Paris ; and also from a Peripatetic of a later age, who wrote a Commentary upon Aristo¬ tle’s Meteorology. 1 1 Simplicius Cilix, a Platonist, who flourished under the emperor Jus¬ tinian, wrote commentaries upon Aristotle, which discover sound judgment and extensive reading ; but his fondness for the Eclectic method of phi¬ losophising led him to mix the Platonic and Stoic with the Peripatetic doc-_ trines. His “ Commentary upon the Enchiridion of Epictetus” affords a curious example of this combination of heterogeneous tenets. He strenu¬ ously defended Aristotle’s doctrine concerning the eternity of the world against Philoponus. Simplicius was one of those Platonists, who, about * Suid. Phot. Cod. 74. Them. Oral. 4. 1C, 17. 20, 21. 23. 27. 31. 33. Liban. Epist. i. 139, HO. Jid. ep. ad Them. f Socrat. 1. iv. c. 32. Sozom. 1. vi. c. 36. Niceph. 1. xi. c. 46. I Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. viii. p. 1. 37. Ed. Venet. 1534. Par. 1684. , § Phot. Cod. 108. 23. |1 Suidas. Marin. Vit. Procli, c. 9. Chap. 2. S. 6. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 353 the beginning of the sixth century, fled from the persecution of the em¬ peror to Chosroes, king of Persia.* From the preceding detail, a sufficiently accurate idea may be formed of the fate of the Peripatetic philosophy under the Roman emperors, before it took refuge, as we shall afterwards see, among the Arabians. Under several of the Caesars, the philosophers of this school shared, with their brethren, the common discouragements and infelicities of oppression. The concise and logical method of philosophising, which prevailed in this school, could obtain few admirers at a period remarkable for a loose and florid kind of eloquence. The doctrine which the Peripatetics of this period had received from their master suffered much adulteration from the unwearied endeavours of the Alexandrian philosophers to establish an Eclectic system. Notwithstanding the external splendour in which this sect, with several others, appeared under the Anton ines, it was from that time impaired by internal disease and corruption. Many bold but in¬ judicious grammarians and critics attempted to supply chasms, and to clear up obscurities, in the writings of Aristotle, from their own ingenious con¬ jectures, which they presumed to incorporate with the author’s text. Even Alexander Aphrodisius, who professed to restore the genuine Aristotelian system, not confining himself to the doctrine of his master, contributed towards its adulteration. But nothing proved so injurious to the Peripatetic philosophy as the rage for commenting upon the works of Aristotle, which prevailed among his followers. Notes, paraphrases, arguments, summa¬ ries, and dissertations, piled up, century after century, under the general name of Commentaries upon Aristotle, created, as might be expected, endless disputes concerning the meaning of his writings ; and it may, perhaps, be asserted with truth, that their genuine sense, after all the pains which have been taken to explore it, yet remains, in many particulars, undiscovered.f SECTION VI.— OF THE STATE OF THE CYNIC SECT, UNDER THE ROMAN EMPERORS. The ancient Cynic sect was instituted, as has been shown, rather with a view to exhibit a pattern of philosophical virtue, than to introduce a new system of opinions. For this end, the original authors and sup¬ porters of this sect devoted themselves to voluntary poverty, lived upon the charity of the rich, practised the most rigorous abstinence from plea¬ sure, and became censors of public manners. Whilst the Cynics adhered to their original principles and character, they commanded, notwith¬ standing their forbidding peculiarities, great attention and respect, not only from the vulgar, but even from persons of the highest rank. But in process of time their independent spirit rose into insufferable haughtsness and insolence ; and their unnatural severity of manners degenerated into a gross contempt of decorum, and an impudent freedom of speech. Even so early as the time of Cicero this sect was fallen into such dis¬ credit, that it was his opinion that the whole body ought to be banished * Simp, ad Phys. I. i. com. 12. p. 32. I. iv. com. 53. 141. De Coelo, p. 113. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. viii. p. 621. t Vidend. Cozzand. de Magistr. Ant. Ph. 1. ii. c. 2. Voss, de Sc. Math. c. 33. sect. 9. c. 59. sect. 14. Id. de Hist. Gr. 1. ii. c. 4. 1.5. 20. Grot. Epist. 262. Cleric. Hist. Med. p. iii. c. 9. Jons. 1. ii. c. 16. 1. vi. c. 19. Ruald. in Vit. Plutarch, c. 7. Meurs. ad Aristoxen. et de Fortuna Attica, c. 8. Labh. Conspect. Interpr. PI. et Arist. Schel- born. Anioenit. Lit. P. iii. A A 354 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book lUf‘ from the state, for their shameful violations of modesty.* Under the Caesars, their infamous excesses furnished Lucian with a copious theme'ffi for satire. -f- In his Fugitives, he draws a humorous picture of thosejt false Cynics, who, without the virtues of Diogenes, carried his singularitiesEJ, to the most extravagant height. The gross and shameless manners of these pretended philosophers^) exposed them to ridicule and insult from the lowest and most profligateWi vulgar. Hence Persius says,§ Multum gaudere paratus, nH Si Cynico barbam petulans nonaria vellet. (a) jHD] Julian, II speaking of the Cynics of his time, says, that they led a wan-jB^ dering and brutish life, and were alike troublesome and mischievous b^ffl the malignant reproaches which they cast upon the most excellent cha-W racters, and by the base adulation which they bestowed upon the most® infamous. It is no wonder that this body, so injurious to society, as well^ as disgraceful to philosophy, was, under the virtuous Antonines, bidden to hold public schools; and that in the fifth century, as the poet® Sidonius intimates,^ the sect became almost extinct. In the midst of ft the numerous herd of Cynics whose names are forgotten, there were aj¥j few persons whose singular virtues, or vices, have preserved their names from oblivion. Musonius a Babylonian (confounded by Suidas with Musonius th^*) Tuscan, a Stoic philosopher) is ranked by Eunapius** among the mos^' virtuous and excellent of the modern Cynics. Philostratus speaks of hinT» as next to Apollonius in wisdom, and as an eminent philosopher. Hi^; cynical spirit would not permit him to spare the vices of Nero ; and thi^^ resentment of that tyrant consigned him to prison. Whilst he was iuK; confinement he formed a friendship with Apollonius, and held a correct spondence with him, some specimens of which are preserved by Philostratu^ He was at last banished to the Isthmus of Greece, and condemned to i remain a slave, and to labour daily with the spade. His friend Demetrius, . seeing him in this condition, expressed great concern at his misfortunes ; upon which Musonius, striking his spade firmly in the ground, said, “ Why, Demetrius, do you lament to see me digging in the Isthmus ? You might indeed lament if you saw me, like Nero, playing upon the harp.-j-j-” Julian speaks with admiration of his magnanimitjLj;|; The time of his death is uncertain ; and none of his writings remain. §§ Demetrius of Corinth, |||1 the friend of Musonius, was also banished from Rome in the time of Nero for his free censure of public manners. After the death of this emperor he returned to Rome ; but the boldness of his language soon offended Vespasian, and again deprived him of his liberty. Apollonius, with whom he had contracted a friendship, pre¬ vailed upon Titus to recall him ; but under Domitian he shared the com- ; mon fate of the philosophers, and withdrew to Puteoli. Seneca, who was I * De Off. 1. i. -j- Lucian. Diog. et Crates : Vit. Auct. &c. J T. iv. p. 321. § Sat. i. V. 133. (a) And then, O then, art most supremely blest, When some wise Cynic’s beard becomes a jest. Brewster. 11 Orat. 6, 7. Conf. Maxim. Tyr. Diss. 21. Arrian. Diss. Epict. 1. iii. c. 22. p. 229. Carm. 2. ** In Prooem. p. 6. ft Vit. Apoll. 1. iv. c. 35. 46. 1. v. c. 19. 1. vii. c. 11. 16. Suidas. Epist. ad Themist. p. 262. §§ Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 365. 111! Eunap. Vit. Soph. p. 7. Phil'ost. 1. iv. c. 42. 1. v. c. 19. 1. vi. c. 30. 1. vii. c. IL Suet, in Vesp. c. 13. Aul. Gel. 1. xv. c. 1 1. Arrian. Ep. 1. i. c. 26. Chap. 2. S. 6. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. S55 intimately acquainted with Demetrius, speaks in the highest terms of panegyric concerning his masculine eloquence, sound judgment, intrepid fortitude, and inflexible integrity. “ Leaving,” says he, “ the nobles clad in purple, I converse with, and admire, the half-naked Demetrius : and why do I admire him, but because I perceive that in the midst of his poverty he wants nothing ! — When I hear this excellent man discoursing from his couch of straw, I perceive in him, not a preceptor only, but a witness of the truth ; and I cannot doubt that providence has endued him with such virtues and talents, that he might bean example, and a monitor, to the present age.”* * * § Demetrius laid down to himself this prudent maxim, That it is better to have a few precepts of wisdom always at hand for use, than to learn many things which cannot be applied to practice. . He attended Thraseas Pmtus in his last moments, before his execution, and fortifled his mind by conversing with him upon subjects of philo¬ sophy. -}- Among the Cynics of this period is commonly reckoned, both by , ancient and modern writers, GEnomaus, who wrote a treatise to expose the frauds and impostures of Oracles, and another, to censure the degene¬ racy of the later Cynics. He flourished under Adrian. His writings are not extant.j: A distinguished place among the genuine Cynics who were friends to virtue appears to be due to Demonax; whose history, though related only . by Lucian, § deserves credit, since it is not probable that the Satirist, . who lived at the same period, would have ventured to give a false narra¬ tive of a well-known character, or that he would have gone so far out of his usual track of satire, merely to draw a fictitious portrait of a good man. Demonax, according to Lucian, was born in Cyprus. His parents were • possessed of wealth and rank ; but he aspired after higher honours in the study of wisdom, and the practice of virtue. Early in life he removed to I Athens, where he afterwards continued to reside. In his youth he was intimately conversant with the poets, and committed the most valuable parts of their writings to memory. When he engaged in the study of philo- : sophy, he did not lightly skim over the surface of subjects, but made him¬ self perfect master of the several sects. In his habit and manner of living Demonax resembled Diogenes, and is therefore properly ranked among I the Cynics ; but he imitated Socrates in making philosophy, not a specu¬ lative science, but a rule of life and manners. He never openly espoused the doctrines of any particular sect, but took from each whatever tenets he judged most favourable to moral wisdom. Avoiding all ridiculous ! singularity, disgusting severity, and forbidding haughtiness, he associated freely with all, and conversed with such graceful ease, that persuasion might be said to dwell upon his lips. He possessed the happy art of ' rendering even reproof acceptable ; like a prudent physician, curing the disease without fretting the patient. His simple manner of living gave him perfect independence; and his virtues procured him such a degree of influence, that he was often employed in settling domestic dissensions. His philanthropy was universal ; and he never withdrew his regard from any, but such as would not be persuaded to forsake their vices. So per¬ fect was his equanimity, that nothing ever deeply affected him, except the * Sen. de Vit. Beat. c. 25. t Sen. Ep. 20. 62. 67. 91. De Benef. 1. vii. c. 1. 8, 9. 11. Qu. Nat. 1. iv. Brjef. de Prov. c. 4, 5. Tacit. Annal. xv. c. ult. + Suidas. Fabr. B. Gr. v. ii. p. 365. Jul. Orat. vi. vii. § In Demonacte, t. ii. p. 560. A A 2 356 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. ^ sickness or death of a friend. He lived nearly to the age of an hundred years, without suffering pain or disease, or becoming burdensome to any one. In extreme old age he went from house to house wherever he pleased, and was every where received with respect. As he passed along the streets the sellers of bread would beg him to accept of some from their hands ; and children would offer him fruits, and call him father. He died Q with the same placid countenance with which he had been accustomed to ^ meet his friends. The Athenians honoured his body with a public funeral, which was attended by a numerous train of philosophers andfe^ others, who all lamented the loss of so excellent a man. If this picturejM which is that of Lucian in miniature, was originally taken from real lifejB; the biographer had some reason to speak of Demonax as the best philo-j, i sopher he ever knew. w From the anecdotes of Demonax, related by Lucian, we shall select thef" following: — Soon after Demonax came to Athens, a public charge was^' brought against him for neglecting to offer sacrifice to Minerva, and to be initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries. Appearing before the assembly in a white garment, he pleaded, that Minerva did not stand in need of his offerings ; and that he declined initiation into the mysteries because, if they were bad he ought not to conceal them, and if they were good, his love to mankind would oblige him to disclose them ; upon which he was acquitted. One of his companions proposing to go to the temple of Esculapius, to pray for the recovery of his son from sickness, Demonax said, “ Do you suppose that Esculapius cannot hear you as well from this place ? ” Hearing two ignorant pretenders to philosophy conversing, and remarking that the one asked foolish questions, and the other made replies which were nothing to the purpose, he said, “ One of these men is milking a he-goat, while the other is holding a sieve under him.” Ad¬ vising a certain rhetorician, who was a wretched declaimer, to perform frequent exercises ; the rhetorician answered, “ I frequently practise by myself.” “ No wonder,” replied Demonax, “ that you are so bad a speaker, when you practise before so foolish an audience.” Seeing a Spartan beating his servant unmercifully, he said to him, “ Why do you thus put yourself upon a level with your slave ?” When Demonax was informed that the Athenians had thoughts of erecting an amphitheatre for gladiators, in imitation of the Corinthians, he went into the assembly, and cried out, “ Athenians, before you make this resolution, go and pull down the Altar of Mercy.” Of a character very different from that of Demonax was Crescens, a Megalopolitan. He even disgraced the name of Cynic by his infamous practices : nevertheless, he declaimed eloquently in praise of abstinence, magnanimity, and contempt of death. Crescens is mentioned by Tatian, Justin Martyr, and Jerom, as a vile calumniator of the Christians. His malicious accusation of Justin for atheism before the magistrate, crowned i that illustrious ornament of the Christian church with the honours of martyrdom.* About this period lived Peregrinus, of Parium, in Pontus. Lucian, relating the particulars of his life,t says, that after having been guilty of ' many enormities, he became a Christian, and obtained a temporary credit i among the Christians in Palestine ; but that, returning to his old habits, i he was dismissed from their society, and went to Egypt, where, in the * Tatian. Or. adv. Grsec. p. 157. Just. Apol. i. p. 46. Euseb. Hist. Ecc. 1. iv. c. 16. Syncell. p. 351. Phot. Cod. 125. Hieron. Cat. Script, c. 23. f De Morte Peregrini, t. iv. p. 268. Athenag. legat. c. 23. Chap. 2. S. 7. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 357 character of a mendicant Cynic, he practised the most extravagant exploits of fanaticism ; that he afterwards roved about through Italy and Greece, pouring forth the most impudent invectives against men of rank, and even against the emperor himself ; and that at last, to procure himself an immortal name, he went to the Olympic games, and, in the presence of a vast concourse of spectators, raised a funeral pile, upon which in imitation of Hercules, he devoted himself to voluntary death. It is very probable that in this account the satirist has not given a just representation of the character of Peregrinus; for Aulus Gellius* speaks of him as a philo¬ sopher of reputation in Athens, who was admired for his constancy, and whose moral lectures were much frequented. The story of his last mad adventure is probably true.-j- Eusebius relates that he committed him¬ self to the flames in the year one hundred and sixty-eight. The last name which remains to be added to the list of ancient Cynics, is that of Salustius, a Syrian, who flourished about the beginning of the sixth century. After having studied and practised eloquence, he attended upon Proclus at Athens, and was instructed by him in the Alexandrian philosophy. But being disgusted with the futile speculations, and the cha¬ otic confusion of this school, he determined to adopt a kind of philosophy, which he judged to be better suited to the purposes of human life, and addicted himself to the Cynic sect. Leaving Athens, he went with Isidorus to Alexandria, where he freely censured the vices of the times, and in¬ veighed, with great acrimony, against the speculative philosophers of every sect. A treatise “ On the Gods,” edited by Gale in his Opuscula Mythologica, was probably not the work of this Salustius, but of a Platonist of the same name, who lived in the time of Julian. SECTION VII.— OF THE STATE OF THE STOIC SECT UNDER THE ROMAN EMPERORS. The Stoic philosophy, which had obtained so much authority during the Roman republic, especially among the professors of the law, continued to flourish under the emperors till after the reigns of the Antonines. Its ethical doctrine became the permanent basis of the Roman jurisprudence; and the high tone of wisdom and virtue which it assumed induced many persons of great distinction and eminent merit to declare themselves of the Stoic sect, or at least to prefer its moral system to that of any other school. The prevalence of the Christian doctrine at this period seems to have con¬ tributed, in no small degree, to the success of Stoicism, by leading its followers, to whom the language and tenets of Christianity could not be unknown, to soften the extravagances of their own system, and to clothe its dogmas in a more popular dress. Add to this, that the Stoic sect ac- quii'ed great credit and authority from the illustrious examples of many persons of both sexes, who, in these times of civil oppression, bravely en¬ countered death in the cause of liberty and virtue. Among the heroines of this age, Tacitus mentions the two Arrias, the wives of Csecina Pmtus and Thraseas, and Fannia the wife of Helvidius. From these and other causes the Stoic sect, in the time of Juvenal, prevailed almost through the whole Roman empire. * Noct. Att. 1. viii. c. 3. I. xii. c. 1 1. + Tatian. Or. adv. Gr. c. -II. Philostr. Vif. Soj)h. 1. ii. c. 1. sect. 13. Euseb. Chron. 01. 236. + Suidas. Phot. Cod. 242. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 643. 358 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book IIIjl Melius nos Zenonis prsecepta monent, nec enim omnia qugedam Pro vita t’acienda putat, sed Cantaber unde Stoicus, antiqui praesertim aetate Metelli? Nunc totus Graias nostrasque habet orbis Atbenas.* (a) Under Antoninus Pius schools of Stoicism were supported at the public expense in Athens, Alexandria, and probably too at Rome; for Antoninus,’ after he came to the purple, visited the house of Apollonius the Stoic to study philosophy. f At Tarsus in Cilicia there was also a Stoic school,' which produced several celebrated philosophers, afterwards to be nien^ tioned. But notwithstanding the general credit which the Stoic doctrine ob tained, it met with powerful opposition from several quarters ; particularly from the Sceptics, who were ingenious, and indefatigable in their endea¬ vours to overturn every dogmatic system ; and from the Alexandrian sect, which, by its destructive plan of coalition, corrupted the genuine doctrine of every other school. From the period when the motley Eclectic system was established, Stoicism began to decline; and in the age of' Augustine it no longer subsisted as a distinct sect. It was only during the short space of two hundred years that the Roman school of Zeno was adorned with illustrious names which claim a place in the history of philosophy.+ The first Stoic who merits attention in this period is Athenodorus,§ of Tarsus in Cilicia. He lived at Rome, and on account of his learning, ' wisdom, and moderation, was highly esteemed by Augustus. His opinion ^ and advice had great weight with the emperor, and are said to have led him into a milder plan of government than he had at first adopted. He obtained for his fellow-citizens, the inhabitants of Tarsus, relief from a part of the burden of taxes which had been imposed upon them, and wasj:' on this account honoured with an annual festival. Athenodorus was en- trusted by Augustus with the education of the young prince Claudius ;jj and, that he might the more successfully execute his charge, his illustrious^ pupil became for a while a resident in his house. This philosopher retired in his old age to Tarsus, where he died in his eighty-second year. At the beginning of the reign of Nero, lived and taught at Rome AnnjEus Cornutus,|| an African; a name not without distinction in the family of the Stoics. He excelled in criticism and poetry ; but his principal study was philosophy. His merit as a teacher of the Stoic doc¬ trine, sufficiently appears from his having been the preceptor of that honest advocate for virtue, the satirist Persius. How highly the master * Sat. XV. V. 108. (a) Zeno indeed has taught us sounder wit, “ Better to die than a vile deed commit.” l But how should Spaniards know the Stoic lore ? Which Rome e’en knew not in those days of yore. Learning indeed is now more widely spread, ; And Greek and Latin every where are read. Owen. f Lucian, in Eunuch, t. iv. p. 160. Capitolin. in Anton. P. c. 11. in Aurel. c. 10. f Xiphil. in Ant. Strabo, 1. xiv. p. 673. Athen. 1. iv. p. 186. \ : Euseb. Praep. 1. xiv. c. 2. Phot. Cod. 124. Aug. adv. Acad. 1. iii. c. 18. [ § Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 391. Zosim. 1. i. c. 6. Lucian, in Macrob. t. ii. p. 829. Suet. | in Claud, c. 4. Suidas. 4 II Shidas. Aul. Cell. 1. ii. c. 6. 1. ix. c. 10. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 401. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 359 I Chap. 2. S. 7. 'S I was esteemed by his pupil may be inferred from the following passage, ? among many others :* Cumque iter ambiguum est, et vitse nescius error Deducit trepidas ramosa in compita mentes Metibi supposui : teneros tu suscipis annos Socratico, Cornute, sinu, tunc fallere solers Apposita intortos extendit regula mores: Et premitur ratione animus, vincique laborat, Artificemque tuo ducit sub pollice vultum. (a) Persilis, dying before his master, left him his library, with a consider¬ able sum of money ; but Cornutus, accepting only the books, gave the money to the sisters of Persius. The poet Lucan was also one of his pupils. Under Nero, Cornutus was driven into exile for his freedom of speech. The emperor having written several books in verse upon the affairs of Rome, and his flatterers advising him to continue the poem, this honest Stoic had the courage to remark that he doubted whether so large a work would be read ; and when it was urged that Chrysippus had writ¬ ten as much, he replied, “ His writings were useful to mankind.” After such an unpardonable offence against imperial vanity, the only wonder was that Cornutus escaped with life.-j' Caius Musonius Rufus, J a Tuscan of equestrian rank, who enjoyed military honours, was a great admirer of the Stoic philosophy, and took much pains to disseminate its principles and precepts among the Roman youth, particularly among the officers of the army. The attempt was ridiculed by some, and offended others. Nero, who perhaps did not him¬ self escape the admonitions of this bold reformer, was displeased at his freedom, and banished him to Gymra. He was afterwards, however, re¬ called by Vespasian ; and that emperor was so well pleased with his con¬ duct, particularly in his strenuous opposition to the measures of Egnofius Celer, a man universally detested, that when, at the instigation of Mucian, he banished the philosophers from Rome and Italy, Musonius alone was permitted to remain in the city. His philosophy, like that of Socrates, was adapted to the purposes of life and manners, as may be inferred from a dissertation which he has left “On the Exercise of the Mind,” preserved by Stob8eus.§ Among the Stoics of this period we must also reckon ChjEremon,!] an * Sat. V. ver. 34, (a) Scarce had I reach’d the slippery point of life, Where vice and virtue wage a doubtful strife ; Where inexperience flexile youth betrays. And leads it devious thro’ her mazy ways ; But lo ! Cornutus, thy directing hand Sudden I sought, I stoop’d to thy command : On thy Socratic bosom lay reclin’d. While wholesome precepts form’d the list’ning mind, j Thy standard rule with nice address applied, I Corrected every thought that warp’d aside, j My soul by reason’s force convicted stood, 1 Its error saw, and strove to he subdued. ‘ Thy abler skill submissive it obey’d ; It took the stamp thy forming finger made. Brewstek. I t Aul. Cell. 1. vi. c. 2. Dio, 1. Ixii. p. 715. Euseb. Ecc. H. 1. vi. c. 19. Suidas. f Gale, Opusc. Myth. Prsef. I I J Suidas. Tacit. Ann. 1. iv. c. 10. 40, 1. xiv. c. 59, 60. Hist. 1. iii. c. 81. Philostr. I Vit. Apol. 1. vii. c. 16. Xiphil. et Zen. in Vesp. Orig. adv. Cels. 1. iii. p. 156. ■ ! § Serm. 117. I I il Suidas. Euseb. Prsep. 1. v. c. 10. 1. xi. c. 57. Porph. Trepl anoxv^, 1- iv- p. 360. Orig. ' j adv. Cels, 1. i. p. 46. Sen. Qu. Nat. 1. vii. c. 5. 360 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. Egyptian, who in his youth had the charge of the Alexandrian library, but afterwards removed to Rome, where he was employed, with Alexander iEgeres, as one of the preceptors of Nero. Under his name the epigram¬ matist Martial* ridicules the whole sect of the Stoics for their contempt of riches; but it is not probable that Chaeremon was ever in that state of poverty which the poet describes. This philosopher wrote a book con¬ cerning comets, quoted by Origen ; and an account of the Egyptian hie¬ roglyphics and priesthood, of which a curious fragment is preserved by Porphyry. In the whole school of Zeno, there is no name more highly celebrated than that of Seneca; and whether we consider his natural abilities, his extensive erudition, or the number and merit of his writings, this philo¬ sopher is certainly entitled to particular attention. Lucius Ann.®us Seneca was a native of Corduba, an ancient and flourishing Roman settlement in Spain. f His father, Marcus Annaeus Seneca, a man of equestrian rank, was a celebrated orator ; his mother’s name was Helvia. He was born about fifteen years before the death of Augustus, or the year before the commencement of the Christian era,| and was brought to Rome while a child, probably for education, by his aunt, who accompanied him on account of the delicate state of his health. § His first studies were devoted by his father to eloquence, but his mind, naturally disposed towards serious and weighty pursuits, soon passed over from words to things; and he chose rather to reason with the philosophers than to declaim with the rhetoricians. This propensity was displeasing to his father, who, having himself no taste for philosophy, thought it a frivo¬ lous study, and had no other object of ambition, either for himself or his children, than eloquence. His son Junius Gallio succeeded in this pursuit, and was celebrated for the melody of his elocution ; but Lucius was not to be divei’ted from his purpose of devoting himself to wisdom. Sotion, a philosopher, who, though of the Pythagorean sect, inclined to the Stoic doctrine concerning morals, was fixed upon as his preceptor. But whether it was that Seneca was disgusted with the severity of the Pythagoric dis¬ cipline, or that he was dissatisfied with the obscure dogmas of this school, he soon forsook Sotion, and became a disciple of Attains, a Stoic ; at the same time, occasionally conversing with philosophers of other sects, and freely examining the writings, or doctrines, of the several founders of the Grecian schools. Through his father’s importunity, he for a short time interrupted his philosophical studies to engage in the business of the courts; and we are assured by so good a judge as Quintilian, that, whilst he con¬ tinued to plead, his speeches, if deficient in some of the graces of oratory, abounded with that good sense and strength of thought which are the basis of eIoquence.il Thus furnished with plentiful stores of learning, and with a competent skill in the art of speaking, Seneca, as soon as he arrived at the age of manhood, aspired to the honours of the state. The first office with which he was invested was that of questor ; but at what time he obtained it is uncertain. II From this time his good fortune made rapid advances ; and he soon rose to distinction in the court of Claudius : but the particulars of his public life, during this period, are no where preserved. Hence it is * L. xi. ep. 57. f Plin. Hist. N. 1. iii. c. 1. Tac. Ann. 1. xiv. c. 54. Qu. Nat. I. i. c. 1. § Cons, ad Hslv. c. 16. Ep. 108. II Dial, de Gauss. Corr. Eloq. De Vit. Beat. c. 3. De Benef. 1. ii. c. 17. 1. iv. c. 7. De Prov. c. 5. Qu. Nat. 1. iii. c. 29. Ep. 9. 18. 21. 33. 41. 45. 48. 58. 65. 75. 89. 94. 97. 100. 107. ^ Cons, ad Ilelv. c. 16. Chap. 2. S. 7- THE ROMAN EMPIRE. S61 impossible to discover with certainty the cause of the charge, which was publicly brought against him, of adultery with Julia, the daughter of Ger- manicus, and wife of Venicius. It is probable, however, from the infamous character of Messalina,* who instigated the prosecution, that he was accused without any sufficient ground. The affair, notwithstanding, termi¬ nated in his banishment ; and Seneca, after having for many years enjoyed the favour of the emperor, and been distinguished among the great, was obliged to remain eight years an exile in the island of Corsica. Here, if we are to credit his own account, he passed his time agreeably, devoting himself entirely to the study of philosophy and elegant learning. In a letter to his mother, he says,j' “ Be assured that I am as cheerful and happy as in the days of my greatest prosperity ; I may indeed call my present days such ; since my mind, free from care, is at leisure for its favourite pursuits, and can either amuse itself with lighter studies, or, in its eager search after truth, rise to the contemplation of its own nature and that of the universe.” But it may be questioned whether Stoic ostentation had not some share in dictating this report ; for we find him, in another place, expressing much distress on account of his misfortune, and courting the emperor in a strain of servile adulation, little worthy of so eminent a philosopher. Agrippina, the second wife of Claudius, whose character was the reverse of that of Messalina, employed her interest with the emperor in favour of Seneca ; and not only obtained his recall from banishment, but prevailed upon Claudius to confer upon him the honourable office of pretor. j; Her inducement to this measure appears to have been a desire of engaging a philosopher of so much distinction and merit to undertake the education of her son. Probably, too, she hoped, by attaching Seneca to her family, to strengthen Nero’s interest in the state ; for the Roman people would, of course, entertain high expectations from a prince educated under such a master. Afranius Burrhus, a pretorian prefect, was joined with Seneca in this important charge : and these two preceptors, who were entrusted with equal authority, and had each his respective department, executed their trust with perfect harmony, and with some degree of success ; Burr¬ hus instructing his pupil in the military art, and inuring him to wholesome discipline ; Seneca furnishing him with the principles of philosophy, and the precepts of wisdom and eloquence ; and both endeavouring to confine their pupil within the limits of decorum and virtue. § Whilst these pre¬ ceptors united their authority, Nero was restrained from indulging his natural propensities ; but after the death of Burrhus, the infiuence of Seneca declined, and the young prince began to disclose that depravity i which afterwards stained his character with eternal infamy. || Still, however, Seneca enjoyed the favour of his prince ; and, after Nero was advanced to the empire, he long continued to load his preceptor with honours and riches. Partly from inheritance and marriage, but chiefly through imperial munificence, he possessed a large estate, and lived in great splendour.^ Juvenal speaks of** - Senecse praedivitis hortos. (a) A superb mansion at Rome, delightful country seats, rich furniture, * Suet, in Cali^. c. 19. in Claud, c. 29. Dio, 1. lx. Tacit. Ann. 1. xiii. c. 42. t Consol, ad Hel. c. 4. ad Polyb. c. 21. J Tacit. Ann. 1. xii. c. 8. § Tacit. Ann. 1. xiii. c. 2. || Tac. Ann. 1. xiv. c. 52. ^ Consol, ad Helv. c. 2. Tac. Ann. 1. xiv. c. 53. ** Sat. ix. (a) The gardens of the wealthy Seneca. 362 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III.' including, as Dio particularly mentions, five hundred cedar tables with ^ ivory feet, uniform, and of excellent workmanship,* were articles of luxury J hitherto unusual among philosophers, and were thought by many not very^v | consistent with that high tone of indifference, in which the Stoics, and^ among the rest Seneca himself, spoke of external good. Suilius, one of his enemies,-!- asked by what wisdom, or by what precepts of philosophy,' Seneca had been able, during four years of imperial favour, to amass the immense sum of three hundred thousand sestertia.\ Seneca perceived the gathering clouds of jealousy and envy, and sawOT that his sovereign himself, whose vices were now become too imperious to endure restraint, was disposed to listen to the whispers of obloquy. In hopes of escaping the destruction which threatened him, he earnestly requested the emperor’s permission to withdraw from the court, and devote the remainder of his days to philosophy ; he even offered to refund the' immense treasures which royal bounty had lavished upon him, and to' retire with a bare competency. Nero rejected his proposal, and assured him of the continuance of his favour; but the philosopher knew the' emperor’s disposition too well to rely upon his promises. From this time Seneca declined all ceremonious visits, avoided company, and, under the' pretence of indisposition, or a desire of prosecuting his studies, confined' himself almost entirely to his own house. § i It was not long before Seneca was convinced that in distrusting a tyrant,] whose mind was wholly occupied by suspicion, he had acted prudentljv Antonins Natalis, who had been concerned in the conspiracy of Piso, upon^ his examination, in order to court the favour of Nero, or perhaps even at his instigation, mentioned Seneca among the number of the conspirators. vj ' This single evidence was by the tyrant deemed sufficient against the mang. to whom he had been indebted for his education, and whom he had called his friend. To give some colour to the accusation, Natalis pretended thatU 1 he had been sent by Piso to visit Seneca whilst he was sick, and to com-^", ^ plain of his having refused to see Piso, who as a friend might have expected free access to him upon all occasions ; and that Seneca, in reply, had said, ij that frequent conversations could be of no service to either party, but thatV he considered his own safety as involved in that of Piso. Granius Sylva-‘f nus, tribune of the pretorian cohort, was sent to ask Seneca whether he's' recollected what had passed between himself and Natalis. Seneca, whether*'- by accident or design is uncertain, had that day left Campania, and was at'- his country seat, about four miles from the city. In the evening, while he- was at supper with his wife Paulina and two friends, the tribune, attended' by a military band, came to the house, and after giving the soldiers orders' to surround it, delivered the emperor’s message. Seneca’s answer was,'^ that he had received a complaint from Piso, of his having refused to see him ; and that the state of his health, which required repose, had been his apology. He added, that he saw no reason why he should prefer the safety of any other individual to his own ; and that no one was better acquainted than Nero with his independent spirit. :) This reply kindled the emperor’s indignation, and he asked the messen¬ ger whether Seneca discovered any intention of putting an end to his own life. The tribune assured him that there was no appearance either of terror or of distress in his countenance or language. Upon this the tyrant, who felt his own pusillanimity reproached by the constancy of the * Dio, 1. lx. Ep. 67. J .^2,421,875. f Tac. Ann. 1. xiii. c. 42. 52, 53. § Tac. Ann. 1. xiv. c. 53. 56. Suet, in Ner. c. 35. Chap. 2. S. 7. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 363 philosopher, ordered him to return without delay to Seneca, with his peremptory command immediately to put himself to death. Sylvanus, who had himself been one of the conspirators, had not the courage to meet the face of Seneca upon such an embassy, but sent the fatal message by one of his centurions. The philosopher received it with perfect composure, and asked permission of the officer to alter his will. This indulgence being refused him, he turned to his friends, and requested, that, since he was not allowed to leave them any other legacy, they would preserve in their memory a portrait of his life, as a perpetual monument of friendship. At the same time he restrained their tears, and exhorted them to exercise that fortitude which they had professed to learn in the school of philosophy. “ Where are now,” said he, “ our boasted precepts of wisdom ? where the armour which we have been so many years providing against adverse fate.? Who among us has been a stranger to the savage spirit of Nero? After murdering his mother, and his brother, it was not to be expected that he would spare his preceptor.” Having conversed in this manner for some time with his friends, Seneca embraced his wife, and earnestly intreated her to moderate her grief, and after his death to console herself with the recollection of his virtues : but Paulina refused every consolation, except that of dying with her husband, and earnestly solicited the friendly hand of the executioner. Seneca, after expressing his admiration of his wife’s fortitude, proceeded to obey the emperor’s fatal mandate, by opening a vein in each arm : but, through his advanced age, the vital stream flowed so reluctantly, that it was necessary also to open the veins of his legs. Still finding his strength exhausted without any prospect of a speedy release, in order to alleviate, if possible, the anguish of his wife, who was a spectator of the scene, and to save him¬ self the torture of witnessing her distress, he persuaded her to withdraw to another chamber. In this situation, Seneca, with wonderful recollection and self-command, dictated many philosophical reflections to his secretary. After a long interval, his friend Statius Annmus, to whom he complained of the tedious delay of death, administered to him a strong dose of poison ; but even this, through the feeble state of his vital powers, produced little effect. At last, he ordered the attendants to convey him into a warm bath ; and, as he entered, he sprinkled those who stood near, saying, “ I offer this libation to Jupiter the Deliverer.” Then, plunging into the bath, he was soon suffocated. His body was consumed, according to his own express order in a will which he had made in the height of his prosperity, Avithoutany funeral pomp.* Such was the end of Seneca, an end not unworthy the purest and best principles of the Stoic philosophy. The character, the system, and the writings of this philosopher have been subjects of much dispute among the learned. Concerning his cha¬ racter, a candid judge, who considers the virtuous sentiments with which his writings abound, the temperate and abstemious plan of life which he pursued in the midst of a luxurious court, f and the fortitude with which he met his fate, will not hastily pronounce him to have been guilty of adultery, upon the evidence of the infamous Mes.salina ; or conclude his wealth to have been the reward of a servile compliance with the base pas¬ sions of his prince. It has been questioned whether Seneca ought to be ranked among the Stoic or the Eclectic philosophers ; and the freedom of * Tacit. 1. XV. Ann. c. 62. ^ Ep. 108. 87. 104. 112. Tacit. Ann. 1. xv. c. 45. 63. I. xiii. c. 3. 1. xiv. c. 7. Qu. Nat. 1. iii. c. 7. Conf. Dio, 1. Ixi. Xiphilin. 364 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III.^ judgment which he expressly claims, together with the respect which he pays to philosophers of different sects, clearly prove that he did not im plicitly addict himself to the system of Zeno ; nor can the contrary be inferred from his speaking of our Chrysippus, and our Cleanthes ; for he speaks also of our Demetrius, and our Epicurus. It is evident, however, -1,) from the general tenor and spirit of his writings, that he adhered in the v'| main to the Stoic system.* With respect to his writings, as it is not ourf proper business to examine their literary merit, we shall content ourselves with remarking that, although he is justly censured by Quintilian, f andS other critics, as among the Romans the first corrupter of style, his works are, nevertheless, exceedingly valuable, on account of the great number of just and beautiful moral sentiments which they contain, the extensive eru¬ dition which they discover, and the happy mixture of freedom and urbanity with which they censure vice, and inculcate good morals. The writings of Seneca, except his Books of “Physical Questions,” are chiefly of the] moral kind : they consist of one hundred and twenty-four “ Epistles,” and distinct Treatises, “ On Anger; Consolation ; Providence ; Tranquillity of^ Mind; Constancy; Clemency; the Shortness of Life; a Happy Life ; Retirement ; Benefits.” j; Among the more celebrated Stoics, who lived in the time of Nero, we must also reckon Dio of Prusa, in Bithynia, called for his eloquence Chrysostom. Under Nero and Vespasian he followed the profession of a Sophist ; and in his juvenile orations he treated light subjects in a declam¬ atory and luxuriant style, and frequently inveighed against the most illus trious poets and philosophers of antiquity. This raised no small degree of ill-will against him, which induced him to leave Rome, and withdraw to Egypt. From this time he assumed the character of a Stoic philosopher ; but he retained so much of his former manner, that he embellished his phi-” losophical discourses, which turned chiefly upon moral topics, with the graces of eloquence. Both his doctrine and practice being strictly con¬ formable to the principles of virtue, he was a bold censor of vice, and spared no individual on account of his rank. His freedom of speech offended Domitian ; and he went into voluntary exile in Thrace, where he lived in great poverty, and was obliged to support himself by servile labour.' After the death of Domitian, he returned to Rome, and remained a short time concealed ; but finding the soldiers inclined to sedition, he suddenly brought to their remembrance Dio the orator and philosopher, by harangu¬ ing them in a strain of manly eloquence, which soon subdued the tumult. Both Nerva and Trajan admitted him to their confidence, and the former distinguished him by public tokens of favour. He lived to old age; but the time of his death is uncertain. The “Orations” of Dio are still extant, from which it appears that he was a man of sound judgment and lively fancy, and that he happily united in his style the qualities of anima-' tion and sweetness, § Euphrates]! of Alexandria was a friend of Dio and of Apolloniusy Tyaneus, who introduced him to Vespasian. This emperor on some occa¬ sion, preferring the opinion of Euphrates to that of Apollonius, a violent I * Ep. 96. 78. 41, Cons, ad Marc. c. xix. 25. ; v t Inst. 1. X. c. 1. Conf. Plin. H. N. 1. iv. c. 14. Aul. Gell. 1. xii, c. 2. 'f X Fabr. Bib. Lat. t. i. p. 32. 1' § Eunap. in Procem. Pbilostr. Vit. Sopb. 1. i. c. 7, 8. Vit. Apoll, 1. v. c. 31. 40.< Synesii Op. p. 35. 37. Petav. Phot. Cod. 209. Dion. Oral. 12, 13, 14, 15. 17. 21, 22.^ 30, 31. 71, 72. 80. . J. 11 Eunap. in Procem. Philostrat. Vit. .Apoll. 1. v. c. 28. 33. 1. vi. c. 7. 13. I. viii. c. 3.^., Chap. 2. S. 7. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 365 quarrel arose between these two philosophers ; whence Philostratus, the panegyrist of the latter, inveighs against Euphrates with great severity ; but it appears from the testimony of Epictetus, Pliny the Younger, and Eusebius, that he was universally esteemed for his talents and virtues. Pliny’s character of this philosopher is too interesting to be omitted. “ If ever polite learning flourished at Rome, it certainly does at present. Of this I could give you many instances ; but I will content myself with naming only Euphrates the philosopher. When in my youth 1 served in the army in Syria, I had an opportunity of conversing familiarly with this excellent man, and took some pains to gain his afiFection ; though that indeed was not difficult ; for he is exceedingly open to access, and full of that gentle¬ ness of manners which he teaches. Euphrates is possessed of shining talents, which cannot fail to interest even the unlearned. He discourses with great accuracy, dignity, and elegance, and frequently rises into the sublimity and luxuriance of Plato himself. His style is copious and diversi¬ fied, and so wonderfully sweet, as to captivate even the most reluctant auditor. Add to all this, his graceful form, comely aspect, long hair, and large ! white beard ; circumstances which, though they may probably be thought trifling and accidental, contribute, however, to procure him much rever¬ ence. There is no disgusting negligence in his dress; his countenance is grave, but not austere ; his approach commands respect, without creating awe. With the strictest sanctity he unites the most perfect politeness of manners. He inveighs against vice, not against men ; and, without chas¬ tising, reclaims the offender. You listen with fixed attention to his exhor¬ tations, and even when convinced, still hang with eagerness upon his lips.”* If this testimony to the uncommon merit of Euphrates be compared with the praises bestowed upon him by Epictetus-|- and Eusebius, J the censures i of Philostratus, will appear deserving of nothing but contempt. In confor¬ mity to the principles of the Stoic philosophy, Euphrates, when he found his strength worn out by disease and old age, voluntarily put a period to his life by drinking hemlock, having first, for some unknown reason, ob¬ tained permission from the emperor Adrian. § Another illustrious ornament of the Stoic school, who claims respectful i attention both for his wisdom and virtues, is Epictetus. j] This eminent philosopher was born at Hierapolis, in Phrygia, in a servile condition, and was sold as a slave to Epaphroditus, one of Nero’s domestics. Ancient writers are agreed that Epictetus was lame, but differ with respect to the cause of his lameness. Suidas says that he lost one of his legs when he was young, in consequence of a defluxion; Simplicius asserts that he was born lame; Celsus relates that, wdren his master, in order to torture him, bended his : leg, Epictetus, without discovering any sign of fear, said to him, “ You . will break it and when his tormentor had broken the leg, he only said, “ Did I not tell you you would break it ?” Others ascribe his lameness to the heavy chains with which his master loaded him.^ Having at length, by some means which are not related, obtained his manumission, Epictetus retired to a small hut within the city of Rome, where, with nothing more than the bare necessaries of life, he devoted himself to the study of philosophy. Here he passed his days entirely alone, till his humanity led him to take the charge of a child, whom a friend of his had through poverty exposed, and to provide it with a nurse. Having * Plin. Ep. 1. i. ep. 10. f Arrian, I. iv. c. 8. p. 427. + Adv. Hierocl. c. 33. § Dio, 1, Ixix. II Simplic. Prooem. comm, in Enchir. Ep. Suidas. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iii. p. 259. ^ Simplic. ib. p. 70. Orig. Adv. Cels. 1. vii. p. 378. Arrian, 1. i. c. 8. 366 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. furnished himself, by diligent study, with a competent knowledge of the principles of the Stoic philosophy, and having received instructions in rhe¬ toric from Rufus, who is said to have been himself a bold and successful corrector of public manners, Epictetus, notwithstanding his poverty became a popular moral preceptor. He was an acute and judicious observer of manners. His eloquence was simple, majestic, nervous, and penetrating. His doctrine inculcated the purest morals ; and his life was an admirable pattern of sobriety, magnanimity, and the most rigid virtue.* Neither his humble station, nor his singlar merit, could, however, screen Epictetus from the tyranny of the monster Domitian. With the rest of the philosophers he was banished, under a mock decree of the senate from Italy. But he bore his exile with a degree of firmness worthy of a philo- jj sopher who called himself a citizen of the world, and could boast that, wherever he went, he carried his best treasures along with him. At Nicopolis, the place which he chose for his residence, he prosecuted his design of correcting vice and folly by the precepts of philosophy. Wherever he could obtain an auditory he discoursed concerning the true way of at¬ taining contentment and happiness ; and the wisdom and eloquence of his discourses were so highly admired, that it became a common practice among the more studious of his hearers to commit them to writing.-|- It is uncertain whether Epictetus returned to Rome after the death of Domitian ; but the respect which Adrian entertained for him renders it probable. The “ Conference between Adrian and Epictetus,” if the work were authentic, would confirm this probability ; but it is impossible to com¬ pare it with his genuine remains without pronouncing it spurious.;J; Epictetus flourished from the time of Nero to the latter end of the reign of Adrian; but it is improbable, notwithstanding the assertion of Themistius§ and Suidas,|| that his life was protracted to the reign of the Antonines ; for Aulus Gellius,^ who wrote in their time, speaks of Epictetus as lately dead ; and the emperor Marcus Aurelius mentions him only to lament his loss : whereas, had he been living when that prince engaged preceptors of different sects, it is not likely that he would have overlooked the first orna¬ ment of the Porch, or preferred his disciple .Junius Rusticus. The memory of Epictetus was so highly respected, that, according to Lucian, the * * § earthen lamp by which he used to study was sold for three thousand drachms.** His beautiful Moral Manual, or Enchiridion, and his “ Dis¬ sertations” collected by Arrian, ff were drawn up from notes which his ' disciples took from his lips. Simplicius has left a Commentary upon his doctrine, in the Eclectic manner. There are also various fragments of the wisdom of Epictetus preserved by Antoninus, Gellius, Stobseus, and ' others. Although the doctrine of Epictetus is less extravagant than that of any other Stoic, his writings every M'here breathe the true spirit of Stoicism. ^ The sum of his moral precepts is, dvexov kui dwexov, Endure and abstain. JJ He inculcates contentment upon the principle that all things happen * Siraplic. p. 70. 180. Aul. Cell. 1. i. c. 2. Arrian, 1. i. c. 8, 9. 12. 1. iii. c. 15. 23. Orig. 1. vi. p. 283. f Aul. Gell. 1. XV. c. 11. 1. xvii. c. 19. Suet, in Domit. c. 10. Lucian, in Peregr. t. iv. p. 283. Arrian, Praef. et Diss. X Spartian. in Hadr. c. 10. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 502. v. xiii. p. 557. § Orat. 5. II In Epict. ^ L. ii. c. 18. ). vii. sect. 19. ** Adv. Indoct. lib. ement. t. ii. p. 767. •f f Phot. Cod. 58. Lucian. Pseudom. t, i. p. 524. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iii. p. 269. 246. It Gell. 1. xvii. c. 19. Chap. 2. S. 7- THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 367 according to the appointment of Providence, that is, as the Stoics under¬ stood the term, according to the inevitable order of fate. Sextus, of Chmronea* * * § in Bceotia, must be added to the list of Stoics of this period. His eminence in philosophy may be inferred from the account which Antoninus-j- gives of the able and faithful manner in which he dis¬ charged the duties of a preceptor. Such was the respect which his illus¬ trious pupil continued to entertain for him, that after he was nominated to the succession in the imperial power, he frequently visited Sextus, to converse with him upon philosophical subjects ; and after he assumed the purple often consulted him in the administration of justice. Certain “ Dissertations against Scepticism,” which are commonly annexed to the works of Sextus Empiricus, were probably written by this Sextus of Chaeronea.J The last ornament of the Stoic school, who remains to be mentioned, is the great and good emperor, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus ;§ a man not less distinguished by his learning, wisdom, and virtue, than by his imperial dignity. We shall here consider him only in the light of a phi¬ losopher, and a patron of philosophers. Aurelius, who was born in the year one hundred and twenty-one, after having been early instructed in languages, eloquence, and liberal arts, followed the natural bias of his genius, in devoting himself to the study of philosophy under Sextus Junius, and other professors of the Stoie school. At the same time he omitted no opportunity of acquainting himself with the tenets of other sects. At twelve years of age he forsook the common pursuits and amusements of childhood, and assumed the habit of a Stoic philosopher. In order to inure himself to the hardiness of the Stoic character, he used to sleep upon the ground, with no other covering than his cloak ; and it was with great difficulty that his mother prevailed upon him to make use of a leathern couch. So great was the respect which he always retained for his preceptors, that he honoured their memory with statues, and kept their busts, or portraits, in his domestic temple. || The accomplishments and virtues of this excellent youth recommended him to the favour of the emperor Adrian, who conducted him rapidly through the several stages of advancement, and who appointed Antoninus Pius his successor upon the express condition that Aurelius should be next in succession. Aurelius, far from being elated with these honours, upon his removal from his father’s house to the emperor’s, discovered great reluctance, and expressed strong apprehensions of the difficulties and hazards of government. After his advancement, he continued to treat his parents with the same respect, and to pay the same regard to their advice and authority as he had before always done. Nor did he suffer the engagements or avocations of his high station to divert him from the prosecution of his studies. Under the direction of Apollonius the Chal- cidian, a Stoic philosopher, he studied philosophy as the foundation of policy, in order to qualify himself for the offices of government.^ During the life of Antoninus Pius, that emperor was greatly assisted in the affairs of government by Aurelius, who gave him every possible proof • Suidas. Apul. Metam. c. 1. Eutrop. 1. viii. Dio, 1. Ixxi. Themist. Orat. ii. t De Seipso, 1. i. sect. 9. Capitolin. in Marc. c. 3. 1; Fabr. Bib. Gr. vol. xii. p. 617. § Xiphilin. Herodian. Victor. Eutr. Zonar. Capitolin. Suidas. 11 Capitolin. c. 2. 4. De Seipso, 1. i. sect. 1 — 17. Philostr. Vit. Soph. 1. ii. c. 1. Dio, 1. 69. 71. Macrob. Sat. 1. v. c. i. ^ Capitol, c. 4, 0. Spart. in Hadr. c. 23. Dio, 1. 71. 368 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. of probity, fidelity, and affection. After the death of the emperor, which happened in the year one hundred and sixty-one, Marcus Aurelius Anto¬ ninus was, with the unanimous concurrence of the senate and people, advanced to the purple ; and through the whole course of his reign he exercised his power under the direction of philosophy, and by his justice and clemency obtained the general love of his subjects.* It is much to be lamented that the mild and gentle spirit which this emperor unquestionably possessed should, with respect to the Christians, have so far yielded to the importunity of inferior governors, and the tumultuous complaints of the people, that in several provinces, particularly in Gaul, he permitted them to be harassed by persecution. Perhaps too, that false notion of the character and conduct of the Christians, which led him, with many others, to mistake their meritorious perseverance for cul¬ pable obstinacy, might have some share in producing those severities which were continued through his whole reign. j- An invasion from the north having been, not without great difficulty, repelled, the emperor devoted his attention to the institution of useful laws, and the correction of civil and moral disorders. He never failed to give encouragement to such as distinguished themselves by their talents or merit, and to recommend the strictest morality by his own example. Whilst he was indefatigable in his attention to public affairs, he^filled up every hour of leisure with philosophical studies. He suffered no material incident to pass without writing such reflections upon it as might serve to establish in the mind the habit of virtuous fortitude. This practice pro¬ duced those Meditations., which are deservedly reckoned among the most valuable remains of Stoic philosophy. Modesty, and humanity, the fairest fruits of wisdom, were virtues peculiarly conspicuous in the character of this amiable prince. He despised flattery, refused magnificent titles, and would suffer no temples or altars to be erected in honour of his name. When the rebellion in Syria was suppressed, and the head of Aulus Cas¬ sius, the leader of the revolt, was brought to Rome, the emperor received it with manifest tokens of regret, and ordered it to be buried, j: During an interval of peace, Aurelius took a journey to Athens. His route was marked with actions worthy of his character : and when he ar¬ rived at the ancient seat of the Muses, he gave many welcome proofs of his love of learning and philosophy, by appointing public professors, libe¬ rally endowing the schools, conferring honours upon persons of distinguished merit, and performing other acts of imperial munificence.§ Returning to Rome, the emperor retired to Lavinium, with the design of devoting himself to his favourite studies. But, after a short interval, an irruption of Scythians, and other Northern people, obliged him to lead his forces against them. From this expedition he returned victorious ; but, in his way home, he was seized at Vienna with a mortal disease. Aurelius met his end with great firmness ; expressing, in the true spirit of Stoicism, indifference to life, and contempt of death. He died in the sixtieth year of his age. 1 1 Through his whole life, this illustrious philosopher exhibited a shining example of Stoic equanimity. His countenance remained unaltered by * Capitol, c. 6, 7, 8. t Conf. Amm. Marcell. 1. xxiv. c. 4. Plin. Ep. 1. x. 97. De Seipso, 1. xi. sect. 3. A Rescript, sent to Asia. y)rolubiting the persecution of the Christians, has been ascribed to this emperor ; but it is more probable that it was issued by his predecessor, Antoninus Pius. See Lardner’s Heathen Test. v. ii. p. 159. X Capitol, c. xii. 23. § Capitol, c. 24 — 26. Philostr. 1. ii. c. 1. sect. 12. Dio, 1. 71. II Capitol, c. 28, 29. Herodian, c. 4, 5. Chap. 2. S. 8. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 369 any emotions of joy or sorrow ; he never suffered himself to be elated by victory, or depressed by defeat. The severity, which the philosophical system he espoused was adapted to cherish, was, nevertheless, happily chastised by an innate benevolence of heart; and it is deservedly repre¬ sented as his highest praise, that he was able, by the united influence of his precepts and example, to make bad citizens good, and the good still better.* * * § The philosophical Commentaries of Aurelius Antoninus, addressed to himself, Ilpde 'Eavrdv, are Meditations, or Soliloquies, written for his own u'^.f In order to form a true judgment of their meaning and spirit, they ' should be read, not as detached moral maxims, or reflections, but as con¬ nected with, and founded upon, the principles of Stoicism’. Through inattention to this precaution, a meaning has sometimes been annexed to the words of Aurelius, which is inconsistent with his system, and which he, probably, never conceived. From the time of the Antonines to that of Alexander Severus, there were public schools of the Stoics in Athens and Alexandria : but their doctrine was corrupted by the prevalence of the Eclectic philosophy ; and where we might expect to And disciples of Zeno, we only meet with fol¬ lowers of Ammonius.j: \ SECTION VIII.— OF THE STATE OF THE EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY UNDER THE ROMAN EMPERORS. The Epicurean sect, though degenerated from the simple manners of its founder, continued to flourish through a long course of years under the * Roman emperors. This was owing in part to the freedom of manners which it permitted, and in part to the boldness with which it combated superstition ; but principally to the strict union which subsisted among the members of this school, and the implicit deference, which they unani¬ mously agreed to pay to the doctrines of their master.§ The succession of disciples in this sect was, as Laertius attests, || uninterrupted, even when other schools began to fail. In many places the doctrine of Epicurus w'as publicly taught; and at Athens the Epicurean school was endowed with a fixed stipend. There can be no doubt, therefore, that there must have been among the Epicureans eminent teachers of their system ; and it may seem * Capit. 1. c. Euseb. Hist. Red. 1. iv. c. 12. f Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. iv. p. 21 — 25. i I Vidend. Schilter Manud. Phil. Mor. ad. Jurisp. c. 1. Gravina, Grig. Jur. Civ. 1. i. sect. 44. Otto de Stoica Vet. Jur. Pliil. Lips. Manud. ad Phil. Stoic. Diss. viii. xiv. Werensels, de Met. Orat. Brucker, Diss. de Stoic, subdol. Christ. Imit. Temp. Helv. t. iii. sect. 2. Thomas de Exust. Mund. Stoic. Diss. x. Menag. Hist, mulier. Phil, sect. 75. Voss, de Sect. c. 19. Jons. Scr. H. Ph. 1. i. c. 20. 1. ii. c. 18. 1. iii. c. 7. Cozzand. de Mag. Ant. Ph. 1. iii. c. 4. Heum. Act. Ph. v. iii. p. 110. y. i. p. 743. v. iii. р. 486. Gale, Praef. ad Opusc. Mythol. Stoll. Hist. Ph. Mor. sect. 223. 230. 234. 237- Voss, de Hist. Gr, 1. ii. c. 1. Senec. Vit. a Lipsio ap. Sen. Op. Vit. a Schotto, Gen. 1665. Fabr. Bib. Lat. t. iii. p. 496. De Servies Femmes des Douze Caesars, p. ii. p. 294. Blount, Cens. Cel. Auth. p. 109. Malebranche, de la Recherche, &c. P. i. 1. ii. с. 4. Paschius, de Var. Mod. Trad. Mor. c. iii. sect. 17. Diss. de Secta Elpistica Misc. Berol. t. v. Obs. ult. Morhoff. Polyh. Lit. t. i. 1. vi. c. 2. Voss, de Hist. Gr. 1. ii. c. 15. Epict. Vit. a Wolfio, Bellegardio, Boileavio. Fabr. Diss. de Eloq. Epict. in Fascicule'. Budd. de Mor. Phil. p. 103. Heins, de Phil. Stoic Orat. p. 301. Scbaelfer, de Phil. Ital. c. 10. Crellius de virepffocpois et ^daScpois, Epict. Lips. 1716. Vit. Anton, a Daciero et a Wollio. Gataker, Praef. ed. Lond. 1730. Koeler, Diss. de Phil. Aur. Ant. Budd. in Phil. Mor. Anton. Amoen. Lit. t. viii. p. 443. § Senecae, Ep. 33. Themist. Orat. iv. Euseb. Praep. 1. xiv. c. 5. || L. x. sect. 9. B B 370 OF THE PHIT.OSOI’MY OF 15ook III. strange, that their names should not have been transmitted to posterity : but , if the genius of this sect be considered, the difficulty will be obviated; for, such was the superstitious reverence which the disciples of this school paid to the decisions of their master, that they neither ventured to add to his system, nor even to exercise their judgment in writing commentaries upon it ; their whole concern was, to transmit the tenets and maxims of Epicurus uncorrupted to posterity. Hence, whatever celebrity any of the preceptors of this sect might have attained during their lives, their names soon fell into oblivion. Among the learned men of this period, there were, how¬ ever, some who held the memory of Epicurus in high estimation, and in many particulars adopted his doctrine, and who, therefore, may not impro¬ perly be ranked in the class of Epicureans. Of these the principal are, Pliny the Elder, Celsus, Lucian, and Diogenes Laertius. Caius Plinius Secundus, called Pliny the Elder, to distinguish him from his nephew Caius Plinius Csecilius, M as born in the reign of Tiberius, about the year twenty-three, and is commonly said to have been a native of Verona. In his youth, he took upon him the military character, and served in the army in the German war ; but he soon turned the course of his am¬ bition into the channel of learning, and by the indefatigable use of excellent talents acquired extensive and profound erudition. During the life of Nero, his dread of the savage spirit of that tyrant induced him to prosecute his studies in private. Towards the close of the reign of that emperor, he' wrote a critical work on ambiguity of expression. Under the more favour¬ able auspices of Vespasian, the superior abilities of Pliny had an opportunity' of displaying themselves, not only in literary speculations, but in public affairs ; for that emperor admitted him to his confidence, and employed him in important posts. In the midst of innumerable avocations, he pro¬ secuted his studies with a degree of industry and perseverance scarcely to be paralleled. What his nephew relates on this head must not be omitted. After enumerating his writings, he says :* ' “ You will M'onder how a man of business could find time to write so much, and often upon such difficult subjects. You will be still more sur¬ prised when you are informed, that for some time he engaged in the pro¬ fession of an advocate; that he died in his fifty-sixth year; and that, from the time of his quitting the bar to his death, he M’as busily occupied in the execution of the highest posts, and in the service of his prince. But he had a quick apprehension, joined to uuM'earied application. In summer he alM'ays began his studies as soon as it was night; in winter, generally at one in the morning, but never later than two, and sometimes at midnight. He slept little, and this often without retiring to his chamber. After a short and light repast at noon, according to the custom of our ancestors, he would frequently, in summer, if he was disengaged from business, recline in the sun ; some author, in the meantime, being read to him, from which he made extracts and observations. This indeed was his constant practice in reading; for he used to say, that no book was so bad, but something might be learned from it. When this was over, he commonly went into the cold bath, and as soon as he came out of it, took a slight refreshment, and then reposed himself for a short time. After which, as if it had been a new day, he resumed his studies till supper time, when a book was again read to him, upon which he made some cursory remarks. In summer, he rosf from supper by day-light, and in winter, as soon as it was dark, and this’ was an invariable rule with him. Such was his manner of life, amidst th( noi.se and hurry of the town. But in the country, his whole time was * L. iii. ej). 5. Chap. 2. S. 8. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 371 devoted to study. Even in the bath, while he was rubbed and wiped, either • some book was read to him, or he dictated himself. When he was travel¬ ling, he attended to no other object. A secretary constantly attended him in his chariot. For the same reason he was always, at Rome, conveyed from one place to another in a chair. I remember he once reproved me for walking : ‘ You need not,’ says he, ‘lose so much time: ’ for he thought all time lost, which was not devoted to study. It was this intense appli¬ cation which enabled my uncle to write so many volumes, besides a hundred and sixty, which he left me, containing extracts and observations, written in a very small character.” Out of all the rich fruits of Pliny’s industry, one work only has escaped the ravages of time, his “’Natural History of the World a valuable trea¬ sury of ancient knowledge ; concerning which, notwithstanding all its ■ errors and extravagancies, we do not scruple, with some allowance for rhetorical decoration, to subscribe to the judgment of the Younger Pliny, who calls it “ a comprehensive and learned work scarcely less various than ; nature herself.” The author, in the dedication to Vespasian, makes this : modest apology for the defects of his history : “ The path which I have taken has hitherto been, in a great measure, untrodden ; and holds forth to the traveller few enticements. None of our own writers have so much as attempted these subjects; and even among the Greeks no one has treated of them in their full extent. The generality of authors in their pursuits attend chiefly to amusement ; and those who have the character of writing with greath depth and refinement are involved : in impenetrable obscurity. Such is the extent of my undertaking, that it comprehends every topic which the Greeks include under the name of : Encyclopcedia ; of which, however, some are as yet utterly unknown, and others have been rendered uncertain by excessive subtlety. Other parts of my subject have been so often handled, that readers are become cloyed with them. Arduous indeed is the task to give what is old an appearance of novelty ; to add weight and authority to what is new ; to cast a lustre upon subjects which time has obscured ; to render acceptable what is become trite and disgusting ; to obtain credit to doubtful relations ; and, in a word, to represent every thing according to nature, and with all its natural pro¬ perties. A design like this, even though incompletely executed, will be allowed to be grand and noble.” He adds afterwards, “ Many deflects and errors have, I doubt not, escaped me ; for, besides that I partake of the common infirmities of human nature, I have written this work in the midst of engagements, at broken periods which I have stolen from sleep.” ‘ It would be unjust to the memory of this great man, not to admit this apology in its full extent; and it would be still more unjust, to judge of the merit of his work, by comparing it with modern productions in natural history, written after the additional observations of seventeen hundred years. Some allowance ought also to be made for the carelessness and ignorance of transcribers, who have so mutilated and corrupted this work, that, in many places, the author’s meaning lies almost beyond the reach of conjecture. With respect to philosophical opinions, Pliny did not rigidly adhere to any sect, but occasionally borrowed such tenets from each, as suited his present inclination or purpose. He reprobates the Epicurean tenet of an infinity of worlds; favours the Pythagorean notion of the harmony of the spheres; speaks of tlie universe as God, after the manner of the Stoics ; • Fabr. Bib. Lat. t. i. p. 405. t. ii. p. 5G2. : jB B 2 372 OF THE IHIILOSOPHY OF Book III. and sometimes seems to pass over into the field of the Sceptics. For the most part, however, he yields towards the doctrine of Epicurus.* The insatiable desire, which this philosopher always discovered to become acquainted with the wonders of nature, at last proved fatal to him. An eruption of the volcano of Mount Vesuvius happening while Pliny lay, with the fleet under his command, at Misenum, his curiosity induced him to approach so near to the mountain, that he vvas suffocated by the gross and noxious vapours which it sent forth. An interesting account of the particulars of this tragical event is given by Pliny the Younger it hap¬ pened in the year 79. Celsus, the adversary of Christianity to whom Origen replies, though 9 in his attack he sometimes makes use of Platonic and Stoic weapons, is expressly ranked by Lucian, ;j; as well as Origen, § among the followers of Epicurus : and this supposition best accounts for the violence with which he opposed the Christian religion ; for an Epicurean would of course reject without examination, all pretensions to divine communications or powers. The extracts from his writings, preserved by Origen, at the same time that they prove him to have been an inveterate enemy to Christianity, show i that he was not destitute of learning and ability. Celsus, besides his book against the Christians, wrote a piece entitled, “ Precepts of Living Well,’’ ij and another “ Against Magic ; ” but no part of his writings are extant, except the quotations made by Origen. Lucian dedicates to him his account of Alexander the impostor. That Lucian’s friend was the same Celsus, against whom Origen wrote, appears from this circumstance, that both Lucian and Origen ascribe to him the work against magic. Celsus was i born tovvards the close of Adrian’s reign, and was contemporary with 1 Lucian under Aurelius Antoninus.|| . Lucian,^ the celebrated satirist, was a native of Samosata, on the bor¬ ders of the Euphrates, and flourished in the time of the Antonines and Commodus. In his youth, his father, who was of low rank, was desirous to have diverted his attention from letters, and put him under the care of his uncle, who was a statuary ; but being unfortunate in his first attempts, i he deserted his art, and fled to Antioch, where he engaged, not without ■ success, in the profession of a pleader. He soon, however, grew tired of this employment, and gave himself up entirely to the practice of eloquence, i in the character of a sophist or rhetorician. In this capacity, he travelled ji through several countries, particularly Spain, Gaul, and Greece. At length, he passed over to the study of philosophy. Without rigorously addicting himself to any sect, he gathered up from each whatever he found useful, and ridiculed, with an easy vein of humour and pleasantry, what¬ ever he thought trifling or absurd. Like Maximus Tyrius, Themistius, and several other eminent men of this age, he united the arts of eloquence, and the graces of fine writing, with the precepts of philosophy.** Photius,-]''}- and several modern writers, have ranked Lucian among the Sceptics : they might more properly have given him a place among the Socratics. But, in truth, there is no sect which he seems to have been so * Hist. Nat. 1. ii. c. 1. 3. 5. 7. f L. vi. Ep. 16. X Luc. de. Alexandro. § Origen cont. Celsium, I. J. p. 8. II Orig. cont. Cels. 1. i. p. 52. iii. 136. iv. 204. 206. 215. v. 249. vii. 342. Fabr. Bib. Gr. V. ii. p. 809. v. v. p. 219. ^ Suidas. ** In Revivisc. t. iii. p. 156. Apolog. pro Merced, coiid. t. i. 385. Herod, t. iii. p. 219. Luc. Hist. t. ii. p. 3?9. Conviv. t. iv. p. 366. ft Cod. 128. Chap. 2. S. 8. THE UOMAN EMPIRE, 373 much inclined to favour as the Epicurean. He speaks of Epicurus as the only philosopher who had been acquainted with the nature of things, and of his followers as, in the midst of mad men, alone retaining a sound mind. Himself a sworn enemy to imposture, he preferred the sect Avhich professed to annihilate superstition ; and he dedicated his narrative of the impostures of Alexander to Celsus, an Epicurean.* * * § ’ Whatever credit be allowed to Lucian as a humorous satirist, he i s however, much to be censured for having in many instances, suffered his propensity towards ridicule to lead him into severe and unjust sarcasms against the w'hole body of philosophers, and into a credulous, or illiberal, adoption of tales injurious to the most respectable characters of antiquity. His misrepresentation of the doctrine, and his unsupported insinuations against the character of Socrates; the contempt with which he treats Chrysippus and Aristotle, as mere triflers ; and the absurd stories which he admits, without adducing any evidence of their authenticity, are vio¬ lations of candour and truth, for which no apology can be made, unless it be said, that Lucian introduced them for no other purpose than to enliven his satire, without seriously believing them himself, or expecting that they should be believed by his readers.-f- His ridicule of the Christians was owing to another cause, an entire misapprehension of their character and of the nature of their religion ; and is therefore wholly unworthy of notice. Under Aurelius Antoninus, Lucian was appointed procurator of Egypt, with a liberal salary ; but how long he continued there, or where he passed the latter part of his life, does not appear. J He lived to the age of eighty, or, as some say, ninety years, and died in the reign of Corn- modus. His dialogues are still extant: they are written with humour, and discover great erudition. We must not close our account of eminent men who favoured the Epi¬ curean sect, without mentioning Diogenes Laertius, a writer, to wdiom the world is indebted for many facts respecting the history of philosophy. His predilection for Epicurianism is shown in the extraordinary pains he has taken to give an accurate summary of the doctrine of Epicurus, and a full detail of his life ; nevertheless, he sometimes seems to favour the doc¬ trine of Divine Providence. Whatever system he espoused, or if he was in reality addicted to none, as a collector of philosophical facts he is entitled to the praise of having cast much light upon the history of the Grecian sects. His Memoirs of “ The Lives, Opinions and Apophthegms of Celebrated Philosophers,” § as a repository of materials for the history of philosophy no where else to be met with, is exceedingly valuable; but in other respects it is a defective and faulty work. The author has col¬ lected from the ancients with little judgment ; patched together contradic¬ tory accounts ; relied upon doubtful authorities ; admitted as facts many tales which were produced in the schools of the Sophists ; and been inat¬ tentive to methodical arrangement. The work appears, on the w hole, to have been the production of a credulous and feeble mind, and by no means to deserve implicit credit. Of the author nothing more is known than is to be gathered from his writings. From his surname 'O AaEprtoc,]! it is probable that he was a native of Laertes, a town in Cilicia. He certainly flourished before the time of Constantine ; for Sopater, who lived under * Hermot. t. ii. p. 170. Alex. t. i. p, 549 — 51. 569, 570. 576. 5S1 — 84. t Ib. Vit. Auctio, &c. t. iii. 105 — 128. Piscator. t Quomodo Hist. Scrib. t. ii. p. 343. de Merced. Cond. t. i. p. 382. Tragopodr. t. iii. p. 672. Ocyp. p. 722. Ilercul. Gall. t. i. p. 81 1. § Menag. ad Laert. II Phot. Cod. 161. 374< OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF Book III. that emperor, compiled, as Photius attests, the sixth book of his Excerpta from the writings of Diogenes Laertius. His “ Lives” probably appeared about the middle of the third century.* * * § SECTION IX.— OF THE STATE OF THE SCEPTIC SECT UNDER THE EMPERORS. At the period of which we are now treating, the Sceptic philosophy was either overborne by the general prevalence of the Dogmatic systems,,^ . or concealed under the less obnoxious form of the Academic doctrine. A^ jj few words may therefore suffice concerning the state of Scepticism, or^/ Pyrrhonism, under the Roman emperors. Contradictory in its first principles to the common notions of mankind, who are inclined to credit their senses ; disgraced by the extravagant i practices of some of its professors ; opposed with violence by the whole body of Platonists and Stoics ; and destitute of countenance among the great ; it was no wonder that the school of Pyrrho was little frequented, and that few persons were found, who were willing to sacrifice interest, or fame, to the empty profession of the science of knowing nothing. Pyrrhonism, however, was not at this time entirely without avowed advocates. Diogenes Laertius mentions ■f- a continued succession of learned Sceptics from the time of Cicero, when Oenesidemus reformed the Sceptic school at Alexandria : Zeuxippus, Zeuxis, Antiochus, Menodotus, Herodotus, Sextus, and Saturninus. Of these, as if the medical profes¬ sion peculiarly disposed the mind to scepticism, several were physicians. Besides these, other Sceptics are mentioned by the ancients. So that when Seneca asks,J “ Who is there now who teaches the doctrine of Pyrrho ?” he must be understood either to speak of the public professors of Pyrrhonism, or to represent this school as annihilated in comparison with that of the Stoics. ' Only one name occurs among the Sceptics of this period, which merits particular notice, that of Sextus Empiricus, § a celebrated writer. According to Suidas, he was by birth an African ; but Sextus himself dis- ' tinguishes between his own country and Lesbia; the place of his nativity therefore remains uncertain. His surname, Empiricus, prefixed to the manuscripts of his works, and given him by Diogenes Laertius, j| indicates *that he was a physician of that class which was distinguished by the title of Empiric : and this he himself confirms.^ It has been strenuously maintained, that Sextus Empiricus was the same person with Sextus Cheeronensis, preceptor to Aurelius Antoninus: but it appears from the list of Sceptics given by Laertius,** that Sextus Empiricus was the third in succession from Menodotus and Theudes, who * Vidend. Cozzaiid. de Magistr. Ant. Phil. 1. vi. c. 2. Masson. Plin. Vit. Cagalin. de Patr. Plin. ed Plin. Wechelinn. Palermus de Patr. PI. Veron. 1608. Voss, de Hist. Lat. 1. i. c. 29. Blount. Cens. p. 128. Marville Melanges de Liter, t. iii. p. 438. Par¬ ker de Deo, Disp. i. p. 63. Reimman. Hist. Ath. c. 28 Stoll. Hist. Ph. Pag. p. 72. Horn. Hist. Ph. 1. v. c. 4. Cudworth. c. iv. sect. 36. Jons. 1. iv. p. 332. 1. iii. c. 10. 12. Voss, de Sect. c. v. sect. 2. c. xiii. sect. 3. c. xiv. sect. 6. c. vi. sect. 24. c. vii. sect. 24. Erasm. 1. xxx. Ep. 5. Heuman. Act. Phil., vol. i. p. 323. 328. Laert. Ed. Wetst. Amst. 1693. t L. ix. sect. 116. + Qi,. Nat. 1. vii. c. 32. § Laert. 1. ix. sect. 116. Suidas. || L. c. ^ Conf. adv. Gramm, sect. 161. 260. adv. Log. 1. ii. sect. 191. 202. 327, 328. ** L. c. sect. 126. Chap. 3. THE ROMAN EMPIRE. 375 arc mentioned by Galen in a work* * * § which he wrote in the time of Aurelian, as at that time the last of the Empirics ; consequently Sextus Empiricus had not then began to flourish, and could not have been the emperor’s preceptor. It is probable that Sextus Empiricus appeared to¬ wards the close of the life of Galen, who died upwards of thirty years after he wrote the work just mentioned, in the seventh year of the reign of Severus, or in the year two hundred. Sextus Empiricus was entirely devoted to the Sceptic philosophy; as fully appears from his “ Institutes of Pyrrhonism,” the work to which we have been almost wholly indebted for the materials of our account of this sect. He also wrote, at large, in refutation of the Dogmatists in his treatise “ Against the Mathematicians.” His works discover great eru¬ dition, and an extensive acquaintance with the ancient systems of philo¬ sophy ; and, on this account chiefly, merit an attentive perusal. After the age of Sextus, there were not wanting persons, who followed the Sceptic method of philosophising,f either under the name of Aca¬ demics or Pyrrhonists ; but the sect, through the spread of the Alexan¬ drian philosophy, and the Christian religion, by degrees disappeared, and remained for many centuries wholly unnoticed. j; CHAPTER HI. OF THE ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY. Having completed the history of the Grecian philosophy, during the period of the Roman Republic and Empire, before we pass on to the con¬ sideration of the state of philosophy among the Jews, Arabians, and Christians, it will be necessary that we endeavour to trace the remains of Barbaric philosophy in the East. In our history of the ancient philosophy of the East, it appeared that, , from the most remote times, the Oriental philosophers endeavoured to explain the nature and origin of things by the principle of Emanation from an Eternal Fountain of Being. That through succeeding ages this doctrine remained, and was taught in schools of philosophy in the more civilized regions of Asia and Africa, is highly probable from several con¬ siderations ; which we shall proceed distinctly to lay before the reader, after premising, that we do not undertake to pi ove, that this species of philosophy existed under any distinct name, or can be referred, with cer¬ tainty to any single author, or leader, but merely, that a certain metaphy¬ sical system, chiefly respecting the derivation of all natures, spiritual and ^ material, by emanation from the First Fountain, was, before the com^r mencement of the Christian era, taught in the East, whence it gradually spread through the Alexandrian, Jewish, and Christian schools. ^ It is well known, that at the rise of the Grecian sects, the Eastern countries were frequently visited by the sages who travelled in search of wisdom. Clemens Alexandrinus, who was well acquainted with Oiiental history, says,§ that the Greeks borrowed w^hat was most valuable in * De Ilypotyposi Emperica. f Laert. 1. c. Agathias, I. ii. p. 67. t Vidend. Huet. de la Foiblesse, &c. I. i. c. 14. Sext. Emp. ed. Lips. 1718. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. iii. p. 591. v. ii. j . 91. Lactant. Inst. 1. hi. c. 5. I'luseb. Prep. 1. xiv. c. 18. § Siromat. I. i. p. 303. 376 OF THE ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY. Book III. philosophy from barbarians ; for philosophy was publicly taught by the Brachmans, the Odrysii, the Getae, the Chaldeans, the inhabitants of Arabia Felix and Palestine, the Persians, and many other nations. Among i the Grecian philosophers who travelled into the East was Democritus, i who visited Persia after the schools of the Magi had been reformed by '< Zoroaster, and travelled to Chaldea and other Eastern countries, for the i sake of learning philosophy. From the account which Pliny gives of this < expedition, some idea may be formed of the nature of that philosophy ! i w’hich Democritus and others found in these schools. “ Democritus,” i says Pliny,* “ undertook what might be more properly called an exile ' i - than a journey, for the purpose of learning magical philosophy ; and, returning home, taught it, in his mysteries, from the writings of certain •- Oriental philosophers, which he illustrated.’’ Accordingly, the philosophy which Democritus taught appears to have been of two kinds ; public, or i that of the Eleatic sect ; and secret, in which he followed the mysteries i of the Chaldean, Persian, and other Eastern Magi. If these facts be compared with the general history of the barbaric philosophy, and parti- g cularly with that of Zoroaster and his doctrine, it will appear exceedingly probable, that the doctrine of Emanation continued to be taught (that is, ig that the Oriental philosophy subsisted) without interruption in the East, : through the period of the Grecian sects. The uninterrupted continuance of the Oriental philosophy may be fur- .j ther inferred from the sudden rise, and rapid spread, of those numerous i heresies, which, under the ostentatious name of Gnosticism, over-ran the il churches of the East. « Porphyry, in his preface to a work of Plotinus against the Gnostics, * says, “ that there were at that time many heretics, among whom were ^ ■ some, who, deriving their heresy from the ancient philosophy, were : followers of Adelphinus. These,” adds he, “ circulated many books of U Alexander the Lybian, Philocoinus, and Demostratus the Lydian, and. ' ■ pretended to teach certain doctrines which they had received from Zoro-’^ ' aster, Zostrianus, Nicotheus, Allogenes, and Mesus, herein, after having been deceived themselves, imposing upon others. These heretics assert that Plato was little able to penetrate into the depths of intelligent natures. Therefore Plotinus frequently refuted them in his public lectures, and • ^Vrote a book, which I have entitled “ A Treatise against the Gnostics,” leaving it to me to manage this business according to my own judgment. Amelius has written forty volumes against the book of Zostrianus ; and I, * Porphyry, have shown by many arguments, that this book, which they ascribe to Zostrianus, is spurious, and of modern date, and has been forged by the authors of the heresy, that their doctrine might appear to be derived from Zoroaster.”-)' From this passage, compared with the general design of Plotinus, in his treatise against the Gnostics, it may be inferred, that prior to the appear¬ ance of the Gnostic heresies among the Christians, a system well known by the name of the Ancient Philosophy, existed in the East; that this philosophy is not to be sought among the Greeks, not even in Plato him¬ self, but is opposed to the Grecian philosophy, as more ancient and more consonant to the truth ; that this philosophy was commonly understood to have been taught by Zoroaster; and that the Christian Gnostics forged books, under the names of Eastern philosophers, from which they pre- * Hist. Nat. 1. XXX. Procem. t Conf. Vit. Plot. c. 3. Plot. En. ii. I. v. p. 20-1. Pref. Porpli. Chap. 3. OF THE ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY. 377 tended to derive their genealogies of emanations from the First Foun¬ tain of Intelligence. Hence, too, the reason appears, why Plotinus deter¬ mined to spend eleven years in the East, to explore the philosophy TAUGHT AMONG THE PERSIANS AND INDIANS.* That the Gnostic heresies were of Eastern origin may be further con¬ cluded from a fragment of Theodotus the Valentinian, commonly annexed to the works of Clemens Alexandrinus, and also preserved by Fabricius, entitled, “ An Epitome of the Writings of Theodotus,” and Ttjg avaToXiKrjg KoXoviJiepr}^ ^iSacTKaXcag, OF THE DOCTRINE CALLED THE Eastern, in the time of Valentinian.-j- This title evidently refers the dreams of Valen¬ tinian to an Oriental source, and therefore supposes the existence of the Oriental philosophy. Eunapius, who was himself of the Alexandrian school, relates, tljat Sosipater was miraculously instructed in philosophy by two strangers, who, after being much importuned, acknowledged that they had been initiated in the Wisdom called Chaldaic. The story, like most of those related by this wwiter, has a fabulous air ; but, stripped of its dis¬ guise, it seems plainly to intimate, that in the Greek school of Jamblicus, which flourished in Cappadocia, the appellation of the Chaldaic, or Eastern, philosophy was well known, and that the teachers of this philosophy com¬ municated their mystical wisdom to those who were prepared to receive it, and particularly to the disciples of the Alexandrian school. To these authorities, in proof of the existence of the Oriental philosophy, it may be added, as a consideration of great weight, that, if all the systems of philosophy distinct from the Grecian sects, which became famous in Asia or Egypt, particularly the Egyptian, Cabbalistic, Gnostic, and Eclectic, be compared, there will be found among them a wonderful agree- ^ ment with the general principles of that system which we call the Oriental philosophy ; whence it seems perfectly reasonable to admit the existence of this philosophy as a common source, and to make use of it as a univer¬ sal key to unlock the mysteries of the rest. Upon these grounds we conclude, that the Oriental philosophy, as a peculiar system of doctrines concerning the Divine Nature, originated in Chaldea, or Persia ; whence it passed through Syria, Asia Minor, and Egypt, and, mixing with other systems, formed many different sects. There seems also to be sufficient ground for referring the formation of the leading doctrines of this philosophy into a regular system to Zoroaster, § whose name the followers of this doctrine prefixed to some of their spurious books, and whose system is fundamentally the same with that afterwards adopted by the Asiatic and Egyptian philosophers. Among the branches from the Zoroastrean stock we must reckon the Gnostic heresies which arose so early in the Christian church. || This is the only source to which they can be satisfactorily traced back ; for they differ materially from the Platonic doctrine, from which they have been supposed to be derived, as Plotinus has fully shown in his treatise against the Gnostics. The mixture of Platonic notions which we find in the Asiatic philosophy, as well as of Oriental doctrines among the later Pla- tonists, may be easily accounted for, from the intercourse which subsisted between the Alexandrian aad Asiatic philosophers, after the schools of Alexandria were established. From that time many Asiatics who were * Vit. Plot. t f Fabric. Bib. Gr. vol. v. p. 13/5. Fragrn. eel. Ulra. 1704. + In iEdesio, p. Cl. § Porphyr. Vit. Plot. c. 13. 16. p. 118. etl. Fabr. il Iren. 1. iii. c. 4. 11. Hieron. Lat. Script c. 21. Epiph. Haeres. 27. sect. 1. Ph. Castr. Haeres. 33. p. 71. ed. Fabr. 378 OF THE ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY. Book III. addicted to the study of philosophy, doubtless visited Alexandria,* and became acquainted with the celebrated doctrines of Plato ; and, by blend¬ ing these with their own, formed an heterogeneous mass of opinions, which in its turn mixed with the system of the Alexandrian schools. f This union of Oriental and Grecian pliilosophy was further promoted by the dispersion of the philosophers of Alexandria in the reign of Ptolemy Physcon ; many of whom, to escape from tyranny, fled into Asia, and opened schools in various places. It was, probably, at the time when the Platonic philosophers of Alexan¬ dria visited the Eastern schools, that certain professors of the Oriental philosophy, prior to the existence of the Christian heresies, borrowed from the Greeks the name of Gnostics, to express their pretensions to a more perfect knowledge of the Divine Nature than others possessed. That these philosophers assumed this vaunting appellation before their tenets were transferred to the Christians, may be concluded from this circum¬ stance, that we find it, among the Christians, not appropriated as a distinct title to any single sect, but made use of as a general denomination of those sects which, after the example of the Pagan philosophers, professed to have arrived at the perfect knowledge of God. The Pagan origin of this appellation seems also plainly intimated in two passages in St. Paul’s epistles ; in one of which he cautions Timothy against dynOecreig rrjg ^pevdwvv/jiov Yvu)(re(i)£, “ the opposition of false science J and in theother,§ warns the Colossians not to be imposed upon by a vain and deceitful phi¬ losophy, framed according to human tradition and the principles of the world, and not according to the doctrine of Christ. But, whatever may be thought concerning the name, after what has been advanced, there can be little room left to doubt, that the tenets, at least, of the Gnostics, existed in the Eastern schools, long before the rise of the Gnostic sects in the Christian church under Basilides, Valentine, and others. The Oriental doctrine of emanation seems frequently alluded to in the New Testament, II in terms which cannot so properly be applied to any other dogmas of the Jewish sects. And it appears, from the authorities to which the Gnostic heretics appeal, that this doctrine was taught in the Apostolic age. These heresies seem to have arisen in Egypt, and to have passed thence into Syria, and into Asia Minor, where they infected the church so early as the reign of Nero. ^ It is much to be regretted that the Greek writers, to whom we are chiefly indebted for our knowledge of the ancient history of philosophy, took so little pains to inform posterity concerning the opinions which, during the time when the Greek sects flourished, were taught in other countries, particularly in Egypt and Asia. In this want of original docu¬ ments concerning the Oriental philosophy, we can form an idea of its peculiar tenets only by comparing the ancient doctrine of the East with that of those sects which sprang from this stock. The Gnostics were chiefly employed in supporting the system of Divine Emanation, taught by Zoroaster and his followers.** They maintained, that all natures, both intelligible, intellectual, and material, are derived, by a succession of emanations, from the infinite fountain of Deity. From • * Ammian. Marc. 1. xxi. c. ult. f Jambl. de Myst. Aigypt. Sect. viii. c. 2, 3. Marin, in Vit. Prod. c. 26. J 1 Tim. vi. 20. § Coloss. ii. 8. II 1 Tim. i. 4 — 7. iv. 7. Tit. i. 14. iii. 9. Conf. Acts, viii. 9, 10. ^ Vitringa Obs. Sac. 1 v. j). 153. 161. Conf.Teriull.de Prescr. adv. Haer. c. 7. Epiphan. Haeres. 24. sect. 6. Jambl. Myst. .Egypt. S. viii. c. 1. ** Theodot. ap. Fabr. 1. c. Plotin. coatr. Gnost. et. Eanead. 2. 1. ix. c. 6. Chap. 3. OF THE ORIENTAL PHILOSOPHY. 379 this secret and inexhaustible abyss, they conceived substantial powers, or natures, of various orders, to flow ; till, at the remote extremity of the emanation, evil demons, and matter, with all the natural and moral evils necessarily belonging to it, were produced. This notion was pursued in the Alexandrian philosophy, in the Jewish Cabbala, and in the Gnostic system, through a long course of fanciful conceptions. The Gnostics con¬ ceived the emanations from Deity to be divided into two classes ; the one comprehending all those substantial powers, which are contained within the Divine essence, and which complete the infinite plenitude of the Divine nature ^ the other, existing externally with respect to the Divine essence, and including all finite and imperfect natures. Within the Divine essence, they, with wonderful ingenuity, imagined a long series of emanative prin¬ ciples, to which they ascribed a real and substantial existence, connected with the first substance as a branch with its root, or a solar ray with the sun. When they began to unfold the mysteries of this system in the Greek language, these substantial powers, which they conceived to be com¬ prehended within the TrX^pwpa, Divine plenitude, they called aiu)vee, tDoiis; and they discoursed about them with as much confidence and familiarity, as if they had been objects of sight. The notion which they entertained of these iDons, like the Platonic notion of ideas, was that of ovaiag avrdg KaO' avrdg, beings which existed distinctly ancfsubstantially. They included within this series the Demiurgus, or maker of the world, whom they sup¬ posed to have been an ^on, so far removed from the first Source of Being as to be allied to matter, and capable of acting upon it. Having conceived both the spiritual and material world to have flowed from the same fountain, their system required substantial virtues, or powers, of two kinds, active and passive : hence, in their figurative and emblematical language, they speak of male and female Aions.* If the reader should think this account of the Gnostic doctrine of ema¬ nation obscure, we request him to lay the blame upon the mystical genius of the fabricators of this fanciful edifice. In the midst of thick darkness, it is scarcely possible that the traveller should not sometimes stumble.-}- * Plotin. contr. Gnost. t Vidend. Mosheim. Diss. de. Gauss, supposit. lib. Brucker, Hist, de Ideis Sect. i. sect. 6. Thomas, Orig. Hist. Phil, et Eccl. sect. 25. Beausobre Hist, des Manich. t. ii. 1. V. c. 2. Basnage, Hist, des Juifs, 1. iii. c. 28. sect. 13. Mosheim, Hist. Christ. Sect. i. p. ii. c. 1. Burnet Arch. 1. i. c. 4—8. Mosheim. in Hist. Christ, ante Car. M. sect. 31. Walchiusin Hist. Haeres. P. i. p. 235. Ernest. Bibl. nov. Theol. p. 43'^. Vitringa Obs. Sac. 1. V. p. 146. Michaelis Intr. N. T. sect. 125. 380 OF THE PHILOSOPHY BOOK IV. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE JEWS. CHAPTER 1. OF THE JEWISH PHILOSOPHY FROM THE TIME OF THE RETUR*^,* FROM THE BABYLONISH CAPTIVITY TO THE DESTRUCTION JERUSALEM. “Vi'' The state of learning and science among the ancient Hebrews, in the® early period of their history, while they resided in their own country, has been already described. From the time of the Babylonish captivity, the Israelites no longer existed as an entire nation. Upon the return of the * two tribes of Judah and Ephraim to Palestine, the other ten tribes being ^ almost entirely dispersed, this remnant of the Hebrews lost their ancient name, and were called Jews.* Passing over the subsequent history of the dispersed tribes, as foo uncertain to afford any interesting particulars con- . cerning the state of philosophy among them, we shall inquire into the philosophical history of the Jews in Palestine from the time of their return from captivity. In this part of our work we must extend the meaning of the term phi¬ losophy ; for, in the strict sense of the word, we find few traces of phi¬ losophy in the history of the Jews. There were not wanting, indeed, among this people, men of ability and learning ; but their general taste and i manners, and particularly their traditionary method of instruction, were so unfavourable to scientific researches, that few philosophers, properly so 1 called, arose in Palestine. Nevertheless, in order to prepare the way for ' an accurate account of the state of philosoply among the Saracens and Christians, it is necessary that we briefly mark the progress of learning and knowledge among the Jews. After the revival of the sacred commonwealth of the Jews, though the spirit of prophecy ceased in the person of Malachi, wise men were raised up by Divine Providence to restore their national worship, to explain to them the divine law, and to conduct their affairs, both civil and religious. Among these, were Esdras, Zerobabel, Nehemiah, and Salthiel. Esdras,, as a scribe well instructed in the law of Moses, certainly takes the first place among the learned Jews of this period, but he cannot with propriety ' be ranked among philosophers ; nor is there any sufficient ground for con- 1 sidering him as the author of the Cabbalistic doctrine.-]' The changes which took place in the Jewish nation, after the Baby¬ lonish captivity, produced material alterations in their philosophical and religious tenets. Two events in the Jewish history must be particularly noticed, on account of the great influence which they had upon the state of opinions : the one, the separation of the Samaritans from the Jews, which * Vid. Basnage, Hist. Jud. 1. vii. c. 4. Budd. Hist. Eccl. V. T. t. ii. p. 523. f D. Knibbe, Hist. Proph. 1. ii. c. 6. Budd. Hist Eccl. V. T. t. ii. p. 942. Esdras. vii. 6, &c. Basnage, 1. iii. c. 5. sect. 1, 2. 1. vii. c. 2. sect. 7. Bu.xtorf. Tiberiad. c. 19. Budd. H. E. t. ii. p. 1019. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 381 began in the time of Esdras ; the other, the settling of a colony of Jews in Egypt under Alexander the Great, which was afterwards so increased by his successors, that the Jews in Egypt were little inferior, either in number or consequence, to those in Judea. About two hundred years before the time of Esdras, when Salmanassar, king of the Assyrians, had carried the ten tribes of Israel captive into Assyria, he repeopled Samaria with a colony from Babylon, Chuta, and several other places. The country being soon afterwards harassed with wild beasts, the new settlers concluded that this calamity had befallen them, because they did not worship the God of the land, and sent a complaint to . this purpose to the king of Assyria. Upon this, the king sent them one of the priests who had been taken from the country, “ to teach them how they should fear the Lord.”* * * § Thus the worship of the true God of Israel was restored in Samaria. At the same time, however, the idolaters re¬ tained their respective superstitions, and “ whilst they feared the Lord, served other gods.” Hence the Jews, when they returned to Judea from that captivity by which they had been punished for their former propensity towards idolatry, entertained a rooted aversion against the inhabitants of Samaria, and would not allow them any concern in executing the national design of rebuilding the temple of Jerusalem. The mutual jealousies which arose from this cause were carried to the most violent extremity. Esdras and Zerobabel solemnly denounced an anathema upon the Samaritans ; and the Samaritans, in their turn, made use of all their interest with the king of Assyria to obstruct the rebuilding of the temple. j- At the extinction of the Persian monarchy in consequence of Alexander’s conquests, the Samaritans endeavoured to accomplish a union, both civil , and ecclesiastical, with the Jews. For this purpose, Sanballat, the gover¬ nor of Samaria, who was of Babylonish extraction, brought about a mar¬ riage between his daughter and Menasses, the brother of Jaddus, the Jewish high priest ; fully expecting that Menasses would succeed his brother in the priesthood, and that by this means a coalition would be accomplished. The event, however, did not correspond to his wishes. The Jews highly resented this profane alliance, excluded Menasses from the succession, and banished him from the city. Sanballat, on the other hand, took his son-in-law under his protection ; obtained permission from Alexander to build a temple upon Mount Garizim similar to that at Jeru¬ salem, and appointed Menasses its high priest. With Menasses a powerful body passed over from the Jews to the Samaritans ; and much pains was taken to bring back their doctrine and worship to the pure standard of the law of Moses. J But all this was insufficient to subdue the enmity of the Jews, who execrated the Samaritans as heretical and profane, and main¬ tained, that they themselves alone possessed the true religion. Frequent hostilities arose between the two countries : and Hyrcanus at last besieged Samaria, and after a long resistance took the city, and razed it, together Avith its temple, to the ground. The metropolis of Samaria was afterwards rebuilt by the Roman governor Gibinius, and enlarged and adorned by Herod, who, in honour of Augustus, called the city Sebaste.§ * 2 Kings, xvii. 24. Joseph. Ant. 1. ix. c. ult. Beniam. Tudelens. Itin. p. 37. Bas- nage, 1. ii. c. 4. p. 84. t Eisenmenger. Jucl. Detect, p. i. c. 2. Walton. Appar. Bibl. Proleg. xi. sect. 4. Basnaj^e, 1. ii. c. 5. sect. 1. X Joseph. Ant. Jud. 1. xi. c. 4 — 8. 1. xii. c. 1. Basnage, 1. ii. c. 6. p. 113. § Joseph. Ant. 1. xi. c. 8. 1. xii. c. 1. 1. xiii. c. 18. Reland. Palaest. 1. iii. p. 979. Bas¬ nage, 1. c. p. 99. 382 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. It may be concluded from this narrative, that whatever difference at this time subsisted between the Jews and Samaritans, it was only such as might easily have been compromised ; else Sanballat would not have thought of attempting to unite the religious institutions of both nations by making his son-in-law their common high priest. But this necessarily supposes, that the Samaritans had renounced their ancient idolatry, and were now worshippers of the true God, in forms not very different from those appointed by the Mosaic law. Some remains of erroneous opinions concerning the divine nature, and of Pagan superstition, might, it is true, still be retained, sufficient to give occasion to the censure of Jesus, “ Ye know' not what ye worship.” But there can be no doubt that the Jewish writers, from whom we receive most of our information concerning the Samaritans, through their aversion to this nation, have been guilty of much exaggeration and misrepresentation in their account of the Samaritan doc¬ trine and worship. Of this kind, probably, is the tale of their having the idols of four heathen nations concealed under Mount Garizim, and the notion that they denied the existence of angels.* It is not unlikely, how¬ ever, that they might so far depart from the idea of angels given in the books of Moses (the only sacred scriptures they acknowledged) as to con¬ ceive them to be substantial virtues, or powers derived by emanation -j- from the divine nature, according to the Oriental philosophy.;}; This may be inferred from the history of Simon Magus, Dositheus, and Menander, whose doctrines appear to have obtained much credit and authority among the Samaritans. Simon Magus, § who is commonly understood to have been the person mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, was by birth a Samaritan, and in his native country practised magical arts, which procured him many fol¬ lowers. According to the usual practice of the Asiatics at this time, he visited Egypt, and there, probably, became acquainted with the sublime mysteries taught in the Alexandrian school, and learned those theurgicor magical operations, by means of which it was believed that men might be delivered from the power of evil demons. Upon his return into his own country, the author of the “Clementine Recognitions” || relates that he imposed upon his countrymen by his pretensions to supernatural powers. And St. Luke attests, that this artful fanatic, using sorcery, had bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that he was some Great One; and that he obtained such general attention and reverence in Samaria, that the people all gave heed to him from the least to the greatest, saying, “ This man is the Great Power of God.”^ * Epiphan. Haeres. ix. t. 1. op. p. 25. Her. xiii. p. 30. Her. xiv. p. 31. Reland. Diss. Misc. p. ii. p. 57. f Seldon is of opinion, (a) that the Cuthaei, by whom Samaria was in part colonised, were Persians, who dwelt on the borders of the river Cuth, and conjectures, that Nergal, the idol which they worshipped, was the sacred fire of the Persians. If this be admitted, we may reasonably conjecture, that the religion of the Persian Magi, the worship of fire, brought by this people into Samaria, was united with the worship of the God of Israel ; that with this worship was introduced the Oriental doctrine of divine emanations, taught by the Persian Zoroaster ; and that, in this manner, the Gnostic fictions concerning divine virtues and powers spread among the Samaritans. 'I Reland. 1. c. p. 29. Cellar. Gent. Sam. Diss. Ac. p. 109. § Just. Mart. Apol. ii. p. ()9. 91. Iren. Haer. 1. i. c. 23. sect. 4. II L. ii. c.21. ^ Actsviii. 9. Iren. adv. Haer. 1. i. c. 23. sect. 4. p. ICO. Theodoret. Haeret. Fabr. 1. i. c. 1. Aug. de Haer. c. 1. Epiph. Haer. 21— 24. Euseb. H. E. 1. iii. c. 26. It has been said, that Simon Magus was worshipped by tlie Komans as a god ; and a (a) De DissSyriis, Synt. ii. c. 8. p. 312. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 383 From the nature of the philosophy which, at this period, was taught both in Asia and Egypt, and in which Simon had, doubtless, been in¬ structed, it may be reasonably concluded that he pretended to be an iF)on of the first order, or one of the most exalted of those substantial powers, or divine immortal natures, which were supposed to have emaned from the eternal fountain of the Supreme Deity. He boasted, that he was sent down from heaven, among men, to chastise and subdue those evil demons, by whose malignant influence the disorders and miseries of human nature were produced, and to conduct them to the highest felicity. To his wife Helena he also ascribed a similar kind of divine nature, pretending that a female Hion inhabited the body of this woman, to whom he gave the name of ’'Evvota, Wisdom ; whence some Christian fathers have said, that he called her the Holy Spirit.* The sura of his fanatical doctrine, divested of allegory, was, that from the Divine Being, as a fountain of light, emaned various orders of .Sions, or Eternal Natures ; subsisting within the plenitude of the divine essence ; that beyond these, in the order of emanation, are different classes of intel¬ ligences, among the lowest of which are human souls; that matter is the most remote production of the emanative power, which, on account of its infinite distance from the Fountain of Light, possessed sluggish and malig¬ nant qualities, which oppose the divine operations, and are the cause of evil ; that it is the great design of philosophy to deliver the soul from its imprisonment in matter and restore it to that divine light from which it was derived ; and that for this purpose God had sent one of the first iEons among men. He also taught that human souls migrate into other bodies, as a punishment for their sins ; and he denied the resurrection of the body."!- Simon Magus, having taught these and other similar doctrines of the Oriental philosophy, may perhaps be considered as the founder of a philo¬ sophical sect of Gnostics ; but it is a mistake to suppose, as many writers, implicitly following Irenaeus, J have done, that he was the head of the Christian Gnostics ; for, whereas these heretics thought Christ to be one of the iEons sent down in a human form to deliver the world from the dominion of evil demons, Simon Magus claimed this very character to himself ; and consequently, notwithstanding his temporary assumption of the Christian name, must be ranked among the enemies of Christ. Dositheus was one of those fanatics who arose from the rigorous discipline of that Jewish sect, which, as we shall afterwards see, was de¬ voted to solitude and abstinence. Failing in his attempt to pass among the Jews for their Messiah, he went over to the Samaritans, and endea¬ voured to persuade them that he was the prophet predicted by Moses, and practised among them various kinds of austerities. The author of the passage in Justin Martyr, (a) where he says that, between two bridges on the Tiber, he saw a statue with this inscription, Simoni Sancto Deo, has been quoted in support of this assertion. But besides the great improbability that the Romans would rank a Samaritan among their divinities, it has since appeared that Justin .Martyr read this inscription inaccurately; (b) for in the year 1754, a statue was dug up in Rome, in the very situation mentioned by Justin, with this inscription, Semoni Sanco Deo Fidio. * Recog. Clem. 1. li. c. 22, &c. Horn, xix, sect. 14. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1.. ii. p. 383. August, de Haeres. c. 1. Tertull. de. Anim. c. 34. t Recogn. Clem. 1. ii. c. 21. p. 522. I. iii. p. 528. Epiph. Haer. p. 58, 59. Iren. 1. i. c. 23. 28. Clem. Horn. iii. p. 648. xviii. p. 754. xix. p. 954. Plotin. En. vi. I. ix. c. 9. : L. c. («) Apol. ii. p. 69. 9J. (5) Ant. Van Dale ad calc. lib. de Orac. Deyling. Obs. Sac. I. i. Ob. 36. 384 OF THE philosophy Book IV. i H “ Clementine Recognitions ” speaks of Dositheus as a disciple of Simon ; a others make him his preceptor ; but both without proof.* Menander, a Samaritan, trod in the footsteps of Simon Magus, boast- Li ing himself to be a Great Power of God, sent to deliver the world, by, “It magical operations, from the tyranny of evil spirits. To those who par-^ ' « took of his baptism he promised, that their bodies should be purified from ||ai the dregs of materiality, and be raised to a spiritual and immortal existence i within the Pleroma, or Plenitude, of the divine nature. f From this time the affairs of the Samaritans declined, and their history M affords nothing which requires our attention. ^ The Second great Event, in this period of the Jewish history, whicl^^i affects the state of philosophy, is the settling of a Jewish colony in Egypt.^ji Notwithstanding the hereditary hatred which, from the most ancient times,’lb Ji had subsisted between the Hebrews and the Egyptians, necessity had^- li obliged the two nations, as we learn from the Sacred History, to unit^ ii more than once against the assaults of the kings of Assyria. In proces^j i of time, the enmity between them was so far subdued, that the posteritj^ i of Israel migrated to the country from which their ancestors had been® i- expelled, The first certain record of the settling of a Jewish colony in Egypt is4f that of the prophet Jeremiah, :j: from which we learn that during th^| , Babylonish captivity (about five hundred and eighty years before Christ)^’ : ' after Ishmael had treacherously cut off Gedaliah, the governor of Judea, i appointed by Nebuchadnezzar king of Assyria, the Jews who still re^i * mained in Judea, fearing the resentment of the king, first took up thei^' ) abode near the borders of Egypt, and then, contrary to the remonstranc^“ i of the prophet Jeremiah, removed into Egypt, and settled at Tahpanhes^ > According to the prediction of the prophet, in a successful attack soon ' afterwards made upon Arnasis, king of Egypt, by Nebuchadonosor, they ■ i were carried captive, with a body of Egyptians, into Babylon. A few of ■ their number, however, who had escaped into solitary places, remained in ' : Egypt, and their posterity greatly increased. 5 When Alexander, in order to people his new city, Alexandria, invited ‘ strangers from different countries ; among the rest a considerable body of Jews left their native country, and put themselves under the protection of the conqueror, who granted them the same privileges which he had con¬ ferred upon his own countrymen. § This Jewish colony was afterwards enlarged by Ptolemy Lagus, who invaded Syria and Judea, besieged and took Jerusalem, and carried a hundred thousand Jews and Samaritans in captivity to Egypt. |1 Under the protection of Alexander and his successors, ! this numerous body of Jews long continued to flourish, and occasionally to ! receive new accessions from Judea. Ptolemy Philadelphus treated them ^ with great liberality, and put them on the footing of equality with the rest of his subjects ; allowing them the free exercise of their religion, according to the precepts of their law, and the traditions of their fathers.^ It was at this time that the Alexandrian Jews, who now commonly spoke the Greek language, wrote their celebrated Greek Translation of their Sacred Scriptures, known by the name of the Septuagint Version. This translation has been siiid to have been made by order of the king, through * Epiphan. Heer. xi'ii. p. 30. T Iren. Heer. 1. ii. c. 31. Theodor. Haeret. Fabr. 1. i. c. 2. Euseb. Hist. Ec, 1. iii. c. 26. Epipb. Haer. xxii. Tertull. de Resur. c. 5. 10. de An. c. 50. X Ch. xlii. ver. 15. xliii. 10. xliv. 11. § Joseph. Ant. Jud. 1. xi. c. 8. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 385 the solicitation of Deraetrius Phalereus his librarian ;* * * § bntf it is impro¬ bable that a Peripatetic philosopher should have paid so much respect to the books of the Jews, as to request such an exertion of the royal authority ; and the story is inconsistent, as we have already shown, with well known facts, in the life of Demetrius Phalereus. The truth seems to be, that the translation was reluctantly undertaken by the Jews themselves, for the convenience of that numerous body, among whom Greek was now the common language ; but that, when the Alexandrian Jews found that this public exposure of their sacred oracles was displeasing to their brethren in Palestine, they invented this story, to give their version the sanction of royal authority. On similar grounds, the story of another version, J more ancient than the Septuagint, of the Pentateuch, from which Pythagoras and Plato borrowed some of their doctrines, is to be rejected as fabulous ; for the fact rests wholly upon the testimony of Aristobulus, whom there is reason, as we shall see, to suspect of having, through national vanity, invented this story, in order to transfer the credit of the Greek philosophy to the Hebrews. From this period, there can be no doubt that the doctrine of the Jews was known to the Egyptians ; and, on the other hand, that Pagan philo¬ sophy was known to the Jews. Grecian wisdom, corrupted by being mixed with the Egyptian and Oriental philosophy, assumed a new form in the Platonic school of Alexandria. This school, by pretending to teach a sublimer doctrine concerning God and divine things, enticed men of dif¬ ferent countries and religions, and among the rest the Jews, to study its mysteries, and to incorporate them with their own. The symbolical method of instruction, which had been in use from the most ancient times among the Egyptians, was adopted by the Jews; and it became a common prac¬ tice among them to put an allegorical interpretation upon their sacred writings. Hence, under the cloak of symbols. Pagan philosophy gradually crept into the Jewish schools ; and the Platonic doctrines, mixed first with the Pythagoric, and afterwards with the Egyptian and Oriental, were blended with their ancient faith in their explanations of the law and the traditions. § The society of the Therapeutae (of which we shall presently speak more fully) was formed after the model of the Pythagorean disci¬ pline : Aristobulus, Philo, and others, studied the Grecian philosophy, and the Cabbalists formed their mystical system upon the foundation of the tenets taught in the Alexandrian schools. The practice of clothing the precepts of the Mosaic law in a Platonic dress, and mixing Platonic notions with the doctrine of the Jewish religion, seems to have given birth to the ancient Jewish book, improperly called. The Wisdom of Solomon, \\ a work which abounds with Platonic language, and was probably written after the Cabbalistic philosophy was introduced among the Jews. The preceding narrative of facts clearly shows in what manner the purity of divine doctrine became corrupted among the Jews in Egypt. Enticed by the promise of new and hidden treasures of wisdom concerning God and divine things, they admitted, under the disguise of allegory, doctrines never * Joseph. 1. c. t Conf. Van Dale, Diss. super Aristea. Hody Diss. contr, Aristea. Ox. 1684. 8vo. et de Bibl. Text. 1705. fol. J Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 305. 342. Euseb. Praep. Ev. 1. xiii. c. 12. Joseph. Ant. 1. xii. p. 391. § Euseb. Praep. Ev. 1. viii. c. 9, 10. 11 Among many other passages of this book, in which both the sentiments and lan¬ guage are borrowed from the Greek philosophy, the reader may consult c. i. 7. c. vii. 17 — 22. In ch. v. ver. 25. the Oriental doctrine of emanation is clearly expressed. C C 386 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. i dreamed of by their ancient lawgivers and prophets, and adopted a mystical 4 interpretation of the law, which converted its plain meaning into a thousand ( idle fancies. This corruption, which begun in Egypt about the time of i | Ptolemy Philadelphus, soon spread into Palestine, and every where disse- i minated among the Jews a taste for metaphysical subtleties and mysteries.* < Aristobulus, an Alexandrian Jew, who lived in the reign of Ptolemy 1 Philometer, was an admirer of the Greek philosophy, and united with the i study of the Mosaic law, in the mystical and allegorical method at this j time introduced, some knowledge of the Aristotelian system. Eusebius j| speaks of him as a favourite of Ptolemy, and quotes, from a work of his I inscribed to that prince, sundry verses of Orpheus, in which mention is ; made of Moses and Abraham. These verses are also found in the works 1 of Justin Martyr ; but with so much variation as to afford ground for sus- i pecting their authenticity. It is not improbable that Aristobulus himself, | i who, as Clemens Alexandrinus relates, -j" ascribes the Grecian philosophy || to a Hebrew origin, was the author of this fraud, as well as of the tales l| respecting the Greek versions of the Hebrew scriptures. On these ac- J* ii counts, we cannot hesitate to rank Aristobulus among the first corrupters ‘ > of Jewish wisdom. J From Egypt we shall now pass over into Judea, to inquire into the state t s of philosophy among its inhabitants. Soon after their return from the 1 Babylonish captivity, they forsook the ancient simplicity of their sacred 1 doctrine, and listened to the fictions of human fancy. This change hap- i pened, not through any intercourse which the Jews had, during their cap- i tivity, with the Chaldean Magi, (for it does not appear that they borrowed 1 ■i any tenets from these,) but in consequence of the conquests of Alexander i and his successors, which obliged them, contrary to their ancient habits, to , mingle with foreigners. A circumstance which, left to its natural operation, would have led them imperceptibly into the adoption of foreign opinions ; and customs. But their conquerors hastened this change by compulsion ; for we are informed that Antiochus Epiphanes commanded them to forsake 1 their ancient religious ceremonies ; and, although the greater part of the nation bravely resisted this unjust and tyrannical command, there were some among them so unfaithful to their country, and their God, as to show f an inclination to court the favour of the conqueror by mixing Pagan tenets and superstitions with their own sacred doctrines and ceremonies. § The * influence of example in their Alexandrian brethren, who had already caught { the infection of Gentilism, doubtless, concurred with the circumstances of the times, to introduce corruption into the schools of Judea. Accordingly we find, in fact, that a taste for Grecian philosophy and Egyptian mysteries : so far prevailed in the joint reign of Aristobulus and Hyrcanus, that some of the zealous advocates for the purity of the Jewish faith and worship thought it necessary to denounce anathema upon any one who should teach the Grecian wisdom to his children. || No anathema^ however, could pre¬ vent the spread of Grecian learning among the Jews. In the time of Alexander Jannaeus, about one hundred years before Christ, Simon ben Shetach, a learned Jewish doctor, who had for some political offence been banished Judea, was recalled, with his disciples, from Alexandria, “ and with him,” as Jehuda Levi relates,^ “ the Cabbala, or * Joseph. Prooem. Ant. Jud. p. 3. f Strom. 1. i. 305. J Maccab. 1. ii. c. i. v. 10. Euseb. Praep. 1. viii. c. 9. 1. xiii. c. 5. Justin. Cohort, ad Gent, et Apol. ii. § Maccab. Hist. Joseph. Ant. J. 1. xii. II Gemar. BaJ>. in Menachoth. f. 64. Lightfoot Hor. Heb. Math. viii. 30. Lib. Cosri, p. iii. p. 240. Conf. R. Mardochai de Karaeis, c. 3. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 387 oral tradition, recovered its pristine vigour.” And there can be little doubt that this Cabbala included the theoretical as well as preceptive doctrines received by the Alexandrian Jews under the notion of traditions especially since we have so many proofs of the early prevalence of these doctrines among the Jews, in the writings of Philo and others. The result of the facts already related is, that the mystical, or cabbalis- tic doctrine of the Jews arose in the time of the first Ptolemies. The Jewish ^ mystics, indeed, pretend to trace back their fanciful system even to Adam in Paradise, and boast that their oldest cabbalistic books were written by the patriarch Abraham.* But it will be evident to any one, who compares these books with the system conpounded of Oriental, Pythagoric, and Platonic doctrines, which the Jews at this time began, as we have seen, to mix with the Mosaic law, that the leading tenets of the Cabbala and the Alexandrian philosophy are the same. The ancient book entitled Cosri, written by JehudaLevi before the compilation of the Talmud, describes in allegorical and mystical language the philosophy which passed over from the Alexandrian schools into Judea. The same philosophy is found in the cabbalistic books of the Jezirah, mentioned in the Talmud ; in the Sohar, ascribed to Simeon ben Jochai, a disciple of Akibha, who lived in the time of Vespasian; and in the 13akir, said to be of still greater antiquity. Al¬ though the age of these books is not certainly known, there is great reason to conclude from their contents, that the seeds of the cabbalistic doctrine were first sown under the Ptolemies, when the Jews began to learn the Egyptian and Oriental theology, and to incorporate these foreign dogmas with their ancient creed. Having said thus much concerning the introduction of Gentile philosophy among the Jews both in Egypt and Palestine, the way is prepared for in¬ quiring into the rise and progress of their domestic sects. After all the learned labour which has been bestowed upon this subject, the origin of these sects still remains involved in obscurity. Some eminent writers, on the authority of several passages in the history of the Maccabees, and in Josephus, have said,f that many of the Jews, after their return from cap¬ tivity, expressed their religious zeal, not only by a strict observance of the law, according to its literal meaning, but by introducing certain religious ' ceremonies, and other services, not prescribed in the written law, as volun¬ tary expressions of extraordinary sanctity ; that a large body of these zealots formed themselves into a fraternity, or sacred college, under the name of ^ Hasidaei, who, under the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes, joined the Maccabees ; that, in process of time, the institutions of this body were digested into a regular canon, which created innumerable disputes, and produced parties among the Jews, of whom those who adhered strictly to ' the letter of the Mosaic law were called Karaeites, while the advocates for the new institutions retained the name of Hasidaei: and that from the for¬ mer sprung the Sadducees, and from the latter the Pharisees and Essenes. This account of the rise of the Jewish sect is plausible, but destitute of suf¬ ficient evidence from antiquity. For, the Hasidaei, mentioned by the author of the history of the Maccabees, J were not a religious sect, but a civil party, which arose during the wars. Upon this matter nothing further is certain, than that, soon after the termination of the prophetic age, the Jews began to corrupt the law of Moses, by introducing certain precepts and * R. Gcdalias Shalshel. Hakkabal. p. 28. t Scaliger. Blench. Trihaeres. c. 22. Drusius et Serrarius cle Hasidaeis. edit, a Trig¬ land. in Syntagm. deXrib. Sect. Jud. Delph. 1704. Goodwin’s Moses and Aaron. I. i.c. 9. J L. i.c. vii. 13. 1. ii. c. xiv. 6. C C 2 388 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. institutions, which they professed to have received by oral tradition from the most ancient times. This traditionary law, which chiefly respected religious ceremonies, fastings, and other practices distinct from the moral duties of life, at length obtained, with the greater part of the Jewish nation, a degree of authority equal to that of the Mosaic law ; whilst the rest re¬ jecting these innovations, adhered strictly to the institutions of their sacred oracles. These two general classes, which do not appear to have been dis¬ tinguished, on this single ground, by any peculiar appellation, gradually adopted other tenets and customs, and formed several distinct sects, of which the principal were the Sadducees, the Karseites, the Pharisees and the Essenes. Without paying any attention to the extravagant fiction of the Jewish writers, who pretend to refer the origin of the Sadducean doctrine to Pa¬ gan atheists, among whom they reckon Aristotle ; who, by the way, was, they affirm, afterwards converted, and made a proselyte of righteousness, by Simeon the Just ;* we shall confine ourselves to those events, in the history of the Jewish church, which seem to have gradually given exist¬ ence to the sect of the Sadducees. It is exceedingly probable that, as soon as the oral, or traditionary, law above mentioned was introduced, multitudes reprobated the innovation, and determined to adhere to the written law, in its obvious and literal meaning. This dispute might naturally occasion a controversy concerning the doctrine of the Hebrew scriptures upon the subject of a future state; and the speculations of the Alexandrian Jews, which about this time began to be known in Judea, might furnish fresh matter of debate. These con¬ jectures are confirmed by facts. Antigonus SoCH.®us,'j- a native of Socho on the borders of Judea, who flourished in the time of Eleazer the high priest (or about three hun¬ dred years before Christ) and was a disciple of Simeon the Just, offended at the innovations which were introduced by the patrons of the traditionary institutions, and particularly at the pretensions which were made to merito¬ rious works of supererogation, by means of which men hoped to entitle themselves to extraordinary temporal rewards, strenuously maintained and taught, that men ought to serve God, not like slaves for hire, but from a pure and disinterested principle of piety. This refined doctrine, which Antigonus only opposed to the expectation of a temporal recompence for works of religion and charity, his followers misinterpreted, and extended to the rewards of a future life. Sadoc and Baithosus, two of his disciples, taught that no future recompence was to be expected, and consequently that there would be no resurrection of the dead. This doctrine they taught to their followers ; and hence arose, about two hundred years before Christ, the sect of the Baithossei, or Sadducees. These appellations,' derived from the names of the founders of the sect, seem to have been at first used promiscuously ; but by degrees the former fell into disuse ; which accounts for the silence of the sacred history, and of Josephus, concerning the Baithosmi.J The sect of the Sadducees long continued to flourish in Judea, and to possess great authority. Although they differed in fundamental points of faith from the rest of the nation, they were admitted to sacred privileges * Shalsheletl) Hakkabalah, p. 83. t Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. ad Matt. iii. 7. t. ii. p. 273. Reland Palaest. I. iii. p. 1018. Basnage, 1. ii c. 14. X Pirke Abhoth. c. 5. R. Nathan, ad 1. c. apud Lightfoot, t. ii. p. 737. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 389 and offices, and even to the highest dignity of the priesthood.* And not- j withstanding the enmity which subsisted between this sect and that of the j Pharisees, on account of the contempt with which the Sadducees treated j the traditionary law, these sects frequently united in public councils, and i in defence of the common cause of religion. Under the reign of Hyrcanus, t who, about one hundred and thirty years before Christ, possessed the su- , preme civil and sacerdotal power in Judea, the Sadducees were the leading > sect ; for that prince, being opposed by the Pharisees in the execution of the office of high priest, treated them with great severity, and espoused the Sadducean party, requiring the whole nation, on pain of death, to pro¬ fess the doctrine of this sect. After the death of Hyrcanus, the prosecu¬ tion of the Pharisees was, for some time, continued by his son, Alexander Jannaeus; but Alexandra, the wife of Jannaeus, who succeeded him in the government, finding that the Pharisaic sect, was more popular than the Sadducean, espoused the interest of the Pharisees, and restored their power and influence. The Sadducees, however, afterwards regained a consider¬ able share of political and ecclesiastical consequence ; for we find, that Caiaphas and Ananus, who were both of this sect, possessed in succession the office of high priest. -j- After the destruction of Jerusalem, the sect of the Sadducees fell into contempt among their countrymen, and even in¬ curred the hatred of the Christians ; the emperor Justinian issued a severe i edict against them,;}; inflicting banishment, and, in case of obstinate per¬ severance, even death, upon those who should teach their doctrines. The chief heads of the Sadducean tenets were these :§ All laws and traditions, not comprehended in the written law, are to be rejected as merely human inventions. Neither angels nor spirits have a distinct existence, separate from their corporeal vestment. The soul of I man, therefore, does not remain after this life, but expires with the body, j There will be no resujrection of the dead, nor any rewards or punishments after this life. Man is not subject to irresistible fate, but has the framing [ of his condition chiefly in his own power. Polygamy ought not to be i practised. It has been asserted, |1 that the Sadducees only received, as of sacred authority, the five books of Moses. But the contrary clearly appears from their controversy with the Pharisees, in which the latter appeal to the prophets and other sacred writings, as well as the law, which they could not have done with any propriety or effect, had not the Sadducees admitted their authority. To this we may add, that had this been the case, it is very improbable that such heresy would have passed without censure. The Sadducees are sometimes ranked with the Epicureans ; but impro- ( perly : for, though they agreed with them in denying the doctrine of a i future state, they differed from them essentially in their ideas of God and Providence. Whilst the Epicureans admitted no supreme intelligent ruler I of the world, and supposed the gods wholly unconcerned in human affairs, ( the Sadducees acknowledged the existence of the one true God, the Jeho- i vah of the Jews, and admitted his universal providence, only rejecting the I notion of an absolute and uncontrollable influence over the volitions and i actions of men : they admitted, too, the reasonableness and obligation of j * Acts, V. 17. Joseph. Ant. 1. xx. c. 15. + Joseph. Ant. 1. xiii. c. 18. 24. Mesrallath. Taanith, c, 4. Basnage, 1. ii. c. 15. I X Novell. 146. § Joseph. Ant. 1. xiii. c. 18. 1. xviii. c. 2. de Bell. Jud. 1. ii. c. 12. Acts, xxiii. c. 8. Matt. xxii. 23. Mark, xii. 18. Luke, xx. 27. j II Tertull. de Prsescript. 1. i. c. 14. Orig. contr. Cels. I. i. p. 39. [ I 390 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. religious worship. Their denial of a future state of rewards and punish¬ ments may perhaps be in part ascribed to their belief in the homogeneous nature of man ; for Josephus expressly says,* * * § that they took away the dis¬ tinct and permanent nature of the soul : \pvxve re rr/y Siafioyrjy dvaipovm. This was, probably, the chief ground of their opposition to Christianity, whose distinguishing doctrine is that of the resurrection from the dead. The sect of the Karaites, f though its history be exceedingly obscure, is not to be confounded with that of the Sadducees. The name Karseite denotes a textuary, or scripturist, and seems intended to distinguish those who followed the written law alone, from those who admitted the authority of traditionary precepts. The origin of this sect is, therefore, to be re¬ ferred to the time when the traditionary, or oral, law was introduced, and with it the allegorical interpretation of the written law. It may be col¬ lected from the Jewish records, that this sect existed in the time of Hyr- canus, and that the followers of Shammai were addicted to it. J The fact seems to have been, that the traditionary law was opposed, as a corruption of the true religion, by a numerous body, who strenuously asserted the sufficiency and perfection of the ancient written law, explained in its literal sense. Among these, as we have already seen, were the Sadducees. But it is exceedingly probable, that the Sadducean tenets were highly offensive to many pious men, who, nevertheless, were not disposed to join those who received the traditionary institutions. These adhering simply to the letter of the Mosaic law, but at the same time refusing to adopt the doctrine of the Sadducees, would of course become a separate sect, which would be distinguished by some name expressive of their leading principle. It is not improbable that the opposite party gave them, in derision, the name of Scripturists, or Kareeites. In this manner we conceive that this sect arose at the same time with those of the Sadducees and Pharisees. The continuance of the sect of the Karaites through several subse¬ quent ages may be learned from the Cosri of Jehuda Levi, above quoted, which intimates, that, in the time of the Rabbies Jehuda ben Tabbai and Simeon ben Shetach, when the traditionary precepts obtained increasing authority, the followers of the letter of the law were a separate body. Perhaps the class of vo/ur/ovg lawyers mentioned by the Evangelists as distinct from the Scribes and Pharisees,§ were the Karaites. This con¬ jecture is favoured by a tradition preserved in the Jerusalem Talmud,|| that there were in Jerusalem four hundred and eighty synagogues, each of which had a separate apartment for the law, and another for the Talmud, or traditionary records ; whence it seems probable, that the Scripturists were a party distinct from the Traditionaries. The scribes, whose office it was to expound the law, from the manner in which they are usually mentioned in the New Testament, in conjunction with the Pharisees, may be concluded to have adopted, in their interpretations, the allegorical method of the Traditionaries and Cabbalists, and therefore to have com¬ monly belonged to their party. After the destruction of Jerusalem, the interest of the traditionary party greatly increased, and that of the Scripturists proportionally declined ; so that the Karseites are from this time little heard of, except when they are mentioned by the pharisaical rabbies in terms of reproach, till the eighth century, when we find the sect revived by the Rabbi Anari ben David, * De Bell. J.l. ii. c. 12. Conf.- Ant. J. 1. xviii. c. 2. 1. xx. c. 8. f R. Mardochai de Karaeis, Trigland. Shupart. et Wolf, de Kar. t R. Mose, Bethshitshi ap. Trigland, de Kar. c. 6. § Luc, xi. 45, 46. || Megillat. f. 73. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 391 whose heresy brought upon him a heavy load of obloquy. The history of this Rabbi clearly shows, that he was not, as some have supposed, the author, but the restorer of the Karaeite sect.* From this time, this sect continued to produce men well skilled in the Jewish law ; among whom, in the twelfth century, was Abu-Alphareus, who lived in Palestine, and wrote a commentary upon the Pentateuch, which added so much strength to the interest of the Karasites, that the traditionary party thought it necessary to implore the assistance of the civil magistrate. -j- Notwith¬ standing this, however, the Karaeites continued to hold their assemblies ; and they are, at this day, found as a distinct body in Turkey, Russia, and Lithuania, but are oppressed by the jealousy of their countrymen, to whom a Karaeite is more hateful than a Christian or a Turk.j; The distinguishing tenets of the sect of the Karaeites are : that there is no other rule of faith and worship than the writings of Moses and the pro¬ phets ; that all oral traditions, and allegorical and mystical interpretations of the law are to be rejected ; that all material beings were created by an uncreated Deity, of whom no resemblance can be found in any thing which he has made ; that he knows all things, and exercises a constant providence over all his works ; that the human mind is subject to divine influence, but at the same time remains free in its volitions ; that true penitence takes away guilt ; that, after death, the soul, if it be worthy, ascends to the intellectual world to live there for ever, but if it be guilty, it is consigned to a state of pain and ignominy ; that God alone is to be worshipped ; and that fasts are to be strictly observed.§ The present ad¬ herents of this sect are said to observe the moral precepts of their law more strictly than their brethren, the pharisaic Rabbinites, with whom, nevertheless, they are thought unworthy of ecclesiastical communion. The most celebrated of the Jewish sects was that of the Pharisees. Its origin, as well as that of the other sects, is involved in some obscurity. The prophet Isaiah, indeed, found among the Jews, in his time, several appearances of the spirit and character which afterwards distinguished the sect of the Pharisees. || But we have no proof that they existed as a distinct body in the prophetic age ; nor do we find any traces of this sect prior to the time when oral traditions, together with the allegorical interpretations of the written law, were introduced in the manner already explained. Although we meet with no satisfactory evidence of the exist¬ ence of the sect of the Hasidaei, which Scaliger^ supposes to have been the foundation of the Pharisaic sect, we think there can be little reason to doubt that this sect arose soon after the return from the Babylonish cap¬ tivity, in consequence of the introduction of traditionary institutions and allegorical interpretations. That it was established, and had acquired great authority in the time of Hercanus, and of his sons, Aristobulus and Alex¬ ander, has been already hinted, and may be seen more at large in Jose¬ phus’s account of their affairs.** Josephus, who was himself of this sect, speaks of it as flourishing in the time of Jonathan the high priest, together with those of the Sadducees and Essenes ; which invalidates the conjecture of Basnage,-|--|' that the Pharisaic sect owed its rise to the separation which * Abr. Ben. Dior. Kabb. Hist. sect. 66. f Buddaei Hist. Bh. Heb. sect. SO. J Tenzel. Colloq. Menstr. 1691. Basnage, 1. ii. c. 6. § R. Japhet. Lev. Conf. Wolf. Bib. Heb. p. i. p. 671. Trigland. 1. i. c. 10, 11. Schudt. Meinor. Jud. p. ii. 1. vi. c. 27. || Isa. Iviii. 2, 3. Ixv. 5. H Elench. Trihaeres, c. 22. p. 170. Relaud. Anticj. Sac. p. 2. c. ix. sect. 13. ** Ant. Jud. 1. xiii. c. 9. 24. 'ft Hist, des Juifs, 1. ii. c. 17. sect. 2. Conf. Wolf. Bibl. Heb. p. ii. p. 816 — 824. Natal. Alex. Hist. Eccl. c. i. art. 5. sect. 3. 392 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. M took place between the schools of Hillel and Shammai ; for the Jewish writers agree, that these celebrated doctors did not flourish earlier than an hundred years before the Christian era. Although the exact time of the first appearance of the Pharisaic sect cannot be ascertained, its origin may be easily traced back to the same period in which the Sadducean heresy arose. From the time that the notion of supernumerary acts of self-denial, devotion, and charity, was introduced under the sanction of the traditionary law, a wide door was opened for superstition, religious pride, and hypocrisy. Whilst, on the one hand, some would despise the weakness, or the affectation, of professing to be pious and holy beyond the prescription of the written law, others, through a fanatical spirit, or that they might provide themselves with a convenient cloak for their vices, would become scrupulous observers of the traditionary institutions. And when these pretenders to extraordinary sanctity saw that many of those who observed only the written law, not only disclaimed all works of supererogation, but even renounced the hope of future rewards, f they would think it necessary to separate themselves into a distinct body,' that they might the more successfully display their sanctity and piety.' These conjectures are confirmed by the name of the sect, which is derived from the word to separate.* * * § Their separation consisted chiefly in certain distinctions respecting food, clothing and religious ceremonies : it does not seem to have interrupted the uniformity of religious worship, in which the Jews of every sect appear to have always united. The peculiar character and spirit of Pharisaism consisted in the strict observance of the oral law, which they believed to have been delivered to Moses by an archangel, during his forty days’ residence on Mount Sinai,i and to have been by him committed to Seventy Elders, who transmitted itf to posterity.-j- Their superstitious reverence for this law, and the apparent sanctity of manners which it produced, rendered them exceedingly popular.' The multitude, for the most part, espoused their interest ; and the great, who feared their artifice, were frequently obliged to court their favour. Hence they obtained the highest offices both in the state and the priest-i hood, and had great weight both in public and private affairs : in some^ instances they proved so troublesome to the reigning powers as to subjectjt themselves to severe penalties. Hyrcanus and Alexander restrained theirj increasing influence, and treated them with great rigour. Under Alex-)^ andra, however, they regained their consequence ; the dissensions between j, the schools of Hillel and Shammai,|; a little before the Christian era, in-^. creased their number and power ; and they continued, till the destruction; of Jerusalem, to enjoy the chief sway in the sanhedrim and in the syna-.: gogue. After that period, when the other sects were dispersed, the\ Pharisees retained their authority ; and, though the name has been' dropped, their tenets and customs have ever since prevailed among the Jewish Rabbinites ; so that at this day, except the- Karaeites, scarcely any. Jews are to be found who are not, in reality, of the Pharisaic sect.§ The principal dogmas of the Pharisees were these : The oral law, delivered from God to Moses on Mount Sinai, by the angel Metraton, and transmitted to posterity by tradition, is of equal 0 • Suidas in Pharis. t Joseph. Ant. Jud. 1. xiii. c. 18. 23, 24. 1. xvii. c. 3. De Bell. J. 1. ii. c. 12. Eis- senmenger Jud. Detect, p. i. c. 8. Hornbeck de Jud. Conv. 1. i. c. 3. X Gieger. de Hill, et Shamm. § Menass. ben Israel de TerminoVit. 1. i. sect. 3. Schudt. Mem. Jud. p. 2. 1. vi. c. 27. sect. 11. Wolf. Bibl. Heb. p. ii. p. 816. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 393 authority with the written law. By observing both these laws, a man may not only obtain justification with God, but perform meritorious works of supererogation. Fasting, alms-giving, ablutions, confessions, are sufficient atonements for sin. Thoughts and desires are not sinful, unless they are carried into action. God is the creator of heaven and earth, and governs all things, even the actions of men, by his providence. Man can do no¬ thing without divine influence ; which does not, however, destroy the free¬ dom of the human will. The soul of man is spiritual and immortal. In the invisible world beneath the earth, rewards and punishments will be dispensed to the virtuous and vicious. The wicked shall be confined in an eternal prison ; but the good shall obtain an easy return to'life. Besides the soul of man, there are other spirits, or angels, both good and bad. The resurrection of the body is to bo expected.* It appears from many passages in the writings of the Jewish rabbis, that they held the doctrine of the migration of souls from one body to another: and it is probable that they derived it from the ancient Pharisees, and these from the Oriental philosophers. This Metempsychosis is, however, to be understood in the Pythagoric and not in the Stoic sense. The Jews, pro¬ bably, borrowed this error from the Egyptians. There is no reason, as some writers have done, to consider the sect of the Pharisees as a branch from the Stoic school.')- For, though the Pharisees resembled the Stoics in their affectation of peculiar sanctity, their notion of Divine Providence was essentially different from the Stoical doctrine of Fate : and their cast of manners arose from a different source ; that of the Stoics being derived from their idea of the nature of the soul, as a particle of the divine nature ; that of the Pharisees, from a false persuasion that the law might be ful¬ filled, and justification with God obtained, by ceremonial observances. The peculiar manners of this sect are strongly marked in the writings of the Evangelists ; J particularly, their exactness in observing the rites and ceremonies of the law, both written and traditionary ; the rigour of their discipline, in watchings, fastings, and ablutions ; their scrupulous care to avoid every kind of ritual impurity ; their long and frequent prayers, made not only in the synagogues and temple, but in the public streets ; their broad phylacteries on the borders of their garments, in which were written sentences of the law; their assiduity in making proselytes; their osten¬ tatious charities ; and, under all this show of zeal and piety, their vanity, avarice, licentiousness, and inhumanity. This account is confirmed by the testimony of the Jewish writers themselves.§ The Talmudic books )| men¬ tion several distinct classes of Pharisees, under characters which show them to have been deeply immersed in the idlest and most ridiculous supersti¬ tions. Among these were, the Truncated Pharisee, who, that he might appear in profound meditation, as if destitute of feet, scarcely lifted them from the ground ; the Mortar Pharisee, who, that his contemplations might not be disturbed, wore a deep cap, in the shape of a mortar, which would only permit him to look upon the ground at his feet ; and the Striking Pharisee, who, shutting his eyes as he walked, to avoid the sight of women, often struck his head against the wall. Such wretched expedients did * Joseph. Ant. Jud. 1. xiii. c. 9. 1. xviii. c. 2. Bell. J. 1. ii. c. 12. t Joseph, in Vita sua, p. 999. Budd. Hist. Ph. Heb. sect. 19. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. n. 508. Budd. Hist. Eccl. Vet. T. t. ii. p. 1217. X Matt. vi. ix. xv. xxiii. Luke vii. &c. § Lightfoot ad loc. cit. Goodwin Mos. and Aaron, p. 180. 202. Pirke Abhoth. c. ii. n. 5. Bava Bathra, f. viii. 2. Basnage, H. J. 1. ii. p. 499. II Lightfoot in Math. ii. 7. Goodwin, p. 205. Buxtorf. Lex. Talm. p. 1852. Hot- tinger, Thesaur. Phil. 1. i. c. 1. 394 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. 1 some of these hypocrites make use of to captivate the admiration of the vulgar. The political influence which their popularity gave them appears in almost every part of the Jewish history ; particularly in the reigns of Hyrcanus, Aristobulus, Jannaeus Alexander, Alexandra, and Herod.* Among the followers of Pharisaism were women, who, after the ej^ample J of the men, under the cloak of singular piety and sanctity, disguised the'j most licentious manners.'!' Another Jewish sect was that of the Essenes, concerning the origin of k which the learned are much divided in opinion. It is certain, from the tes-^ ' timony of Josephus,;}; that it flourished in the time of Jonathan, the bro¬ ther of Judas Maccabaeus, that is, one hundred and sixty years before Christ.^] It also appears from the account which Josephus gives of the institutions^ of this sect, that they were borrowed from the Pythagoreans. It may therefore be conjectured, with a high degree of probability, that at the time when the great body of the Jews were carried captive into Babylon, the small remainder of this oppressed people, after their temple was demolished, their city laid waste, and their religious worship interrupted, were driven by the cruel oppression of Gedaliah, the prefect set over them by the king of Assyria, to take refuge in Egypt ; that here, for want of the public rites of religion, these fugitives, who had a settled aversion to the idolatries of the Egyptians, withdrew into solitary places, where they endeavoured to supply the place of sacrifices by devoting themselves in private, to a reli¬ gious life ; and that, when they became acquainted with the Pythagoreans, ' ■ -i who in the same country adopted a plan of life somewhat similar to their ||$ own, they borrowed from them such of their opinions and practices, as, by ‘ 4 the help of the Egyptian method of allegorising, they could incorporate with the doctrines and institutions of Moses. Afterwards, when new colo¬ nies of Jews were brought into Egypt by Alexander and Ptolemy Lagus, and were allowed the free exercise of their religion, it is probable that j A these Jewish hermits, having been long accustomed to solitude, persisted in their ascetic life and peculiar institutions, and formed a distinct society;^) f that some of these, with others of their countrymen, embracing the indub^ aij gence granted them by Ptolemy Lagus, returned to Judea ; and that here,^ 1 1 through the power of habit, they continued their former manner of life,® and, retiring to the desert parts of the country, established and propagated that peculiar sect, which, from their extraordinary sanctity were called ' S' Essenes, a name probably derived from the word ’’DH, which signifies These conjectures, though not supported by any direct authority, perfectly^ 1 1 agree with the subsequent history of this sect, and account for its existences :f more satisfactorily than any other which have been suggested. § The Essenes formed themselves into a friendly fraternity, for the purpose^ of subduing their passions, and leading a holy life. They commonly lived? in a state of celibacy, and adopted the children of other men, to educate? them in their own principles and customs. They despised riches, and had? a perfect community of goods; every one, who was admitted into their; society, lodging his whole property in a common treasury, whence the wants * * * § of all were equally supplied. They clothed themselves in plain garments, > chiefly white, and held oil and unguents of every kind in abomination.* Their daily religious exercises they performed with great exactness. Before * * Jos. Ant. Jud. 1. xiii. c. 18. 24, 25. 1. xviii. c. 1,2. Vitringa de Vet. Synag. Reland. Ant. Heb. p. 132. Selden de Syned. p. 736. f Lightfoot in Matt. iii. 5. J Antiq. Jud. 1. xiii. c. 9. 24. § Conf. Jos. Ant. 1. xviii. 2. Bell. J. 1. ii. c. 11. Plin. Hist. Nat. 1. v. c. 17. was too little acquainted with Jewish affairs to deserve credit on this subject. . !f • p. 191.'t Pliny )j <4 Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 395 the rising of the sun, they suffered no common language to pass their lips, but recited certain prayers, that it might rise upon them fortunately ; at the same time looking towards the sun, which they regarded as a symbol of the Deity. From this time to the fifth hour every one was employed in his proper occupation ; then, washing themselves, and putting on their white garments, they went into their public hall, or refectory, to dinner, and received their portion of food from the hand of the servitor in silence, ^fter their evening labours, they supped together in the same manner ; and every meal was begun and closed with prayer. No noise or confusion was ever heard or seen in their assemblies ; but conversation was carried on with such quietness, that a spectator would have imagined the silence and tranquillity of the scene intended to express some sacred mystery. They were temperate, peaceable, and honest ; true to their word, without the obligation of an oath, to which they were averse, except on the most solemn occasions ; and prompt to deeds of kindness, which they performed at pleasure without the authority of the master of the fraternity, whose in¬ structions they were in all other things obliged to follow. The virtues of plants and minerals were much studied among them, and applied to the cure of diseases. They honoured the name of Moses next to that of God: and he who blasphemed it was punished with death. So rigorous were they in the observance of the sabbath, that they would neither kindle a fire, nor remove a vessel, nor ease themselves on that day. To be touched by any one not belonging to their sect, or for an old man of their order to be touched by a young person, they held to be an impurity which required ablution. Some among them undertook to predict future events from their sacred books. They offered no sacrifices, but on the seventh day repaired to the synagogue, where the elder brethren explained the law to the younger. Through the simplicity of their manner of living, it commonly happened that they lived to an extreme old age. They were capable of enduring pain with great fortitude; as appeared in the firmness with which they bore the tortures inflicted upon them by the Romans, rather than blaspheme their lawgiver, or violate any of his precepts. They held, that the body is tierishable, but the soul immortal; that the soul, formed of a subtle ether, is imprisoned in the body, and is never happy till it is released from its prison ; that the good will, after death, be removed to a tranquil and de¬ lightful region beyond the ocean, but the bad to a dark habitation, which resounds with never-ceasing lamentations ; and that all things are under the direction of Divine Providence.* The body of the Essenes was not a single community, but consisted of many distinct societies, formed in the country, where they practised agri- ■ culture, or at a small distance from a town, where they might exercise their manual occupations : they had, however, one common interest ; and when any one of their number happened to travel, wherever he found an Essene fraternity, he was sure of being supplied with necessary provision and clothing. All domination they held to be unjust, and inconsistent with the law of nature, who has produced all her sons in a state of equality. So averse were they to war, that they would not suffer any of their body to be employed in manufacturing military weapons, or instruments of any kind. ’ No one was admitted as a member of this fraternity, without passing through a course of preparatory discipline out of the society^ for one year, and afterwards approving his constancy, by two years’ regular attendance within the college. After this, if he was judged worthy, he was received * Joseph, de Bell. J. 1. ii. c. 12. Ant. J. 1. xviii. c. 2. 1. xiii. c. 9. Philo de Essen. Op. p. 876, &c. 396 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. ^ as a brother, with a solemn oath to conform to the discipline, and observe >b the rules of the society, to guard its sacred books, and the names of its if angels, and not to divulge its mysteries. Josephus computes the number o of Essenes in his time, to have been about four thousand. What was meant, in the oath administered to the noviciates, by “ guard- t ing the names of the angels,” may be conjectured from the notion, which commonly prevailed in the East, and in Egypt, concerning the power of* j demons, or angels, over the affairs of this world. It is probable that the 1 Essenes, having adopted the visionary fancies of their Pagan neighbours i* concerning these superior natures, imagined themselves able, by the ma-l|i gical use of the names of angels, to perform supernatural wonders ; and : that the due observance of these mystical rites was the charge, which d they bound themselves by oath to take, of the sacred names of the angels.*]! 9 From the silence of the Evangelists concerning this sect, and from se- ( veral tenets and customs in which they differed from the rest of the Jews, 9 some have supposed that they were a sect of Pagan philosophers, who >i adopted in part the Jewish manners. But this opinion is contrary to the : express testimony of Philo and Josephus, who both speak of three sects of 'J Jews ; Sadducees, Pharisees, and Essenes. There can be no doubt how- ^ ever, that this sect borrowed many things from the heathen philosophers, ■: and particularly from the Pythagoreans, whom they nearly resembled in their manner of living. The truth seems to be, as we have already inti- . mated, that they became acquainted with the doctrines and institutions of : the Pythagoreans in Egypt ; and that, adopting these as far as their re- ' verence for the law of Moses would permit, they formed a distinct, sect ' which subsisted after their return into Judea. Philo mentions two classes of Essenes, of whom one followed a practical ; institution, the other professed a theoretical system. The latter he dis- j tinguishes by the name of the TherapeutjE. According to this writer,f who is here our only authority, the Therapeutse, so called, as it seems, from the extraordinary purity of their religious worship, were a contem- , 1 plative sect, who, with a kind of religious phrenzy, placed their whole felicity in the contemplation of the divine nature. Detaching themselves wholly from secular'affairs, they transferred their property to their relations or friends, and withdrew into solitary places, where they devoted them¬ selves to a holy life. The principal society of this kind was formed near Alexandria, where they lived, not far from each other, in separate cottages, , each of which had its own sacred apartment, to which the inhabitant re¬ tired for the purposes of devotion. After their morning prayers, they spent the day in studying the law and the prophets, endeavouring, by the help of the commentaries of their ancestors, to discover some allegorical mean¬ ing in every part. Besides this, they entertained themselves with composing sacred hymns in various kinds of metre. Six days of the week were, in this manner, passed in solitude. On the seventh day they met, clothed in a decent habit, in a public assembly; where taking their places according to their age, they sat, with the right hand between the breast and the chin, and the left at the side. Then, some one of the elders, stepping forth into the middle of the assembly, discoursed, with a grave countenance and a calm tone of voice, on the doctrines of the sect ; the audience, in the mean time, remaining in perfect silence, and occasionally expressing their atten¬ tion and approbation by a nod. The chapel where they met was divided * Vitring. de Vet. Synag. 1. c. Goodwin Moss, et Aar. 1. i. c. 12. sect. 23. Hottiiiger, 1. c. Coloss. ii. 18. f De Vit. Contempl. Op. p. 891. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 397 into two apartments, one for the men, the other for the women. So strict a regard was paid to silence in these assemblies, that no one was permitted to whisper, or even to breathe aloud ; but when the discourse was finished, if the question which had been proposed for solution had been treated to the satisfaction of the audience, they expressed their approbation by a murmur of applause. Then the speaker, rising, sung a hymn of praise to God, in the last verse of which the whole assembly joined. On great festi¬ vals the meeting was closed with a vigil, in which sacred music was per¬ formed, accompanied with solemn dancing : and these vigils were con¬ tinued till morning, when the assembly, after a morning prayer, in which their faces were directed towards the rising sun, was broken up. So ab- . stemious were these ascetics, that they commonly ate nothing before the setting sun, and often fasted two or three days. They abstained from wine, and their ordinary food was bread and herbs. Much dispute has arisen among the learned concerning this sect. Some have imagined them to have been Judaizing Gentiles;* but Philo sup- ^ poses them to be Jews, by speaking of them as a branch of the sect of Essenes, and expressly classes them among the followers of Moses. Others have maintained, that the Therapeutae were an Alexandrian sect of Jewish converts to the Christian faith, who devoted themselves to a monastic life.-j- But this is impossible, for Philo, who wrote before Christianity appeared in Egypt, speaks of this as an established sect. From comparing Philo’s account of this sect with the state of philosophy in the country where it flourished, we conclude, that the Therapeutae were a body of Jewish fana¬ tics, who sufiered themselves to be drawn aside from the simplicity of their ancient religion by the example of the Egyptians and Pythagoreans. How long this sect continued is uncertain ; but it is not improbable, that, after the appearance of Christianity in Egypt, it soon became extinct. Besides the four principal sects of the Jews, the Karaeites, the Saddu- cees, the Pharisees, and the Essenes, several others are mentioned by ancient writers ; but they are either wholly fictitious, or of little conse¬ quence. Among these sects there were, doubtless, many ingenious and able men, who, had their attention been turned towards philosophy, might have been eminent philosophers. But they were too deeply engaged in the study of their written and traditionary law, to pay much attention to science ; and their history affords few particulars which can be brought within the design of this work. We must not, however, overlook the elegant moralist, Jeshua ben Sirach ; the celebrated doctors of the law, Hillel and Sham- mai ; the learned Philo ; and the useful historian, Josephus. Jeshua, the son of Sirach,;]; appears from his own testimony to have been a native of Jerusalem, and to have lived in the time of the high ‘ priest Eleazer, about three hundred years before Christ. The last high priest whom he mentions is Simeon, the son of Onias, who was immedi¬ ately succeeded by Eleazer, whom he would doubtless have added to the rest, h^d he not been still living when Jeshua wrote. We are indebted to this Jeshua for a Modern Manual, which contains a summary of the ethics received among the Jews after the period of the prophets. It was origi¬ nally written in Hebrew, and translated into Greek by his grandson, at the * Langii Diss. Hal. 1721. + ISlontefaJcon Trad. Phil, de la Vie cent. Par. 1709. 8vo. Lettres, &c. sur les The- rapemes, Paris, 1712. I Ch. 1. V. 29. Joseph. Ant. Jud. 1. xii. c. 2. Wolf. Bib. Heb. P. i. p. 256. 1 398 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. i beginning of the reign of Ptolemy Euergetes.* This piece, called the book of Ecclesiasticus, was formerly read by the Jews ; but, after suffering much interpolation, it was at length prohibited. Passages extracted from this book are, however, still in the hands of the Jews, under the title of The Sentences of Ben Sira.f Hillel, surnarned Hassaken, was born, at Babylon, of poor parents, U' but of the royal stock of David, in the year one hundred and twelve before ^ : Christ. After residing forty years in Babylon, where he married, and had ji i a son, he removed with his family to Jerusalem, for the purpose of study- “ , ing the law. Shemaiah and Abdalion were at that time eminent doctors in Jerusalem. Hillel, unable on account of his poverty to gain a regular admission to their lectures, spent a considerable part of the profits of his daily labour in bribing the attendants to allow him a place at the door of the public hall, where he might gather up the doctrine of these eminent j masters by stealth ; and when this expedient failed him, he found means to j place himself at the top of the building near one of the windows. By un¬ wearied perseverance, Hillel acquired a profound knowledge of the most difficult points of the law ; in consequence of which his reputation gradually rose to such a height, that he became the master of the chief school in Jerusalem. In this station he was universally regarded as an oracle of wisdom scarcely inferior to Solomon, and had many thousand followers. He had such command of his temper, that no one ever saw him angry. The name of Hillel is in the highest esteem among the Jews, for the pains which he i took to perpetuate the knowledge of the traditionary law. He arranged its precepts under six general classes ; and thus laid the foundation of that I digest of the Jewish law, which is called the Talmud. Hillel is said to have lived to the great age of one hundred and twenty years. J Shammai, § one of the disciples of Hillel, deserted his school, and formed a college of his own, in which he taught dogmas contrary to those 1 i of his master. He rejected the oral law, and followed the written law only, in its literal sense. Plence he has been ranked among the Karaeites. The schools of Hillel and Shammai long disturbed the peace of the Jewish church by violent contests, in which however the party of Hillel was at last victorious. Among the Jews who inhabited Egypt was born, at Alexandria, of a noble and sacred family, Philo, a writer deservedly celebrated for his erudition. The exact time of his birth is not known ; but, as he speaks of himself as old and grey-headed in the time of Caligula, when he was sent ■ upon an embassy from his countrymen in Egypt to the emperor, which ■ happened in the year forty, it is probable that he was born at least twenty years before the commencement of the Christian era. || Whilst he was young, Philo diligently applied himself to the study of Grecian eloquence and wisdom in the schools of the Sophists and philoso¬ phers. He was intimately conversant with the writings of Plato, whose philosophy was at this time highly esteemed in Alexandria, and made himself so perfectly master both of his doctrine and language, that it became a proverbial observation, “ Either Plato philonised, or Philo pla- tonised.” After what manner Philo studied philosophy, will appear from a * Conf. Hieron. Prsef. in Prov. Huet. Dem. Ev. Pr. ii. p. 253. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p, 728, 729. f Bartolocc. Bib. Bab. t. i. p. 680. Bartolocc. Bib. Rab. t. i. p. 784. Geiger. Comment, de Hill, et Sham. Altdorf. 1707. Matt. Lightfoot Hor. Heb. 4to. p. .373. § Geiger. 1. c. II Hieron. Cat. Scr. Eccl. c. ii. Suidas. Phot. Cod. 105. Chap. 1. OF THE JEWS. 399 comparison of the nature of Jewish learning with the spirit of the Alexan¬ drian schools. We have seen, that, from the time of the Ptolemies, the use of allegories had been borrowed by the Jews from their Egyptian neighbours ; and that by the help of these, Platonic and Pythagorean dogmas were introduced among them, as the concealed and symbolical sense of their own law. In this manner they were able, without seeming to be indebted to heathen philosophers, to make any use they pleased of their systems. We have also seen, that in Egypt these systems were adul¬ terated with many dogmas from the Oriental philosophy, particularly on the subject of the Divine nature. This philosophy, which had been so well received in Alexandria, Philo eagerly embraced ; and, either for want of a perfect acquaintance with Jewish learning, or through a distaste for the simple doctrine of the Mosaic law literally understood, he, by the help of allegory, boldly interwove the Platonic dogmas with the doctrines of the sacred oracles, and ascribed them to Moses. It is, moreover, exceedingly probable, that he was herein, in some measure, influenced by the example of the Essenes and Therapeutae ; and that, that though he did not adopt their manner of living, he imitated their method of philosophising ; for he always speaks of them in the highest terms of commendation ; and he describes his youthful studies and contemplations in language which per¬ fectly agrees with the spirit of these sects.* Whatever inclination Philo had towards the fanatical philosophy of the Essenes, his love of eloquence drew him off from contemplative pursuits, and immersed him in civil affairs. He visited Rome, at the request of his countrymen, to vindicate them from the calumnies with which they had been loaded by the Alexandrians. Though his embassy proved fruitless, he committed the substance of his Apology for the Jews to writing, and herein gave a favourable specimen of his learning, ability, and integrity. Eusebius relates, that after the death of Caligula this Apology was read in the Roman senate, j- That Philo was acquainted with Grecian literature and philosophy suf¬ ficiently appears from his writings ; but his fondness for allegorical inter¬ pretations is no proof of the solidity of his judgment. At the same time that he greatly admired, and closely followed, the Platonic system, in the adulterated state in which it was taught in the Alexandrian schools, he professed to derive the tenets of Platonism from the sacred writings, and even represented Plato as a disciple of Moses. Of this strange combination of Platonic refinements with the simple doctrine of the Hebrew scriptures, innumerable examples occur in his works. In his book upon the creation of the world, Philo every where supposes the prior existence of Plato’s world of ideas : and represents the Deity as constructing visible nature after a model which he had first formed. He attributes to Moses all the metaphysical subtleties of Plato upon this sub¬ ject, and maintains, that the philosopher received them from the holy prophet; “ God,” says he, j; “ when he foresaw, in his divine wisdom, that no fair imitation could possibly exist without a fair pattern, nor any sensible object be faultless, which did not correspond to the archetype of some intelligible idea, after he had decreed to make this sensible world, first formed an intelligible and incorporeal model, after which he might frame the material world ; the latter containing as many kinds of sensible, as the former of intelligible natures. The ideal world must neither be represented * Jos. Ant. J. 1. xviii. c. 18. Euseb. Hist. Ecc. 1. ii. c. 4. Pr. Ev. 1. vii. c. 12. Phil, de Special. Leg. Op. p. 769. f Jos. et Euseb. I. c. X De Opif. Mundi, p. 3. 400 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. I nor conceived, as circumscribed by space.” Again,* “This intelligible:! i world is, according to the Mosaic doctrine, no other than the Word, or - Reason (Aoyog) of God now forming the world ; and this Reason in the ”1 beginning produced Heaven, which consists in pure essence, and is the .1 destined habitation of gods both visible and invisible.” “ The Creator,” ■ adds he, “f- “framed, in the intelligible world, first of all, an incorporeal ii*li heaven, an invisible earth, and the image of air and space, and afterwards ii the incoi*poreal essence of water and light, and the intelligible pattern of i the sun and all the stars.” After the example of the Alexandrian school, which combined theP: Pythagorean doctrine with the Platonic, Philo supposes the order of the| visible world to have been adapted to the Pythagorean proportions and numbers. He maintains the immutability of the material world upon th^* . principle universally adopted by the ancients, that as from nothing nothing 4 can be produced, so nothing which exists can be annihilated ; whence it may be inferred, that he conceived matter to be coeval with Deity.:}; He held the human soul to consist of three natures, the rational, the irascible^ and the concupiscible.§ Concerning the Deity, Philo every where makes use of the language of Plato rather than of Moses. He speaks of God as containing all things, but contained by none ; as embracing all things within his bosom, and per- jiW vading every part of the universe. His language concerning the Divine '*( Nature is so obscure and inconsistent, that it is difficult to discover, with _i accuracy, his real meaning. But, if those parts of his writings, in which#): he drops the popular language, and expresses his philosophical notions on • this subject, be diligently compared, it will perhaps be found, that Philo iji: supposed a quaternion of principles in the Divine Nature ; the first fountain of divinity, and three emanations from this fountain, each possessing a dis- b tinct, substantial existence, but all united in essence with the First Principle, tf The first of these emanations, which he called The Logos, he conceived / to have been the divine intellect, the seat of those ideas which form the ) intelligible world ; and the second and third, to have been the substantial ' principles or powers by which the sensible world was created and governed.^ i i This doctrine of substantial emanations within the Divine Nature was at ^ this time received among the Platonists from the Oriental schools ; and we ’ shall afterwards find that it was the doctrine of the Jewish Cabbala. It is therefore probable, that this was the doctrine concerning the divine nature embraced by this pupil of the Egyptian schools. Philo, and other Egyptian Jews, who adopted the Oriental and Platonic philosophy, seem neither to have conceived of the Logos, and other primary emanations from the first fountain of Deity, as beings separate in nature 0 and essence from God, nor merely as simple attributes, but as substantial virtues or powers radically united in the Divine Essence, and distinct from the First Principle only in their peculiar mode of existing and acting ; that is, they conceived, or imagined they conceived, a kind of middle nature, between beings who enjoy a separate existence and mere attributes or pro¬ perties. This hypothesis may serve to cast a feeble ray of light upon those obscure passages, in which Philo speaks of God as the Being who is, and who has two most ancient powers nearest him, one on each side, of whom one is called the Maker, the other the Governor. || Again, “ The Middle Divinity, attended on each side by his powers, presents to the enlightened * De Opif. Mundi, p. 5. § De Confus. Ling. p. 322. t P. 6. 9. De Legis Alleg. p. 53. De MundoLincorrupt. p. 939, &c. 11 De Abrahamo, p. 367. Chap. 1. OF TIIK JEWS. 4-01 ■ mind, sometimes one image, sometimes three; one, when the soul, per¬ il fectly purified, passes beyond not only other numbers, but even that which |f| is next to unity, the binary, and hastens to that which is strictly simple; H three, when, not yet initiated into the great mysteries, it is employed upon I the less, and is unable to comprehend Him Who Is, by himself alone I without another, but sees him in his operations as the former or governor il I After what has been advanced, the Platonism of Philo cannot, on any solid ground of argument, be called in question. It must, however, be remembered, that his Platonism was of that adulterated kind, which at this time prevailed in Alexandria. The works of Philo abound with proofs of genius and erudition, and may serve to cast great light upon the state of the Platonic philosophy at that period ; but they discover, in every page, a want of sound and accu¬ rate judgment ; and the allegorical style which he borrowed from the Egyptians has cast such a veil of obscurity over his writings, that it is, i perhaps, in vain to attempt to explain them throughout ; some have even presumed to question, whether Philo himself always clearly understood what he wrote. Josephus,* the historian, was a native of Jerusalem, and a descendant I of the illustrious Asmonean family ; he was born in the year 37. At the ;age of fourteen, he made great proficiency in the knowledge of the Jewish law. For the purpose of studying the history and tenets of the several Jewish sects, he became for three years, a pupil of Banun, a hermit, who had acquired great fame for wisdom, and with him lived a recluse and 1 abstemious life. After this, he addicted himself to the sect of the Pharisees, ! and engaged in civil affairs. Visiting Rome, in the twenty-sixth year of I his age, he obtained access to Nero, and procured liberty for some of his I countrymen. On his return home, he in vain attempted to persuade his I fellow citizens to submit quietly to the Roman yoke. At length, in the (war of Vespatian, after an unsuccessful defence of the citadel of Jotapata, the was taken prisoner. After a short time, however, when Vespatian and , Titus, according to a prediction which he is said to have delivered, came I to the empire, he was restored to liberty. He now visited Egypt, and [took up his residence at Alexandria, where he, doubtless, studied the (Grecian and Egyptian philosophy. II Josephus accompanied Titus in the siege of Jerusalem, the memorable I ! particulars of which he accurately minuted as they passed, and afterwards I -related at large in his Annals. He spent the latter part of his life at Rome, bunder the protection of Vespatian, Titus, and Domitian, and there wrote ihis Jewish Antiquities. He lived till after the thirteenth year of Domitian, jWhen he wrote against Apion ; but in what year he died is uncertain. His b writings at the same time that they discover an accurate knowledge of the I affairs of his own country, show an extensive acquaintance with Grecian [learning and philosophy; but national vanity and partiality led him to I imagine that all knowledge and wisdom had originated in Judea, and had 'flowed thence through all the nations of the earth; a notion which gave Irise to many errors and misrepresentations in his writings, and which has I since been too implicitly adopted by many Christian writers.-f- I * Vit. Op. p. 998, &c. Ant. J. 1. xx. c. 9. f Vidend. passim Reimann. Intr. Hist. Theol. Jud. Carpzov. Int. in Theol. Jud. Eisenmeriger, Jud. Detect. Maii Theol. Jud. Wolfii Bibl. Hebr. Buddsei Introd. ad Hist. Ph. Heb. Basnage, Hist, des Juifs. Reland. Diss. de Samaritan. Cellarius de Samar. Gent. Hist. Horbius de Orig. Simon Mag. Huntington, Epist. Lond. HO't. ! 1) D 402 OF THE PHII.OSOPHY Book IV. I CHAPTER II. 1 OF THE STATE OF THE JEWISH PHILOSOPHY FROM THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM TO MODERN TIMES. I After the destruction of Jerusalem, and the dissolution of the Jewish > state, the history of the dispersed Jews has little connexion with the i history of philosophy. From this time to the Middle Age, we meet with ’ nothing among them which claims our attention, except an excessive and t absurd fondness for their traditionary institutions ; and a kind of enthu- 1 siastic philosophy, called the Cabbalistic, which sprung from the Alexan- .j drian schools, and mixed Oriental, Egyptian, Pythagoric and Platonic u notions with the simple doctrine of the Hebrew scriptures. In process of i time, when the Jews passed from the Eastern to the Western world, the ^ Aristotelian philosophy, which became predominant among the Arabians, i found its Avay into the Jewish schools. In order to trace with precision the progress of the Jewish philosophy, it will be necessary to take a general survey of the state of Jewish learning ; at this period. Without this it would be impossible to discern, how far their Talmudic and Cabbalistic doctrines were grounded upon authority, 1 and derived from their domestic sources ; and how far they were borrowed • from Gentile philosophy. The devastation and ruin which fell upon the Jewish nation after the conquest of Vespatian and Titus, reduced them to so low and wretched a i condition, that only a small number of learned men were left among them, t to transmit their ancient doctrines and institutions to posterity. Of th^e, i pant escaped into Egypt, where a Jewish colony had* resided from the time, i of Alexander ; and part withdrew to Babylon, where also many Jews had remained from the time of the captivity. In both these countries, these Jewish refugees were humanely received.* An inconsiderable body of this unfortunate people still remained behind, in the desolated country of i Palestine. These collected the scattered fragments of Jewish learning ■ from the general wreck, into a school at Jafna'f' (frequently called by the ' Antiq. Eccl. Or. Lond. 1C82. Vossius de Septuag. Interp Hag. Comm. 1661. Van Dale. Diss. de Aristes. Hody contra Hist. Arist. Ox. 1684. et de Bibl. Text. Orig. et Vers. 1705. Nourry Apparat. Biol. Diss. xii. Engelbach Diss. de Vers. Grasc. Sept, antiquiore. | Viteb. 170G. Diss. de Vestig. Phil. Alex, in Libro Sapientise. Misc. Berolin, t. vi. p. 150. Bartoloccii Bibl. Rabbin. Buddsei Hist. Ecc. Vet. T. Zeltner de erud. Feminis Heb. i Schudt. Memorab. Judaic. R. Mardochai de Karseis. Trigland. Syntagma trium. Script, t de Trib. Jud. Sectis. Delph. 1704. Drusii Tract, de Hasidseis. Serarii in Trihaeresin ; contra Drus. Scaligeri Elench. Trihseresii Serarii. Shupart. de Sect. Karaeor. Jenae, 1701. Goodwin’s Moses and Aaron. Willimer, Diss. de Sadducseis. Reland. Ant. Sac. * Geiger, de Hillele et Sbammai. Lightfoot Horse Hebr. &c. Vitringa de Vet. Synag < Deyling, Diss. de Ascet. Obs. S. p. iii. Langii Diss. de Essseis, Ital. 1721. Wachtei i de Essenis. Clerici Epist. Crip. viii. Fabric. Diss. de Platon. Phil. Lips. 1693. in Syllogf 1 Diss. Vander Wayen de Ao^^. Got. Clear. Diss. de Vaticinio Josephi, Lips. 1609 i Pfeiffer, Theolog. Jud. Schoetgen. Jesus verus Mass, ex Theolog. Jud. dem Lips. 1748 t Wachter de Primordiis Chr. Rel. * Joseph Bell. J. 1. vi. Conf. Basnage, 1. iii. c. 1. f Joseph. Ant. J. 1. xiv. c. 8. Bell. J. 1. i. c. 5. Reland. Palaest. 1. iii. p. 823. Light- foot, Cent. Chorogr. Matt. Procem. c. xv. t. ii. }>. 181. R. D. Ganz in Zemach David ; p. 39. Buxtorf. Tib. c. 5. Lightf. Op. p. 87. Basnage, 1. vi. c. 5. sect. 8. Chap. 2. OF THE JEWS. 403 Greek writers Jamnia) where they also revived their forms of worship. The Rabbi Jochanan was the founder of this school ; and the good de¬ sign which he began was completed, as far as the state of the times would permit, by the Rabbi Gamaliel, who is from this circumstance called GeiMALiel Jafniensis. The success which attended this school induced many of the dispersed Jews to return to Palestine : and another school was formed at Tiberias, which soon became the chief seat of Jewish learning in its native country. This school obtained immunities and ! privileges from the emperor Antoninus Pius ; and it produced that I curious record of Jewish wisdom, the Jerusalem Talmud. Other schools I after the example of Jafna and Tiberias, were erected at Bitterah, near I Jerusalem, at Lydda or Diospolis, at Caesarea, and (which became more ! celebrated than the rest) at Zippora, or Sephora, in Galilee.* ! From this time there was not wanting a succession of Jewish doctors to ; transmit their religion and philosophy to posterity. They are arranged in a series of seven classes, "j- the last of which brings down the succession to ;l the time when the Jews, enticed by the example of the Saracens and Christians, engaged in the study of the Aristotelian philosophy. In each ; ’ of these classes there w^ere, doubtless, men of ability ; but the talents which f; nature bestowed upon them were wasted upon the trifling and absurd study I of tradition, which, as tares choke the wheat, suppressed every manly exertion of reason ; or, if any among them attempted a superior kind of if wisdom, they soon lost themselves in the mysteries of Cabbalistic meta- . physics. It is therefore wholly unnecessary, in this work, to enter into a d minute detail of their history. Only it must be remembered, that these ' Jewish doctors flourished not only in Palestine, but in the Babylonish I ' schools which were established at Sora, Pumbedithena, and other places I near the Euphrates : and we must not omit particularly to mention the , ’ Rabbi Jehuda Hakkadosh,^ who adorned the school of Tiberias, and * whose memory is so highly revered by the Jews, that they compare him with the Messiah. He was born about the year 120. The Jews relate ) many extravagant stories of this Rabbi : among the rest, they assert, that ^ he made the emperor Marcus Antoninus a proselyte to Judaism, and that I it was by his order that Jehuda compiled the Mishna. : The history of the Mishna is briefly this : the sect of the Pharisees, after the destruction of Jerusalem, prevailing over the rest, the study of t traditions became the chief object of attention in all the Jewish schools. I The number of these traditions had, in a long course of time, so greatly f increased, that the doctors, whose principal employment it was to illustrate I them by new explanations, and to confirm their authority, found itneces- ' sary to assist their recollection by committing them, under distinct heads, i to writing. At the same time, their disciples took minutes of the explana- I tions of their preceptors, many of which were preserved, and grew up into I voluminous commentaries. The confusion which arose from these causes j was now become so troublesome, that, notwithstanding what Hillel had I before done in arranging the traditions, Jehuda found it necessary to f attempt a new digest of the oral law, and of the commentaries of their I most famous doctors. This arduous undertaking is said to have employed I him forty years. It was completed, according to the unanimous testimony * Lightf. Cent. Ch. c. 81. 52. 16. 82. 76. 96. Reland. 1. c. p. 409. 679. 877. t Pirke Abhoth. Maimonid. in Prsef. Jad. Hassakah. R. Abr. B. Dior, in Cabbala, j P. Zackhuth, in Jucbasin. K. Gedalia in Shalsheleth Hakkabala. Conf. Hen. Othon. ) Hist. Mishnic. cum Relandi Notis. Wclf. Bib. Heb. P. ii. p. 924. i + Bartolocc. Bibl. Rab. t. iii. p. 79. Basnage, 1. iii. c. 3. sect. 2 — 6. 404< or THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. of the Jews, which in this case there is' no sufficient reason to dispute, h about the close of the second century. This Mishna, or first Talmud, 3 comprehends all the laws, institutions, and rules of life, which, besides the t ancient Hebrew scriptures, the Jews supposed tliemselves bound to ob- i ^ serve. Notwithstanding the obscurities, inconsistencies, and absurdities : ii with which this collection abounds, it soon obtained credit among the j}| Jews as a sacred book.* After all, however, the Mishna did not completely provide for many ^ cases which arose in the practice of ecclesiastical law, and many of its 1 prescriptions and decisions were found to require further comments and '4 illustrations. The task of supplying these defects was undertaken by the } Rabbis Chiiam and Oscaim, and others, disciples of Jehuda; who not i only wrote explanations of the Mishna, but made material additions to i that voluminous compilation. These commentaries and additions were i! collected by the Rabbi Jochanan ben Eliezer, probably in the fifth century, ]/i under the name of the Gemara, because it completed the Mishna. This ' collection was afterwards called the Jerusalem Gemara, to distinguish it from another of the same kind made in Babylon, at the beginning of the sixth century. To these collections we must add the Mishnic treatise called, Capitalia Patrum, “ A Compendium of the Moral Maxims and \ Sentiments of the Jewish Fathers it is an ancient compilation, probably 1 made by Nathan, a Babylonian Rabbi, who flourished about the year 120. | ' With the ritual and ecclesiastical precepts of the law, there was also [ a taught in the Jewish schools a mystical kind of traditionary doctrine, i which was called the Cabbala. In this metaphysical system we find the p ' Jews, while they profess to follow the footsteps of Moses, turning aside : 5 into the paths of Gentile philosophy. The Jews pretend to derive their ; I Cabbala from Esdras, Moses, Abraham, and Adam : but it is very evident i from the Cabbalistic doctrine concerning divine emanations, of which we ■ shall speak more fully in the sequel, that it originated in Egypt, where j : the Jews learned, by the help of allegory, to mix Oriental, Pythagoric, and 3 Platonic dogmas with Hebrew wisdom. These doctrines soon found their !: : way into Palestine ; and, though at first the number of Mystics does not appear to have been great, after the dissolution of the republic, multitudes were wonderfully captivated with this sublime method of philosophising upon divine subjects. Under the sanction of ancient names, many fictitious writings were produced, which greatly contributed to the spread of this ; mystical system. Among these wete Sepher Happeliah, The Book of j Wonders; Sepher Hakkaneh, The Book of the Pen; and Sepher Hab- hahir, the Book of Light. The first unfolds many doctrines said to have ;i been delivered by Elias to the Rabbi Elkanah ; the second contains mys¬ tical commentaries on the divine commands ; the third illustrates the most ■: sublime mysteries. t ' “ 'T* Among the profound doctors, who besides the study of tradition, culti- |i vated with great industry the Cabbalistic philosophy, the most celebrated ; ! names are the Rabbis Akibha and Simeon ben Jochai. To the former is ascribed the book entitled Jezirah, Concerning the Creation ; to the tatter, the book NoAar, or Brightness; which are the principal sources whence we derive our knowledge of the Cabbala. * Maimon. Praef. ad Seder Saraim. el. at Jad. Chassaka. Morini Exerc. Bibl. 1. i. c. ;; 6. 1. ii. ex. 6. c. 2. Basnage, 1. iii. c. 6. sect. 6. Ottho Hist. D. Mishnic. : i t Vid. Hist. Lit. Scriptores Jud. R. Zachuth, R. David Ganz, R. Gedalia, Conf. Bas-i nage, p. 139. Lightfoot Op. t. ii. p. 221. Morini Exerc. Bib. 1. ii. ex. 10. c. i. Wolf." Bib. Heb. t. ii. p. 139. i + Wolf. Bib. Heb. P. i. p. 196. 905. P. iii. p. 126, 127. i f I 1 Chap. 2. OF THE JEWS. 40j Akibha, who lived soon after the destruction of Jerusalem, and had a school at Lydda, or Dioscopolis, was so famous a teacher that, if we may credit tlie Jewish accounts, he had twenty-four thousand disciples. In such high estimation was he held among the Jews of Palestine, that they did not scruple to say, that God revealed to Akibha what he had concealed 1 from Moses. His book Jezirah was quoted as of divine authority ; an undoubted proof of the ignorance and superstition of the Jews at this period ; for it is impossible to take the most cursory survey of its contents without perceiving that it abounds with trifles and absurdities.* At the time when Akibha was far advanced in life, and had established extensive authority, appeared the famous impostor, Bar Cochbas, under the character of the Messiah, promising to deliver his countrymen from It the power of the emperor Adrian. Akibha espoused his cause, and afforded f him the protection and support of his name; and an army of two hundred thousand men repaired to his standard. The Romans at first slighted the if insurrection; but, when they found that the insurgents spread slaughter i‘ and rapine wherever they came, they sent out a military force against I them. At first, the issue of the contest was doubtful. After a short time, i however, this pretended Messiah was blocked up, with his army, in the [ city of Bitterah ; and after a siege of three years and a half, he was made , prisoner, and with his followers put to the svvord. In this carnage, Akibha, ' with his son Pappus, was flayed alive. This happened according to the ; Jewish chronologists, in the year 120: Basnage places the event in the I year 138.'|' Akibha, after his death, was honoured by the Jews as an [ eminent doctor of their law ; and his tomb, which they supposed to be at f Tiberias, was visited with great solemnity. The Jewish writers assert that I Akibha received the Jezirah from Abraham ; but there can be little : doubt that its doctrines flowed from the Cabbalistic fountain of the Jewish ' schools in Egypt. The work, whether written by Akibha or one of his ; followers, has probably undergone interpolation. j Simeon ben Jochai,§ who flourished in the second century, and was . a disciple of Akibha, is called by the Jews the prince of the Cabbalists. After the suppression of the sedition, in which his master had been so unsuccessful, he concealed himself in a cave, where, according to the Jew¬ ish historians, he received revelations, which he afterwards delivered to his I disciples, and which they carefully preserved in the book called Sahar, I This book contains a summary of the Cabbalistic philosophy, expressed in I obscure hieroglyphics and allegories. As this book has not been mentioned ; by any Jewish writer prior to the thirteenth century, its authenticity has I been doubted ; but its doctrine and method bear evident marks of antiquity, ' and render it exceedingly probable, that it is, in the main, a true repre- , * Zemach. David, ad. An. iliind. 3760. Bayle. Liglitfoot, Hor. Heb. t. ii. p. 449. : E. g. Dixit R. Akibha: (a) “ Ingressus sum aliquando post R. Josuam in sedis ? secretae locum, et tria ab eo didici : didici promo, quod non versus orientem et occi- • dentem, sed versus septentrionem et austrum nos convertere debeamus. Didici secun- I do, quod non in pedes erectum, sed jam considentem se retegere liceat. Didici tertio, quod podex non dextra sed sinistra manu abstergendus sit. Ad 'nsec objecit ibi Ben Rassai: usve adeo vero perfricuisti frontem ergo magistrum tuum ut cacantem obser- vares ? Respondit ille : legis haec arcana sunt, ad quae discenda id necessario mihi agendum fuit. ” — En vero egregiam doctrinam moralem ! f Basnage, 1. vii. c. 12. Lightfoot, t. ii. ]>. 280. ■ J R. Gedaliab, llakkab. p. 28. ’ § Wolf. Bib. Heb. P. i. p. 702. Knorr. Praef. Cabb. Denud. p. ii. I In tr. Talm. f. 62. col. 1. 4*06 OF THE FHILOSOFHY Book IV. sentation of the doctrine which the Cabbalistic Jews derived from the Eg3’^ptian schools.* From the third century to the tenth few traces of the Cabbalistic phi¬ losophy are to be met with in the writings of the Jews. The probable reason is, that these mysteries, which differ materially from the ancient doctrine of the Jewish church, were entrusted only to the initiated, and this under a solemn oath of secrecy : whence few persons would venture to commit them to writing. If any such books wei’e written, they would, doubtless, be with great industry concealed from public inspection ; or if they happened to fall into the hands of an uninitiated Jew, their enigmatic language would be a seal upon their meaning, not to be broken by a vulgar hand. Add to this, that the Jews were for many centuries deeply involved in controversy concerning their traditionary law, and if they were possessed of Talmudical erudition, thought themselves sufficiently learned; and that jj the whole nation was oppressed and harassed by persecution. Jewish learning, which, from the time of the dispersion of this unfortu¬ nate people, had declined, began to revive at the period when the Saracens became the patrons of philosophy. In the tenth century, the schools of Sora and Pumbeditha again flourished under new preceptors.'!" The Rabbi Saadias Gaon,J a native of Egypt, in the year 927, took the charge of the school of Sora, where he restored the study of literature and philosophy. He wrote a work entitled, “ The Philosopher’s Stone,” which is not, as might be expected, Alchymic, but Cabbalistic; he also wrote “A Compendium of Jewish Theology,” in which he not unskilfully ! illustrates its principal heads by philosophical reasoning. In the eleventh , century, a school was instituted at Pherez Skibber, in which the Rabj* bis Sherira Gaon, and his son Hai, presided. The former wrot^- notes upon the Mishna and Gemara ; the later illustrated the Cabbalisti^ philosophy by a treatise concerning divine names, and a comment upo^i the book Jezirah. With them expired the Jewish learning in the East.®!’ The Jews being now violently persecuted by the Saracens, fled froi^w the Eastern to the Western world, and found an asylum in Spain, whe^l ■ they boast that the family of David is preserved. Here they opened new *; schools, and cultivated Talmudic learning and Cabbalistic philosophy, i About the beginning of the twelfth century, the Talmud was translated ^ into Arabic, and a Talmudic lexicon was published ; after which, many . commentators upon the Talmud, and many Cabbalistic writers appeared. § j The attention which was now paid to the writings of Aristotle, both by \ Arabians and Christians, among whom the Stagirite was every where ex¬ tolled as the oracle of truth, excited the emulation of the Jevi s ; and they, ^ from this time, addicted themselves to the stud)’ of the Peripatetic phi- f losophy. This innovation, so inconsistent with the reverence which they | professed to entertain for the law, and the traditions of their fathers, was | exceedingly displeasing to the zealous advocates for Talmudic learning; | who easily perceived, that as the one gained credit the other must decline. i The ancient curse denounced upon the Jew who should instruct his son | in Grecian learning was revived; and in the year 1280, the Rabbi who j presided in the synagogue of Barsina, Solomon ben Abraham ben * Knorr. ed. Solibach. 1684. Amst. 1714. ! t Basnage, 1. ix. c. 4. sect. 2. X Ganzii Zemach David, p. 51. Zachulhi Juchasin. p. 119, &'c. Gedalia Shalsheleth / Hakkabala, p. 38. Basnage, ib. i Basnage, 1. ix. c. 10. 1. vii. c. 9. Schudt. Mem. Jud. I. iv. c. 9. OF THE JEWS. 407 I Chap. 2. Adrath (called by way of pontraction Rashba) prohibited the study i of Gentile philosophy.* Notvidthstanding all this, however, the Jews I persevered in their philosophical pursuits, and, from the twellth century, : distinguished themselves by their knowledge of mathematics and physics. I Isaac ben Said constructed astronomical tables ;-!■ and Isaac Israel i Toletanus, was an eminent astronomer and chronologer. J t To facilitate the study of Aristotle among the Jews, his writings were ( translated (it may be presumed, not very accurately) from the Arabic (for I the Greek was at this time little read) into the Hebrew tongue. Several I other ancient works, particularly the Elements of Euclid, and the medical [ writings of the Greeks, towards the close of the thirteenth century appeared in a Hebrew dress. So highly was the name of Aristotle now respected ; among the Jews, that they not only called him the prince of philosophers, I but maintained that his philosophy was the perfection of human science, I and could only be excelled by the doctrine of Divine Revelation. In order to screen themselves from censure for submitting to receive wisdom from a heathen philosopher, they pretended that Aristotle was himself a pro¬ selyte to Judaism, and was indebted to Solomon for a great part of his ' philosophy. § The Rabbi Chanani a ben Isaac wrote “ Institutes of the , Philosophers ; ” a collection of moral precepts and apophthegms from the ancients. In the work already mentioned, wwitten about this time under the title of Cosri, or, more accurately, Hachosari,\\ Aristotelian prin¬ ciples were employed in demonstrating the truth of the Jewish religion : it ! may be considered as a specimen of Jewish philosophy in the Middle Age. The most celebrated names among the learned Jews of this period are Abraham ben Muir aben Esra, and Moses ben Maimon, or Mai- ; MONJDES. > Aben Esra was born at Toledo, in Spain, and flourished about the ; middle of the twelfth century. On account of his profound erudition, he was not only called the Wise, but the Great, and the Wonderful. He travelled for the purpose of acquiring knowledge, and far surpassed his I brethren both in sacred and profane learning. He wrote theological, ; grammatical, mathematical, and astrological works, many of which remain in ancient libraries, not yet edited.^ Maimonides, who holds a distinguished place among the learned of this age, was born at Cordova, in Spain, in the year 1131. Among his preceptors was Averroes the Arabian. Through his superior ge¬ nius and industry, he acquired a degree of learning which excited the . jealousy and envy of his countrymen : perhaps, too, his connexion with , Averroes might lead him to adopt obnoxious opinions. It has been asserted, that he became a convert to Mahometanism ; but this wants ' proof. Whatever was the cause, which it is not now easy to discover, it is certain that Maimonides found his residence in Spain troublesome and hazardous, and removed into Egypt, where he settled at Cairo : here his learning and talents engaged the notice of the Sultan of Egypt, Malch El Hadul, who employed him as his physician. Maimonides instituted a school at Alexandria, where he had many followers, who were, however, soon afterwards dispersed by persecution. Some say, that he died in * Shalsheleth. p. 58. Wolf. p. 1033. f Juchasin. p. 132. X Wolf. p. 663. § Wolf. p. 383. 655. 217. Maimon. Ep. ad R. A. Tibbon. § Shalsheleth. p. 40. Wolf. p. 440. I ^ Shalsheleth. p. 41. Juchasin, p. 131. _ Zemach D. ad A. 4934. Wolf. p. 146. 764. 408 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. I Egypt, in the year 1201 ; others, that he died in Palestine, in the , year 1205. ) This learned Jew was not only master of many Eastern languages, but,' which was a rare accomplishment at that time, was well acquainted with the Greek tongue ; in which he seems to have read the works of Plato, Aristotle, Themistius, Galen, and others : he confesses, that he had been'! ' much conversant with the writings of philosophers. As a physician he | possessed high reputation : he was a good logician, and had a competent! knowledge of mathematics. In Talmudic learning, he excelled all his| contemporaries. Besides many other works, he wrote a treatise “ On Idolatry;” another, “ On the Theology of the Gentiles;” and a third, i* “ On Allegorical Language which discovered great learning, but leaned ^ towards Gentile philosophy more than his countrymen approved. A sin-i'| gular proof of his fondness for the Aristotelian doctrines, and, at the same | time, a curious specimen of the absurd method of allegorising, adopted;; even by the more intelligent among the Jews, w’e meet with in his expla-'l j nation of the sapphire stone, which Moses saw under the feet of the Godf' " of Israel, the whiteness of which he understood to denote the "YXiy Trpwrj/^'f ;■ the first matter, of Aristotle. J tV- _ _ i I CHAPTER III. OF THE JEWISH PHILO.SOPHY, EXOTERIC AND CABBALISTIC. The philosophy of the Jews, which is inseparably connected with their* theology, differed essentially from that of the Greeks in the sources from ^ which it was derived. Whilst the several Grecian sects of philosophers,- applied the powers of the human understanding to every subject of specu-/ lation, and attempted to establish all their tenets upon the ground of rational :• argument, the Jew's professed to derive all their knowledge from Divine ' Revelation, either in the Mosaic law, or in the traditions and decisions of their Fathers. Although the Jewish doctors distinguish between such doctrines as may be known from the principles of reason, and such as rest upon tradition, oral or w-ritten, they in fact made little use of this distinc¬ tion, and were satisfied wdth nothing which could not be supported by ■ authority. Even in maintaining those doctrines which might have been established by rational arguments, they relied more upon tradition than reason, and, by the help of allegorical interpretations, found in their sacred books whatever tenets they had either borrowed from others, or framed in * Juchasin. p. 131. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 296. Shakheleth. p. 43. Basnage 1. ix. c. 10. Wolf- p. 865. f Ed. Basil. 1629. Epist. Venet. 1545. 4 Conf. Budd. Intr. Hist. Heb. p. 167. Basnage. 1. ix. p. 277. Vidend. passim Zeltner. Diss. de Beruria. Altdorf. 1714. R. Moses Mikkozi, lib. Prsecept. Maimonid. Preef. ad Sedar Saraim. Buxtorf. Recensio Op. Talm. Z. Gra- pius in Idea Talmud. Hier. Lips. 1695. Jo. A. Lent. Mod. Theol. Jud. Wagenseil ad Sota. Morina Exerc. Bibl. Leo. African. IMaimon. in Praef. Jad. Hassakah. Dior, in Cabbala. Zacbuth in Juchasin. Gedalia in Shalsheleth Kakkabala Gantz. Zemach David Ottbon. Hist. Mishnic. Wolf. Basnage, Reland, Lightfoot, Hottinger, Buddaeus, Prideaux, &c. I Chap. 3. OF THE JEWS. 409 ! their own imaginations. In the writings of men, who thus forsook the pure doctrine of revelation in search of fictions, and who, nevertheless, had ; no confidence in the natural powers of the human mind, it is in vain to expect much that can deserve the name of philosophy. 1 Two methods of instruction were in use among the Jews ; the one, pub- I' I lie or exoteric ; the other, secret or esoteric. The exoteric doctrine was : that w'hich was openly taught the people from the law of Moses, and the il traditions of the fathers. The esoteric was that which treated of the i mysteries of the divine nature, and other sublime subjects, and was known : by the name of the Cabbala. The latter was, after the manner of the Py- ()' thagorean and Egyptian mysteries, taught only to certain persons, who ' M'ere bound, under the most solemn anathema, not to divulge it. The exoteric doctrine comprehended the popular articles of faith and rules of manners. These were not reduced into a systematic form till the middle of the tenth century ; when the Rabbi Saadias Gaon, the master of the school at Sora, wrote a book in the Arabic language concerning the Faith,* * * § which Jehuda Tibbon translated into Hebrew. The articles of the Jewish faith were afterwards reduced by Maimonides to thirteen, which were generally received, though not without some opposition, in the Jew¬ ish church.'!' Ethics were so little studied among the Jews, that, in their whole compilation called the Talmud, there is only one treatise on moral subjects. After the Peripatetic doctrine was received among them, some attention was paid to Aristotle’s doctrine of morals ; and, among the Jews in the Western world, we find, from the eleventh century, many writers, who treat upon the practical rules of life and manners, not however with¬ out a mixture of allegory and mysticism. Their books of morals chiefly consisted in a minute enumeration of duties. From the law of Moses were deduced six hundred and thirteen precepts, which were divided into two classes, affirmative and negative; two hundred and forty-eight in the former, 5 and three hundred and sixty-five in the latter. These may be seen in the ij Jewish catechism, and in a Talmudic treatise, entitled Maccoth.\ It may j serve to give the reader some idea of the low state of moral philosophy I among the Jews in the Middle Age, to add, that of the two hundred and I forty-eight affirmative precepts, only three were considered as obligatory I upon w omen ; and that, in order to obtain salvation, it was judged sufficient to fulfil any one single law in the hour of death ; the observance of the rest being deemed necessary, only to increase the felicity of the future life.§ What a wretched depravity of sentiment and manners must have prevailed before such corrupt maxims could have obtained credit ! It is impossible to collect from these writings any thing like a consistent series of moral doctrine. Of their popular theoretical tenets the follow'- i ing is a brief summary. The Creator is One ; there is none like him, and he alone has been, is, I and will be. The existence of God is nothing but his essence and truth, i The foundation of wisdom is to know, that God is the First Being, and that he gives existence to all others. The essence of God cannot be compre¬ hended by the human understanding ; he can only be known by his attri¬ butes and name. In the name of niH' Jehovah, there is great power ; and it is unlawful for any man to utter it, except the priest when he • Budd. Intr. Hist. Ph. ITeb. sect. 32. t Wolf. p. 867. Basnage, 1. iv. c. 1. sect. 1. Schudt. Mem. J. p. ii. 1. vi. c-^27. j sect. 18. Maimon. Ed. Vorstii. Amst. 1638. + Edit. Cantab. 1597. § Wolf. ib. p. 744. 221. 571. Jo. A. Lent. Theol. Jud. c. xiv. sect. 3. Lev. Muti- ! nens de Cariin. Jud. p. v. c. 4. 410 OF THK PHILOSOPHY Book IV. pronounces the holy benediction. The nature of God is incorporeal and spiritual ; simple essence, without composition or accident ; intellect, in perpetual act. His duration, both past and future, is infinite. God is not so properly said to be in place, as to be himself place, for all space is full of his glory. God is the omniscient and sovereign Lord of the universe; he foresees and ordains all things ; but all evil is to be ascribed to the free will of man. The world was created from nothing, had a beginning, and will have an end. All human souls were created at the beginning of the world, and existed in a happy state before they were sent down into the body. Besides these, there are other created spirits, good and bad, of various names and classes. The bad angels are corporeal, their bodies consisting of the two elements of air and fire. The heavens are animated ; and the stars are rational beings, endued with the powers of intelligence and vo¬ lition ; they have an influence upon human affairs, and even upon inferior animals, plants, and minerals, and communicate to men the knowledge of future events. Different regions of the earth, and even individual men, have their ministering angels. Two archangels were the leaders of a re¬ bellion against God ; and the rebels were cast out of heaven. The fallen angels, procreating with the daughters of men, produced giants and devils. The cause of natural death, and of all the calamities of mankind, is the fall of our first parents. No human being can attain to perfection ; but good works are entitled to reward ; and the pardon of sin may be obtained by fastings, prayers, confessions, and bodily sufferings. All the laws of Moses are eternal and immutable. The soul of man is a thinking substance, having three faculties ; the vegetative, the sensitive, and the rational : it is possessed of liberty, and is immortal. After death, it is not immediately admitted to celestial joys, but wanders in this world, chiefly about its body, during which time it is tormented by evil demons : in this purgatory it is cleansed from its stains ; after which it passes into other bodies of men, or inferior animals. There will be a resurrection of the bodies of dead men, and an universal judgment, which will be succeeded by a state of retribu¬ tion. The good will enjoy eternal life in Paradise, and the wicked will be consigned to the infernal regions; the Jew for a time, but the infidel for ever. The world will be destroyed ; but the materials of which it is com¬ posed will remain.* Many of the most valuable parts of these tenets, the Jews unquestion¬ ably derived from their sacred scriptures ; the rest they borrowed from their Gentile neighbours. They first suffered their doctrine to be cor¬ rupted by the Egyptian philosophy ; and afterwards, learned from the Sara¬ cens to reason after the Peripatetic manner upon metaphysical subjects : examples of which may be seen in the writings of Maimonides, and in the book Cosri. The superstitious notions and practices of the Jews, in the Middle Age, concerning the names of God, were singular. Of these they reckoned seventy-two ; from which, by different arrangements in sevens, they pro¬ duced seven hundred and twenty. The principal of these was Agla ; j- which they disposed in the following figure. * Maimond. Moreh Nebhochim, et Jesode Thora. II. Jos. Albo. Fund. Fid. Bas- nage, 1. iv. c. 6. Ligbtfoot, Hor. Heb. t Contracted from ■'JIN D'pijr'p -inj nriN ; thou art strong in the eternal God. Chap. 3. OF THE JEWS. 411 This they called The Shield of David, and pretended that it was security against wounds, would extinguish fires, and was able to perform other wonders.* The Esoteric or concealed doctrine of the Jews was called the Cabbala, from the word which signifies, to receive, because it had been received by tradition. Concerning the miraculous origin and preservation of the Cabbala, the Jew's relate many marvellous tales. They derive these mys¬ teries from Adam ; and assert, that whilst the first man was in Paradise, the angel Rasiel brought him a book from heaven, which contained the doctrines of heavenly wisdom ; and that when Adam received this book, angels came down to him to learn its contents, but that he refused to admit them to the knowledge of sacred things, entrusted to him alone ; that after the Fall, this book was taken back into heaven ; that, after many prayers and tears, God restored it to Adam ; and that it passed from Adam to Seth.-]- The Jewish fables go on to relate, that the book being lost, and the mysteries it contained almost forgotten, in the degenerate age before the flood, they were restored, by special revelation7 to Abraham, who com¬ mitted them to writing in the book Jezirah ; that the revelation was re- new'ed to Moses, who received a traditionary and mystical, as well as a written and preceptive, law from God ; that being again lost amidst the calamities of the Babylonish captivity, it w'as once more revealed to Esdras; that it was preserved in Egypt, and has been transmitted to posterity through the hands of Simeon ben Setach, Elkanah, Akibha, Simeon ben Jochai, and others.|; All that can be inferred from these accounts, which bear the evident marks of fiction, is, that the Cabbalistic doctrine obtained early credit among the Jews as a part of their sacred tradition, and was transmitted, under this notion, by the Jews in Egypt to their brethren in Palestine. That this system was not of Hebrew origin may be concluded, with a great degree of probability, from the total dissimilarity of its abstruse and mys- * Fabric. Cod. Apoc. V. T. ii. p. lOOG. t. iii. p. 143. f Eisenmenger, Jud. Detect, p. i. c. 8. p. ii. c. 13. Basnage, 1. iii. c. 10. Wachter. Euclid. Cabbal. c. 1. sect. 1. Lib. Sohar. par Berasheith. col. 171. + Buxtorf. Bib. Rabb. p. 184. Reucblin. de arte Cabb. 1. i. p. 622. Wolf. Bib. H. p. i. p. 112. Reimann. Hist. Th. Jud. 1. i. c. 15. Budd. Intr. p. 424. Cosri. p. iii. sect. 65. 4* 412 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. » terious doctrines to the simple principles of religion taught in the Mosaic law ; and that it was borrowed from the Egyptian schools will presently appear, from a comparison of its tenets with those of the Oriental and Alexandrian philosophy. Many writers have indeed imagined, that they have found, in the Cabbalistic dogmas, a near resemblance of the doctrines j of Christianity, and have been of opinion that the fundamental principles' ;; of this mystical system were derived from Divine revelation. But this opi- nion is to be traced up to a prejudice, which began with the Jews, and passed from them to the Christian Fathers, by which they were led to as- «■ cribe all Pagan wisdom to an Hebrew origin ; a notion which, there can • be little room to doubt, took its rise in Egypt, where Fagan tenets first .j' crept in among the Jews. When they first embraced the doctrines of Hea- [f.' then philosophy, neither their national vanity, nor their reverence for the law of Moses, would suffer them to acknowledge themselves indebted to Pagans for their wisdom : they had, therefore, nothing left, but to profess to derive these new opinions from their sacred writings, and, by the help of the allegorical method of interpretation taught them by the Egyptians, to % reconcile them, as well as they were able, with the ancient doctrines of their religion. In support of this pretence, they suppose that the stream of wisdom, which thej" professed to derive from their own sacred fountain, ^ had formerly flowed out of their enclosure into the neighbouring countries ; « and that the Oriental, Egyptian, and Grecian schools had been at first in-® debted to the land of Israel for their knowledge. Philo, Josephus, and® other learned Jews, to flatter their own vanity, and that of their country- wf- men, industriously propagated this opinion ; and the more learned Fathers M* of the Christian church, who thought highly of the Grecian, particularly of® the Platonic philosophy, hastily adopted it, imagining that if they could® trace back the most valuable doctrines of Paganism to an Hebrew origin,® this could not fail to recommend the Jewish and Christian religions to the|K attention of Gentile philosophers. Many learned moderns, relying impli- w citly upon these authorities, have maintained the same opinion, and have » hence been inclined to credit the report of the divine original of the Jewish Cabbala: but both these opinions are equally without foundation. Inf' tracing the ancient Barbaric and Grecian philosophy to their sources, it^ has sufficiently appeared, that they were not of Plebrew extraction and 4, we shall soon see that the Cabbalistic system is fundamentally inconsistent W with the pure doctrine of divine revelation. The truth, as far as we have been able to develop it, after a careful f comparison of the various opinions which have been advanced with the ancient records which remain upon this subject, may be thus briefly stated : ,s * In further confirmation of what has been already advanced upon this point, it may be remarked, that those who have supposed the Chaldean and Egyptian philosophy to have originated with the Hebrews, have not considered that Thoth, Hermes Trismegistus, the Chaldean Zoroaster, and other founders of the ancient Barbaric philosophy, were prior in time to Moses, and even to Abraham. Besides if it were granted that there were, among the Hebrews, patriarchs coeval with the first Chaldean or Egyptian sages, it still remains, to show by what means the former could have prevailed upon the latter to become their disciples, and to adduce some plausible evidence that this was in fact the case. It is wonderful, that any learned men should have maintained, that the Egyptians were indebted to the Israelites for their wisdom, when it appears from the sacred history, that the Egyptians treated the Israelites with contempt, as a race of foreign slaves; and that the descendants of Jacob inhabited a separate region, where they had little intercourse with theTnatives of Egypt. Is there a shadow of probability, that the Egyptians would borrow from such a j)e()]ile any part of their sacred mysteries? But, if even this were allowed to be probable, still the difference between the ancient Hebrew religion, and that of the Egyptians and other nations, is too great to leave any room for admitting the fact. If iltcn it be wholly inconceivable that the ancient Egyp- Chap. 3. OF THE JEWS. 4-13 The Jews, as their own writers attest, like other Oriental nations, from the most remote period, had secret doctrines or mysteries. During the pro- phetic ages, these, probably, consisted in a simple explanation of those ''Divine truths which the prophets delivered under the veil of emblems. After this period, when the sects of the Essenes and Therapeutee were formed, as we have seen, in Egypt, foreign tenets and institutions were borrowed from the Egyptians and Greeks, and in the form of allegorical interpretations of the law, w'ere admitted into the Jewish mysteries. These I innovations chiefly consisted in certain dogmas concerningGod and divine things, at this time received in the Egyptian schools, particularly at Alex¬ andria, where the Platonic and Pythagorean doctrines on these subjects had undergone a material alteration, by being mixed with the Oriental philoso¬ phy. For the Alexandrian Platonists, having rejected the Dualistic system, I had now, from the Orientalists, adopted the Emanative, and admitted the doctrine of various orders of divine emanation. This doctrine, which by the lielp of allegory was easily accommodated to the sacred writings, was embraced, under the notion of traditionary mystery, by Aristobulus, and other founders of the sect of the Therapeutae, and admitted into their writings, as may be seen in the works of Philo. The Jewish mysteries, thus enlarged by the accession of Pagan dogmas, were conveyed from Egypt to Palestine, at the time when the Pharisees, who had been driven i into Egypt under Hyrcanus, returned, and with them many other Jews, into their own country. From this time the Cabbalistic mysteries continued I to be taught in the Jewish schools ; till, at length, they were adulterated by the mixture of Peripatetic doctrines, and other tenets, which sprang up in the Middle age. These mysteries were not, probably, reduced to any systematic form in writing, till after the dispersion of the Jews, when, in I consequence of their national calamities, they became apprehensive that these sacred treasures would be corrupted or lost. In succeeding periods, the Cabbalistic doctrines underwent various corruptions, particularly from the prevalence of the Aristotelian philosophy.'*' This account of the rise and progress of the Jewish Cabbala agrees with i the facts before recited, and is confirmed by the resemblance observable between the features of the Oriental and Cabbalistic systems, as far as the veil of metaphor and allegory, with which they are covered, will permit us - to compare them. The obscurity of the Cabbalistic philosophy is indeed such, that there is some reason to question, whether the authors themselves clearly understood what they wrote : a suspicion which may always arise, where metaphysical ideas, which are only to be understood by mental ab- ! straction, are represented under sensible images. It is probable, however, ' that the writers supposed themselves to have some meaning, in works upon which they bestowed much time and ingenuity ; and it becomes a matter of curiosity, to inquire what meaning lies concealed under the apparent jargon. Perhaps more pains have been taken to make this discovery than the subject deserves : but as others have laboured with indefatigable in- tians should have received their dogmas from the Hebrews, it must be admitted as highly probable, that when, in later times, a wonderful agreement appears between the Jewish and Egyptian tenets, the Jews borrowed their Cabbalistic dogmas from the Alex¬ andrians, among whom they resided, (a) * Wachter. Euclid. Cabb. c. ii. p. 19. Knorr. Cabb. Denud. t. ii. p. 389. 181. thilo. - Op. p. 877. 893. Maimon. Mor. Nebh. 1. iii. c. 4. Wolf. Bibl. Heb. p. ii. 1. vii. c. 1. (a) Conf. Reuchlin. de Art. Cabb. 1. ii. p. 642. Wachter. Spinoz. Jud. p. ii. p. 221. Burnet Arch. 1. i. c. 7. 414 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book IV. dustry, and not without some degree of success, in exploring the mazes of i this labyrinth,* we must not fly from the undertaking as desperate ; and ; we may, possibly, find in the result, that it is not wholly unprofitable, j It will be necessary, however, before we proceed, to premise, that our inquiry only respects the theoretical part of the Cabbala ; and that we pay ; no attention, either to the Enigmatical Cabbala, which consists in certain i symbolical transpositions of the words or letters of the scriptures, fit only for the amusement of children, and those who delight in anagrams and i acrostics, or to the Practical Cabbala, which professed to teach the art of .i curing diseases, and performing other wonders, by means of certain arrange- ments of sacred letters and words.f The chief heads of the Cabbalistic doctrine are these : — From nothing, nothing can be produced ; since the distance between i existence and non-entity is infinite. Matter is too imperfect in its nature, and approaches too near to non-entity, to be self-existent. The Being j from whom all things proceed is a Spirit, uncreated, eternal, intelligent, c percipient, having within itself the principles of life and motion existing q by the necessity of its nature, and filling the immensity of space. This i spirit is En-soph, the Infinite Deity. This Eternal Fountain of existence i sends forth from himself natures of various orders, which, nevertheless, are ii still united to their source. The world is a permanent emanation from the 1 Deity, in which his attributes and properties are unfolded, and variously ; li modified. The nearer any emanation is to the First Fountain, the more « perfect and divine is its nature ; and the reverse. Before the creation of the world, all space was filled with the Or Haen- ■ -s Soph, or Infinite Intellectual Light. But when the volition for the pro- ^ duction of nature was formed in the Divine Mind, the Eternal Light, li hitherto equally diffused through the infinite expanse, withdrew itself to *: an equal distance, in every direction, from a certain point, and thus left, i| about this centre, a spherical portion of empty space, as a field for the ' S operations of emanation, by which all things were to be produced. In the i i space from which the Divine Light was thus withdrawn, there were still, i however, some portions, or traces, left of the divine essence, which were i to become the receptacle of rays sent forth from the Eternal Fountain, or the basis of future worlds. From a certain part of the concavity of Infi- i nite Light which surrounded the opaque sphere, the energy of emanation i was first exerted, and rays were sent forth, in right lines, into the dark abyss. ! The beam of light, thus produced, formed a channel, through which streams s were to flow for the production of worlds. This beam was united to the I Concave of Light, and was directed towards the centre of the opaque ( sphere. From this luminous channel streams of light flowed, at different I distances from the centre, in a circular path, and formed distinct circles of , ( light, separated from the Concave of Light, or from each other, by por- ij tions of dark or empty space. Of these circles of light, ten were produced, \ which may be called Sephir.®, or Splendors. I The reader’s imagination may perhaps be assisted by the following i diagram : — * Budd. Intr. sect. 35. 46. Hist. Ph. H. 1. i. c. 10. Wachter. Spinoz. p. i. p. 22. p. ii. c. 17. Eluc. Cabb. Praef. p. vi. c. 3. sect. 1 — 13. Knorr. Cab. Den. t. i. p. ii. p. 79. t. ii. p. 390. Basnage, I. iii. c. 14. 16. 19. H. Mori Quaest. t. i. p. 62. f Schudt. Mem. J. p. ii. 1. vi. c. 31. Hackspan. Miscell. S. p. 290. Glassi. Philol. S. 1. ii. p. i. tr. 2. s. 3. art. 2. Chap. 3. OF THE JEWS. 41.5 The rectilineal beam of light, which is the First Emanation from the Eternal Fountain, and is itself the source of all other emanations, may be , distinguished by the name Adam Kadman, the First Man, the first pro¬ duction of Divine Energy, or, the Son of God. The Sephirae are fountains of emanation subordinate to Adam Kadman, which send forth rays of divine light, or communicate essence and life to inferior beings. The ten Sephirse are known, according to the order of emanation, by the names. Intelligence i or the Crown, Knowledge, Wisdom, Strength, Beauty, Greatness, Glory, ! Stability, Victory, Dominion. These are not the instruments of the divine operations, but media, through which the Deity diffuses himself through the sphere of the universe, and produces whatever exists. They are not beings detached from the Deity, but substantial virtues or powers, dis¬ tinctly, but dependency sent forth from the eternal source of existence through the mediation of Adam Kadman, the first emanating power, and becoming the immediate source of existence to subordinate emanations. ! They are dependent upon the first fountain, as rays upon a luminary, ‘ which is conceived to have sent them forth with a power of drawing them 1 back, at pleasure, into itself. ' The first Infinite Source of Being is the Ensophic World, or world of I infinity, within which, after the manner above described, four worlds are i produced by the law of emanation, according to which the superior is the immediate source of the inferior ; these are, Aziluth, or the world of f emanation, including the Sephirae; Brish, or the world of creation, con- • taining certain spiritual natures, w^hich derive their essence from the Sephirae ; Jezirah, or the world of forms, composed of substantial natures, derived from the superior spiritual substances, and placed within ethereal vehicles, which they inform and animate; and Asiah, or the material and visible world, comprehending all those substances which are capable of motion, composition, division, and dissolution. These derived worlds are different evolutions, or expansions of the divine essence, or distinct classes of beings, in which the infinite light of the divine nature is exhibited with continually decreasing splendour, as they recede from the first fountain. The last and most distant production of the divine energy of emanation is matter; wdrich is produced when the i divine light, by its recession from the fountain, becomes so attenuated as I I 416 OF THE PHILOSOTIIY Book IV. to be lost in darkness, leaving nothing but an opaque substance,* which is only one degree above non-entity. Matter has no separate and independent existence, but is merely a modification, and permanent effect, of the ema- native energy of the divine nature. The Sephirse, or first order of emanative being, existing in Axiluth, are > superior to spirits, and are called Parzuphim, Persons, to denote that they have a substantial existence. The inhabitants of the second world are called Thrones, on account of the dominion w'hich they possess over the various orders of Angels, which inhabit the third world. The fourth, or material world, is the region of evil spirits, called Klippoth, the dregs of j emanation. These are the authors of the evil which is found in the mate¬ rial world ; but they are continually aspiring towards the Sephirse, and will, in the great revolution of nature, return into the inexhaustible foun¬ tain of Deity. Spirits of all orders have a material vehicle, less pure and subtile, in proportion to their distance from En- soph ; and this vehicle is of * ( the nature of the world next below that to which they belong. Metraton is the prince of Jezirah, or the angelic world, in which there are ten dis- I tinct orders ; Sandalphon, of Asiah, or the material world : these, together ii wdth the hosts over which they preside, animate aerial vehicles, capable of ^ impression from corporeal objects, and in different ways requiring renova- tion. I The human soul, proceeding by emanation from the Deity, is an incor- | poreal substance, of the same nature with the divine intellect. Being iij united to the body, one complex nature is prodaced, endued with reason, I and capable of action. The human soul consists of four parts, Nephesh, 1 or the principle of vitality ; Ruach, or the principle of motion ; Nescha- f rnah, or the power of intelligence ; and Rechidah, a divine principle, by ' means of which it contemplates superior natures, and even ascends to the : Ensophic world. All souls w'ere produced at once, and pre-existed in Adam. Every human soul has two guardian angels, produced by emana¬ tion, at the time of the production of souls. The mind of man is united ' to the Divine mind, as the radius of a circle to its centre. The souls of good men ascend above the mansion of the angels, and are delighted with ' the vision of the first light, which illuminates all the worlds. The universe continues to exist by the divine energy of emanation. > Whilst this energy is exerted, different forms and orders of beings remain: '» when it is withheld, all the streams of existence return into their fountain, j The En-soph, or Deity, contains all things M'ithin himself ; and there is ! always the same quantity of existence, either in a created or uncreated 1 state. When it is in an uncreated state, God is all ; when worlds are i created, the Deity is unfolded, or evolved, by various degress of emana- > tion, which constitute the several forms and orders of created nature. j- Such is the general outline of the Cabbalistic philosophy, as far as we are able to discover it through the thick cloud of words by which it is con- « cealed ; and w'e shall be readily excused from entering into any further ; detail of so fanciful and mystical a system. It is impossible to review the mass of conjectures and fictions, called the Jewish Cabbala, without perceiving that it could not be derived from the pure source of Divine Revelation ; or to compare the Cabbalistic doctrine ' * Carbo ignis divinae. f Loi-riiae lib. Druschim. et Irirae Porta Coelar. ed. aKnorrio in Cabb. Dcnud. Me- nasseh B. Israel de Great, p. ?7. Moses Corduer. Pard. Rimmoniin. tr iv. p. 23. I Chap. 3. OF THE JEWS, 417 with the Oriental and Egyptian philosophy, without discovering that they i are the same system. The Cabbalistic notion of Deity as a pure intellec¬ tual fire, and of the production of nature as an emanation from this foun¬ tain, was taught, as we have already seen, in all the Eastern nations, par¬ ticularly the Chaldean and Persian. Change the names, and for Mithras i substitute Ensoph ; for Oromasdes, Adam Kadman ; and for Arimanius, Klippoth ; and then compare the dogmas advanced concerning each, and it will be sufficiently evident from what source the Jews derived their Cabbala. The Gnostic doctrine of jEons subsisting in the plenitude of the divine nature, which sprang from the same stock, is perfectly similar to that of the Cabbalistic Sephirae : both appear to have been known to Philo. The Alexandrian philosophers of the Eclectic sect adopted the same notions, and pursued them into a variety of extravagant and absurd i fancies, in many particulars nearly resembling those of the Jewish school. ' The common tenets, in which the Oriental, the Alexandrian, and the I Cabbalistic philosophers were agreed, may be thus briefly stated. All things are derived, by emanation, from one principle : this prin- I ciple is God. From him a substantial power immediately proceeds, which [ is the image of God, and the source of all subsequent emanations. This i second principle sends forth, by the energy of emanation, other natures, which are more or less perfect, according to their different degrees of [ distance in the scale of emanation, from the first source of existence, and ! which constitute different worlds, or orders of being, all united to the ! eternal power from which they proceed. Matter is nothing more than the i most remote effect of the emanative energy of the Deity. The material world receives its form from the immediate agency of powers far beneath f the First Source of Being. Evil is the necessary effect of the imperfection I of matter. Human souls are distant emanations from Deity, and after they are liberated from their material vehicles, will return, through various 1 stages of purification, to the fountain whence they first proceeded. ! On the whole, the similarity, or rather the coincidence of the Cabba- I listic, Alexandrian, and Oriental philosophy, leaves us little room to hesitate 1 in pronouncing the latter the parent of the two former. With respect to I the Cabbalistic system in particular, it cannot l^e difficult, after the survey we have taken of its leading tenets, to form a judgment of its merit. It is I unquestionably a fanatical kind of philosophj^ which originates in defect of I judgment and eccentricity of imagination, and which tends to produce a i wild and pernicious enthusiasm. The Cabbalistic system can by no means i be reconciled with just ideas of the Divine nature; since, in supposing all i things to flow from God, it makes all beings not only dependent upon him, i but a part of his essence. In this system all spiritual and even material ; substances are so intimately united with their origin, that they do not differ from it in their nature, but merely in their mode of existence : the universe is an evolution of the Divine essence, and is, in fact, God. To this we must add, that the idea, which this system aflfords, of the mode of divine i operation, by an expansion or retraction of his essence, is too gross to be applied to the first intelligent cause of all things. Nothing can be more visionary than the fundamental hypothesis, that God is an infinite light, which has withdrawn itself from a portion of infinite space, in order to unfold itself in sundry emanations, which constitute the universe ; nor can any thing be more fanciful than the numerous fictions which fill up the «ystem. Its tendency to encourage fanaticism cannot be doubted. The first principle of this philosophy is the ground upon which the whole struc¬ ture of enthusiasm is erected. From the notion that all things emane from E E 418 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. God, and will flow back to him, it naturally follows, that it is the great end J of philosophy to prepare the human mind for its return to its source, when Q i it will be absorbed in the Divine plenitude from which it flowed ; a doctrine which is the very soul of enthusiasm, both theological and philosophical. j But it is high time that we retreat out of this fairy land, where we H should not have remained so long, had it not been necessary to ascertain | distinctly the place of the Jewish Cabbala in the history of philosophy, in \\ order to discover its connexion with the preceding, and its influence upon jl contemporary or subsequent systems ; for it must be confessed, that th^ 'i history of this system is chiefly valuable, as it furnishes an example of theWf k folly of permitting reason, in its search after truth, to follow the wildJL j reveries of an unbridled imagination.* BOOK V. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SARACENS. CHAPTER 1. H OF THE ORIGIN AND PROGRESS OF PHILOSOPHY AMONG THE •^1 SARACENS, OR ARABIANS. ^f-jl l|i At the period when ignorance and barbarism prevailed through everyl| part of the Roman empire, Philosophy found an asylum among the Sara- cens, or Arabians ; a people, who, for several centuries after the appearance of Mahomet, were scarcely less celebrated in their literary and philoso¬ phical, than in their civil and military character. Before we proceed to describe the state of philosophy in the Christian world, from the birth of Christ to the revival of letters, we must, therefore, briefly relate the his¬ tory, and delineate the features, of the Arabian or Saracenic philosophy. Concerning the ancient state of philosophy in Arabia, we have already seen that little is known. The Arabian writers, as far as we are acquainted with them, leave the philosophical and literary history of their country, prior to the time of Mahomet, in almost total obscurity. Abulfaragius, one of the principal Arabian annalists, confesses, -|- that there are no certain records of the ancient Arabian nations, nor any means of investigating * Vidend. Jo. A, Lent. Theol. Jud. Reimann. Hist. Theol. Jud. Budd. Intr. PIi. Heb. Menasse ben Israel ap Cromayer. Scrutin. Relig. Diss. Leo Mutin. de Cserem. et Consuetud. Jud. R. Jos. Albo. Fundam. Fid. R. Moses ad Jezirah. Lib. Cosri. Menasse ben Israel de Term. Vitae, de Great. &c. Abarbanel de Cap. Fid. Saubert. Palestra Theol. Diss. 1. Windet de Vit. Funct. Statu. Bartolocc. Bibl. Rabb. Hart¬ man. loc. paral. Talm. Gressae. 1708. Otton. Hist. Doct. Mishn. Reuchlin. de Art. Cabb. Schrammii Intr. in Dialect. Cabb. Hackspan. de Cabbala Carpzov. Intr. in Theol. vud. Pici. Apol. Op. Praef. Basil. 1601. Compend. ap Budd. Intr. sect. 34. Pestorii Arrs Cabb. Bas. 1581. Rittengel de Lib. Jezirah. Amstel. 1675. Knorrii a Rosenroth Cabbala denudata. Solisbaci, 1677. Contin. lib. Sobar, Jezirah, &c. Hen. More ad lib. Druschim. Watcher. Spinozizm. in Jud. Ejusd. Elucidariura Cabb. Rom. 1706. Mayer, de Trinit. Harder. 1712. Burgonovo select. Cabb. Dogm. Basnage, Eisenmeuger. Wolf. Burnet. Arch. c. 7. f Dynast, ix. p. 100. Chap. 1. OF THE SARACENS. 419 their history. Of this deficiency it is wholly unnecessary to search for any other cause, than the barbarism which at that time prevailed almost uni¬ versally through this country. The Arabian writers themselves oppose the state of Islamism to the state of ignorance which preceded.* Ebn Chalican,-|- an Arabian historian, mentions it as an acknowledged fact, that the first inventor of Arabic writing was Moramer, an Arabian, who lived not long before the time of Mahomet ; and relates,:}; that at the time when the Koran was published, there was not a single person to be found in the whole district of Yamen, who could write or read Arabic. The Jews and Christians who resided in Medina were, for their learning, distinguished by the appellation of The People of the Book, whilst the Arabians were almost universally illiterate. Mahomet himself was wholly destitute of learning. The Arabians themselves call him, The Illiterate Prophet ; and boast, that God chose out of the unlearned the messenger whom he sent to the unlearned. § It is no wonder, therefore, that this prophet, in framing his new religion, found it necessary to call in assistance from the Jews and Christians. He could not have accomplished his great design without the help of Warakan, the kinsman of his wife Chadijia, who had been conversant with the Jews and Christians, and could write Hebrew as well as Arabic. || The appearance of Mahomet, and the promulgation of his religion, in themselves contributed nothing towards the progress of knowledge and philosophy. This impostor thought it necessary to keep his followers as ignorant as himself. That he might, at one stroke, eut off impertinent contradiction, he issued an edict, which made the study of the liberal sciences and arts a capital offence. At the same time, to captivate the imaginations of his ignorant followers, and hereby establish his authority, he sent forth, in separate portions, a sacred book, to which he gave the name of the Koran, containing the doctrines and precepts of his religion. This book, which was chiefly a compilation, sufficiently injudicious and incoherent, from the books of the Nestorian Christians and of the Jews then resident in Arabia, and from the ancient superstitions of the Arabians, long continued the only object of study among the Mahometans. Their reverence for this holy book, the leaves of which they were taught to be¬ lieve were communicated to the prophet by an angel from heaven, long superseded every philosophical and literary pursuit. Imagining that the Koran contained every thing necessary, or useful, to be known, whatever was contrary to its dogmas was immediately condemned as erroneous; and whatever was not to be found in this sacred volume was dismissed as su¬ perfluous.^ Deterred by the fear of punishment from examining the * Dynast, ix. p. 101. f Ap. Pococke Specimen Hist. Arab. p. 153. J Ib. I. c. § Pococke ib. p. 156. 11 Elmacini Hist. Saracen. J. i. c. i. p. 10. ^ This was the principle upon which the caliph Omar consigned the Alexandrian libraries to the flames. Abulfaragius relates, (a) that when Alexandria was taken by Ainrus, the Mahometan commander, Philoponus requested that he might be allowed to rescue the philosophical books in the royal libraries from destruction. Amrus wrote to Omar, informing him of the request of Philoponus ; to which Omar replied : “ As to the books you mention, if they accord with the book of God, there is without them in that book all that is sufficient ; but if there be any thing in them repugnant to that book, we have no need of them ; order them therefore to be all destroyed.” Amrus upon this gave orders that they should be dispersed through the baths of Alexandria, and burned in heating them. (6) After this manner, in the space of six months, they were all consumed. The historian adds, “ Hear what was done, and wonder !” The authenticity of this story has lately been called in question by Mr. Gibbon, wdio (a) Dyn. p. 114. Oxon. 1663. (6) That is, probably in kindling the fires. E E 2 420 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. foundation of their law, or opening their minds to the light of phi- losophy, the followers of Mahomet quietly submitted their reason to the|^ yoke of authority. Add to this, that the violent spirit and military cha- . * racter of Islamism was in itself inimical to philosophy and science. A‘ prophet, who propagated and established his religion, not by reasoning,' but the sword, would keep his followers too busily employed in war and conquest, to leave them leisure for literary pursuits.* From these causes, philosophy, during the first ages of Mahometanism, ' found no protection in Arabia. But, in this period of thick darkness, when, among Christians, true science was lost in the thorny controversies of A theology ; and when, among the Saracens, it was trampled under foot by ignorance and bigotry ; after the extinction of the dynasty of the miadm, who trod in the footsteps of Mahomet, -j- the accession of the family of the Abbasidse, or Hashemidse, to the Caliphate, (which happened in thefr: one hundred and twenty-seventh year of the Hegira, or the seven hundred and forty-ninth of the Christian era,) proved the dawning of philosophy^^ in Arabia. J The first princes of the Abbasidean dynasty were, indeed, chiefly oc cupied in establishing and extending the new empire : but they were in one respect wiser than their predecessors ; they paid little regard to the absurd edict, by which arts and sciences had been banished out of the realms of Mahomet. The second prince of this family, Abug laafar Al-Mansor)^ possessed dispositions and talents which inclined and enabled him to favour the progress of knowledge among his subjects. His gentle temper con¬ tributed towards subduing the ferocity of the times ; his natural good sense taught him the value of learning, and qualified him to detect the erroneous maxims upon which the Mahometan system of policy was founded; and^* | his liberal and candid spirit rendered him easy of access to learned men ofi all countries and professions. § ^ The first circumstance which seems to have led to the introduction of ';; science and philosophy into the courts of the Caliphs, was the necessity)^ which the ignorant Arabians were under of calling in the more enlight-'^ij ened Christians, who resided at this time in great numbers at Bagdat, the ' seat of the empire, and in other parts of the Mahometan dominions, to. superintend and regulate the practice of the medical art. Al-Mansor hady i I I thinks the report of a solitary stranger, who wrote at the end of six hundred years, on the confines of Media, over- balanced by the silence of two annalists of a more early date, ; both Christians, both natives of Egypt, and the most ancient of whom, the patriarch Entychius, has amply described the conquest of Alexandria. But the positive evidence of an histoiian of such unquestionable credit as Abulfaragius cannot be set aside by an argument merely negative. Mr. G. also pleads the repugnancy of the rigid sentence of Omar to the precepts of the Mahometan casuists, which declared it unlawful to burn the religious books of Jews and Christians, and allowed the use of profane writers: but he seems himself aware of the weakness of this argument ; for he imputes the pro¬ tection granted to the religious books of Jews and Christians to reverence for the name ot God, and acknowledges, that “a more destructive zeal may perhaps be attributed to the first successors of Mahomet.” His reference to Aul. Gellius (Noet. Att. 1. vi. c. 17.) Amm. Marcellinus (1. xxii. c. 16.) and Orosius (1. vi. c. 15.) as speaking of the Alex¬ andrian libraries in the past tense, are foreign from the purpose : for these writers only refer to the destruction of books at Alexandria in the time of Julius Csesar, after which, large libraries must have been continually accumulating, during the long period in which the schools of philosophy flourished in that city. • Abulfar, Dyn. p. 99. 104. 110. Ep. de Hai Ebn Yockdan, p. 14. Sar. 1. i. c. 1. f Elmacin. Hist. Sar. 1. i. c. 7. Pococke, 1. c. p. 121. 136. 162. 165, 166. Thophail R. Jehudae lib. Cosri, p. 1. sect. 5. Elmacin. Hist. § Elmacin. Hist. Saracen. 1. ii. c. 3. Abulf. ib. Ib. 1. ii, p. 129. c. 1. Abulf. Dyn. ix. p. 123. Chap. 1. OF THE SARACENS. 421 two Christian physicians in his court, who, on account of their skill in medicine, stood high in his esteem, and who, being men of letters, inspired the prince with the love of literature and philosophy. The Caliph himself, under their direction, studied astronomy. He paid great respect to learned men, and offered liberal rewards to those who would undertake the translation of the Greek writers in philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, medicine, and other branches of learning. These exertions on the part of the prince were not without their effect on his subjects. But the Arabians not understanding Greek, the translation of ancient authors was entirely executed by the Christians then resident in Bagdat ; and, because the vernacular tongue of that city was the Syriac, these versions were made in that language ; from which many of them were afterwards translated into Arabic. Hence most of the Arabic translations of the ancients, still extant, are exceedingly defective.* * * § After Al-Mansor, the fifth Caliph of the Abbasidean dynasty, Haron Rashid, j- who assumed the government in the year 786, cherished the rising plants of science and literature. He was a liberal patron of genius and learning of every kind ; but was particularly fond of those who pos¬ sessed poetical talents. He never travelled without a retinue of learned men. Rashid was at first, through bigotry, disinclined to encourage the learned Christians ; but their superior skill in medicine soon introduced them to his favour. It happened, that a young Egyptian female, of great beauty, who was a favourite with the Caliph, was attacked with a severe illness, which baffled the skill of the Arabian physicians ; upon wdiich Rashid sent a messenger into Egypt, to invite Balatian, the patriarch of Alexandria, eminent for his skill in medicine, to visit Bagdat. Balatian obeyed the summons, and soon accomplished the cure of his fair patient. For this acceptable service he received from the Caliph ample rewards ; and he obtained a mandate in favour of his Christian brethren in Egypt, for the restoration of certain lands, of which they had been unjustly deprived. Afterwards, when Rashid himself was seized with an apoplexy, a Christian physician, in opposition to the judgment of the Arabian practitioners, bled him, and hereby effected his recovery. These and other fortunate, circumstances established the credit of the Christian physicians in the court of Bagdat, and enabled them with the knowledge of medicine, to introduce an acquaintance with other branches of science among the Arabians, j; The light of philosophy, which, at first, under Al-Mansor, and after¬ wards under Rashid, dawned upon Arabia, in the Caliphate of the younger son of Rashid, Abul-Abbas Al-Mamon,§ shone forth in meridian splendour. Endued with a good understanding and a liberal spirit, this prince soon outstripped his predecessors in the zealous and successful patronage of science and learning. Whilst Rashid was living, he nomi¬ nated his eldest son, Al-Mamin, to the inheritance of the Caliphate, and gave Al-Mamon the government of Chorazan. Here this excellent youth applied himself to study under learned men, whom he collected from various countries : these he formed into a society, or college, appointing for their president John Messue, of Damascus, a Christian physician, who * Abulf. Dyn. ix. p. 94. 99. 148. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 814. Friend. Hist. Med, p. ii. p. 5. f Elmacin. 1. ii. c. 6. + Eutychii Alex. Origen. Eccl. Al. (ed. Selden. Lend. 1642.) t. ii. p. 407. Abulf. Dyn, ix. p. 114. Fabr. Bib, Gr. v, xiii. p. 17. Elmaein. 1. ii. c. 6. § Elmacin. 1. ii. c. 8, Abulf. Dyn. ix. p. 160. Leo Afric. de Vir. Arab. c. 1. Zona- ras, 1. iii. Pococke, p. 166. 422 OP THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. had resided at Bagdat, and with whose abilities and merit he had long been acquainted. Rashid, when he was informed of this appointment, expressed great displeasure that his son should confer so distinguished an honour upon a Christian. Al-Mamon, in his own justification, replied, I have made choice of Messue, not as a teacher of religion, but as an able preceptor in useful sciences and arts ; and my father well knows, that the most learned men, and the most skilful artists, in his dominions, are Jews and Christians.” After the death of Rashid, and the short and disgraceful reign of his elder son Al-Mamin, the Caliphate passed into the hands of the enlightened and liberal Al-Mamon, who soon made Bagdat the first seat of the muses.* Having collected many valuable books, written in the Greek, Persian, Chaldean, and Egyptian or Coptic languages, Al-Mamon employed learned men to translate them -into Arabic, Among the Greek writings which now appeared in an Arabic dress, were the works of Galen and Aristotle; and from this epoch we are to date the commencement of the long reign of the Aristotelian philosophy among the Arabians. The Caliph appointed Messue to superintend these translations. Under his auspices this learned preceptor also instituted and conducted a school, in which he instructed a numerous train of pupils in philosophy, and other branches of learning. Among other disciples of Messue was Honain, an eminent Christian phy¬ sician, who translated the elements of Euclid, the Almagestus of Ptolemy, and the writings of Hippocrates and other Greek authors. He may justly be ranked among the fathers of the Arabian philosophy.;;|; Al-Mamon was not only an illustrious patron of the learned, but was himself no mean adept in several branches of science. He was well acquainted with astronomy, mathematics, and philosophy ; and was fre¬ quently present at the conferences of learned men, entering with great spirit into the subjects of their debates. In the midst of the praise which is due to this Caliph, it must, hoAvever, be mentioned with regret, that, through an ill-judged partiality for his vernacular tongue, he gave orders that, after the Arabic versions were finished, the original Greek manuscripts should be burned. § A similar folly seized the Caliphs of Africa : and to this cause we are, doubtless, to ascribe the entire loss of many ancient writings. The diligence, however, with which this Caliph cultivated and encouraged learning, cancels in some measure this disgrace, and leaves him entitled to an honourable station among philosophers.|l It was no inconsi- • Leo Afr. 1. c. ' t Renaudot. de Vers. Arab, et Syr, ap. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 814. Leo. Afr. 1. c. Of Honain, Abulfaragius relates (a) the following anecdote: — One day, after some medical conversation, the Caliph said to him, “Teach me a prescription by which I may take off any enemy I please, witltout being discovered.” Honain declining to give ail answer, and pleading ignorance, was imprisoned. Being brought again, after a year’s interval, into the Caliph’s presence, and still persisting in ignorance, though threatened with death, the Caliph smiled upon him, and said, “ Be of good cheer, we were only trying thee, that we might have the greater confidence in thee.” As Honain upon this bowed down and kissed the earth, “ What hindered thee,” says the Caliph, “ from granting our request, when thou sawest us appear so ready to perform what we had threatened?” “ Two things,” replied Honain : “ my Religion and ray Profession. My religion which commands me to do good to my enemies ; and my profession which was purely instituted for the benefit of mankind.” “ Two noble laws,” said the Caliph ; and immediately presented him, according to the Eastern usage, with rich garments and a sum of money. § Leo Afric. 1. c. ((f) Abulf, p. 172. ap. Harris Philol. Inq. p. 378. II Abulf. ap. Pococke', p. IGO. Chap. 1. OF THE SAUACENS. 423 derable proof of the great service which Al-Mamon rendered to philosophy, that superstition and barbarism bitterly complained of the encroachments which, during his reign, were made upon their territories ; and that Takid- din,* a bigoted Mahometan, said, that God would assuredly punish Al"Mamon for daring to interrupt the devotions of the Mahometans by introducing philosophy among them. No wonder tha.t the zealous advo¬ cates for the religion of Mahomet began to be alarmed, when they saw that the wretched poverty of their Koran was discovered, and the gross absurdity of their siiperstitions exposed, by the light of philosophy. Dur¬ ing the reign of Al-Mamon, the love of science became so prevalent among the Saracens, that scarcely a mosque was erected without annexing to it a school, in which philosophy and literature were to be taught. After the death of Al-Mamon, which happened in the year 833, philo¬ sophy continued its progress among the Saracens. Some of his successors were, indeed, too busily occupied in war, or of too indolent a disposition, to pay much attention to science ; but there were others who fostered the rising plant, and took much pains to bring it to maturity. Among these, the prince whose name is most memorable is Aaron Wacic, or Wathek, who was advanced to the Caliphate in the year 84.l.t He liberally encouraged learned men of every class, particularly mathema¬ ticians and astronomers. His reign produced the celebrated astronomer Al-Hasan, who wrote a treatise on the Lunar Irregularities.:}; The schools, which in the times of Ilashid and Al-Mamon had been instituted under the direction of John of Damascus, Honain, and others, long flourished, and sent forth in great abundance philosophers and learned men, several of whom will be distinctly noticed in the sequel. Science continued to enjoy the protection of the Saracen princes, after the empire was divided into several Caliphates, in Asia, Africa, and Europe, and was, by means of their conquests, disseminated through a great part of the world. In the tenth century, under the Caliph Abul- fadli Murtadir, and others, who distinguished themselves as patrons of learning, poetry and philosophy were equally encouraged ; and they con¬ tinued to flourish among the Saracens till the thirteenth century, when, the power of the Saracens yielding to that of the Turks, learning fled for refuge to the Persians, Tartars, and Scythians.§ From the beginning of the ninth to the end of the thirteenth century, eminent schools of learning flourished in the Saracen empire, among which the principal were those at Bagdat, Bassora, and Bochara, in the East; at Alexandria and Cairo, in Egypt; at Morocco and Fez, in Bai’- ■ bary ; and in several cities of Spain. The college at Bagdat was so flourishing at the beginning of the twelfth century, that it contained six thousand men, including masters and scholars. In that of Bassora, the members of the society formed a sect for correcting the corruptions which had crept into Islamism, which they acknowledged could not be purged away without the aid of philosophy. At Cairo, where, about the year lOOO, twenty schools were instituted, the philosophy of Aristotle was taught to great crowds of pupils from all parts of the world. The schools of Africa and Spain were distinguished by the names of Averroes, Avicenna, and other eminent philosophers, at a period when barbarism universally prevailed among the Western Christians. Many of these col- * Abulf. ap. Pococke, p. 166. Bayle. f Elmacin. 1. ii. c. 10, 11. , t Abulf. p. 258. § Abulf. p. 179. 200. 208. 217. Elmacin. 1. ii. c. 9. 16. 1. iii. c. 1. 4. 8. 424 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V.^ leges were large and magnificent buildings, liberally endowed, furnished with valuable libraries, and adorned with learned professors of languages^ mathematics, astronomy, and philosophy.* It was a necessary consequence of the increase of knowledge among the Saracens, that the absurdities of the superstition which their illiterate prophet had established were perceived; and it became necessary, in.,^[ order to defend it against the reasonings and the ridicule of Christians,^; ■ Jews, and philosophers, to give such an explanation of the Koran, as ■ ; might make it appear not wholly inconsistent with reason and common | sense. Hence arose a vai’iety of forced interpretations of the law, eachj of which had its advocates, and became the foundation of a distinct sect.' Soon after the time when philosophy began to be studied among the Sara¬ cens, the followers of Mahomet were divided into six sects, and these were afterwards subdivided into seventy-three. The rise of these sects was unquestionably owing to the advancement of knowledge. When philo¬ sophy had so far prevailed over superstition, that the more enlightened professors of the Mahometan rdigion began to be themselves sensible of , its absurdities, they endeavoured to conceal them under the veil of figura- tive interpretation. -j- In order to accommodate the established system,' w hich was guarded by the sanction of penal laws, to their philosophical ■ i conceptions, they blended the abstract speculations of the schools with the gross and vulgar conceptions of the Koran. They made use of the sub-A tleties of the Aristotelian philosophy, in the defective state in which it ■ had come into their hands, to assist them in improving upon the literal [ ' meaning of their sacred books, and thus gave a new, and for the most;, J part a metaphysical turn to the religion and law of Mahomet. One of ' their own writers confesses this to have been the origin of their religious^ sects. “ At the beginning of Mahometanism,” says Al-Gazel,:|: “ the art i of reasoning upon religious subjects was unknown ; but afterwards, when , ' If sects began to arise, and ancient articles of belief to be called in question,' it was found necessary to make use of the aid of logic in defending the truth against the bold attacks of innovators. To this new kind of philosophical theology, the Arabians gave the distinct name of Al-Calain, the Wisdom of Words,§ or the Science of Reason ; and those wdio professed it were called Rationalists. Maimonides, who him¬ self long resided among the Arabians, and accurately examined into the history of their sects, asserts,|f that these Rational Theologians, among I the Mahometans, were chiefly indebted, for the weapons with which they defended Islamism against philosophy, to the Greek philosophers them- f selves; and that they borrowed this method of defence from the Chris- tians, to establish the articles of their faith by reconciling them with the ; dogmas of philosophy. This rational Islamism was first reduced into a systematic form by Almawakif,^ an Arabian, who called his system the ■ science by means of wdiich any one might be qualified to resolve doubts concerning religion, and to maintain the truth of its doctrines against , innovators. Philosophy was, in this sect, forced into the service of super- :■ stition ; whence it happened, as might naturally be expected, that these ^ Rationalists employed the distinctions and subtleties of the Aristotelian S' * Abulf. p. 217. 230. Benj. Tudelensis Itin. p. 121. Leo Afr, Hist. Afr. 1. viii. 267; 272. Elmasin. 1. i. c. 13. Toletan. Hist. Ar. c. 9. 12. t Elmacin. 1. i. c. 5. 1. ii. c. 16. 1. iii. c. 6. 8. Pococke, p. 209. Sale Proleg. ad Koran, sect. 8. Maimonid. Mor. Nebhoch. 1. iii. c. 16. X Apud Pococke, p. 196. § Sharestan apud Pococke, p. 194. 11 Mor. Nebh. p. i. c. 71. ^ Ilottinger, Biblioth. Orient, c. ii. p. 187. Chap. 1. OF THE SARACENS. 425 school, not for the discovery of truth, but for the purpose of concealing the real dogmas of the Koran, which could not have been fairly explained without manifest detriment to the cause of Islamism. Of the manner in which the dialectic sects of Mahometans trifled, Mai- monides furnishes the following example.* They chose rather to call God the first agent, or efficient, than the first cause ; for they argued, that if they called God a cause, this would necessarily suppose an effect ; and it would follow, that God being from eternity a necessary cause, the effect produced, or the universe, must also have been eternal : but, if they re¬ presented the Deity as an agent or efficient, the necessary existence of the effect would not follow ; since the efficient not only must be prior to the production, but might exist long before the actual exertion of power by which it is produced. f This specimen of the method of reasoning which prevailed among the Mahometan Rationalists, may serve to illustrate and confirm the following character given of this sect by another learned Jew : “ The sect of the I Rationalists,” says R. Abea Tibbon,:}; “is composed of certain philoso- ! phical sciolists, who judge of things, not according to truth and nature, but according to their own imaginations, and who confound men by a multiplicity of specious words without meaning ; whence their science is called. The Wisdom of Words.” The design, which was formed by this sect, of illustrating and defending the Koran by logical and metaphysical disquisitions, was highly displeasing to many zealous Mussulmen, who wished to retain the simplicity and ignorance of their Founder, rather than to corrupt his sacred book by explaining it according to the rules of a philosophical system wholly unknown to the prophet. So vehement was the popular aversion to this sect, that it was said by Al-Shafi, § “ Whoever devotes himself to The Wisdom of Words ought to be im¬ paled, and carried through all the tribes of Mussulmen, the public crier everywhere proclaiming, ‘ This is the reward of the man, who has for¬ saken the Koran, and the sacred traditions, to follow Al-Calam.’ ” This philosophical theology of the Arabians was the nurse at least, if not the parent of the scholastic philosophy, which, from the tenth century, con¬ founded and distracted the world with its obscure subtleties and barren disputations. Among the Saracens in Asia, Mauritania, and Spain, we find a long catalogue of writers on metaphysics, physics, logic, ethics, politics, mathe¬ matics, and astronomy. From these we shall select such names as are most deserving of attention in the history of philosophy. ' A distinguished place among the Arabian philosophers is due to Jaco¬ bus Al-Kendi, |1 of Bassora. His father was prefect of Cufa under Muhamed Mohdi and Rashid ; whence it appears, that Al-Kendi flourished in the Caliphate of Al-Mamon, that is, at the beginning of the ninth cen¬ tury. He devoted himself to learning and philosophy in the school of Bassora, and attained such distinction among his contemporaries, that he was called, by way of eminence. The Philosopher. After the manner of the age, he yielded implicit submission to the authority of Aristotle, and was chiefly occupied in interpreting and illustrating his waitings. He did not, however, confine himself to these studies ; for we find his name men¬ tioned among the mathematicians and astronomers of the times ; and his medical writings, which are still extant, prove that he made no inconsider- * L. c. p. i. c. 69. t Conf. Hottingfer, 1. c. c. ii. p. 188. 194. I + In Lib. Moreli. § Pococke, c. 166. Bayle. Takkiddin. j II Abiilf. Dyn. ix, p. 213. Bayle. Pococke, p. 365. Lakeniacher, Diss. de Alkend. 426 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. able figure among the Arabian physicians. Abulfaragius, speaking of Al- Kendi,* relates a memorable instance of his moderation towards a malicious adversary. Whilst this philosopher was visiting the schools of Bagdat, which was at this time the chief resort of the learned, his attempts to pro¬ mote the study of philosophy, and to reconcile the doctrines of Islamism with the principles of reason, gave great offence to one of the interpreters of the Koran, who, doubtless, began to be afraid lest the increase of know¬ ledge should expose the absurdity of the vulgar superstitions. This bigot publicly expressed the most vehement indignation against Al-Kendi, and accused him of impiety and heresy. Al-Kendi, however, instead of re¬ straining the fury of his persecutor by violence, as through his interest with the Caliph he might easily have done, generously adopted the more gentle method of attempting to subdue his malignity by enlightening his understanding. Having detected the design which this Abu Maashar (that was the zealot’s name) had formed upon his life, he employed against him no other weapons than the monitions and precepts of philosophy. Well knowing the power of wisdom to meliorate the temper, he found means to engage a preceptor to instruct him, first in mathematics, and afterwards in philosophy. The consequence was, that the man who had, not long before, inveighed with savage ferocity against Al-Kendi, soon be¬ came sensible of his folly, and offered himself as a pupil to the philosopher whom he had persecuted. Al-Kendi received him with the most merito¬ rious condescension, and his convert became an ornament to his school. In fine, on account of his virtues no less than his learning, Al-Kendi is entitled to an honourable rank among philosophers. Another Arabian who must be mentioned among the teachers of phi¬ losophy and mathematics is Thabet Ebn Korea, who w^as of the ancient sect of the Zabii, and wrote a summary of their doctrine. He acquired reputation as a mathematician, both in geometry and algebra, and left be¬ hind him several mathematical works : he flourished in the tenth century.-|- One of the most celebrated philosophers of the school of Bagdat was Al-Farabi, or more properly Abu Nasr, a native of Balch Farab,J who flourished in the tenth century. He was born of wealthy parents ; but, preferring the pursuits of philosophy to those of riches, he devoted himself to study at Bagdat, where he made such proficiency in learning, that he became one of the most eminent philosophers of his age. He studied ma¬ thematics and medicine, but chiefly excelled in logic. His learning and abilities were universally admired, and great men and princes were emu¬ lous to load him with honours and rewards. But Al-Farabi refused every offer of this kind ; and, either through his love of philosophy, or perhaps through a natural gloominess of temper, gave himself up to solitude and an abstemious life. He constantly slept, even during winter, upon straw ; his countenance Avas always sorrowful, and he found no consolation in any thing but philosophy. The cast of his mind led him to dread all inter¬ course with the world as destructive of innocence, and to lament the imper¬ fection and vanity of human life. He employed his time in study, and read the Avritings of Aristotle with unwearied attention. He Avrote sixty distinct treatises on different parts of the Aristotelian philosophy, Avhich were read and admired, not only among the Arabians but also among the Jews, who began about this time to adopt the Aristotelian mode of philo¬ sophising. Many of his books Avere translated from Arabic into Hebreiv. • L. c. p. 272. 178. Zachut'in Juchasin. p.lll. •)• Abulf. Dyn. ix. p. 184. Pococke, p. 377. Fabric. Bibl. Gr. v. ii. p. 56i. X A town in Asia Minor, a&erw'ards called by the Turks Otrar. Chap. 1. OF THE SARACENS. 427 Logic, metaphysics, and physics, were the subjects on which he chiefly treated. Among his physical writings are mentioned treatises on optics and astronomy.* * * § As a philosophical theologian Al-Ashari, or Esciari, obtained high renown. He applied an extensive knowledge of the Peripatetic phi¬ losophy to the explanation of the Islamitic law, and founded a new sect among the Mahometan divines, who were from him called the Asharites. His subtle reasonings on theology, particularly on the essence and attri¬ butes of God, and on the concurrence of divine agency with human actions, rendered him universally famous. His sect became exceedingly popular, and acquired such authority, that all others were deemed heretical : ! his writings were read and explained in the schools ; and a summary of his doctrine was committed to memory by children. Al-Ashari died at Bassra in Arabia Felix, in the year 942.f Among the professors of mathematical and physical science, who at this time adorned the school at Bagdat, one of the most celebrated was Abut Husein Esophi. He was so eminent an astronomer, that it was said of him, that he understood the heavens better than the great geographer I Ptolemy understood the earth. It is asserted that he was the first who I described a celestial planisphere. This philosopher died about the middle i of the tenth century.^; ! In medicine and philosophy, a high degree of reputation was obtained by Al-Rasi, called also Abubeker and Al-Mansor, a native of Rai, in : Persia, After having been in his youth employed in merchandise, upon the death of his father he engaged, at thirty years of age, in the study of the medical art ; at the same time availing himself of the opportunities i which the school of Bagdat, in which he studied, afforded for the pursuit : of other branches of knowledge. By a long course of study, and by the I experience which he acquired from superintending an hospital, he became i so bold and successful in the practice of medicine, that he was called the I Experimenter, and the Arabian Galen. At the invitation of Al-Mansor, 1 king of Corduba, he removed into Spain, where, under the patronage of I that prince, he lived in wealth and splendour. He wrote a summary of medicine, which he dedicated to his patron, and which has, from this cir¬ cumstance, taken the title of Al-Mansor. Al-Rasi wrote many valuable treatises in medicine and chemistry. In philosophy, among other works, he left a commentary on the sublimer parts of metaphysics. This piece, with most of his other writings, has been translated from Arabic into He¬ brew and Latin. He died at Corduba, about the year 986. § i No small degree of celebrity is annexed to the name of the physician Avicenna, or Ibn-Sina, born at Bocharain the year 978. His first pre- ' ceptor was Abu-Abdalla, a philosopher, whom his father engaged to in¬ struct him in his own house; concerning whom Avicenna says, that he taught him the terms of logic, but was unacquainted with the nature of the art. Before he arrived at his eighteenth year, Avicenna, more, as it seems, through his own industry than by the assistance of preceptors, became well read in languages, in the Islamitic law, and in the sciences. In order, however, to render himself a more perfect master of the sublime * Leo Afric. de Vir. Illustr. Arab. c. 5. Abulf. Dyn. ix. p. 208. Pococke, p. 372. Gab. Sionit. de Mor. Orient, p. 16. Fabr. v. xiii. p. 265. Weidler. Hist. Astr. c. 8. f Leo Af. c. 2. Herbelot. Bibl. Or. p. 133. 261. Maimon, Mor. Nebh. p. iii. c. 16. 1: Leo Af. c. 3. § Leo Af. c. 5. Abulf. D. ix. p. 208. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 46. Herbelot. p. 18. 'Al-Rasi Op. ed. Basil. 1544. 428 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. J doctrines of philosophy, and the subtle questions of dialectics, he became a d student in the school of Bagdat. Here he prosecuted his studies with inde- c fatigable industry, but at the same time with a fanatical spirit scarcely ;] consistent with manly sense and sound judgment. When he was perplexed ci with any logical question, or could not discover a proper middle term for a i syllogism, he used to repair to the mosque, and poured out prayers for i divine illumination ; after which he fancied that the arguments and proofs i he had sought were communicated to him in his sleep. As was usual among the philosophers of Bagdat, Avicenna united with i the study of philosophy the practice of medicine ; and he soon acquired ; such a degree of reputation, that the Caliph consulted him, with respect to ^ i his son, in a case which perplexed the physicians of the court. His pre¬ scription succeeded ; and the success obtained him admission to the court < and access to the library of the prince. From this time he continued to t prosecute his studies with diligence, and to practise medicine with great applause. During this tide of prosperity, Avicenna had no small degree of influence in public atfairs, and rapidly increased his possessions. An un¬ fortunate circumstance, however, suddenly turned the current of his for¬ tune, and removed him from the court to a prison. The sultan Jasoch- bagh proposing to send his nephew as his representative into the native country of Avicenna, the young prince obtained the Sultan’s permission to take Avicenna with him, as his companion and physician. The sultan was, not long afterwards, informed that the young prince, with his brother, was meditating a rebellion. Upon this, he immediately sent secret orders to Avicenna, to take off the leader of the conspiracy by poison. The philo¬ sopher had too much fidelity to his master to fulfil the commission ; but, ' at the same time, through caution, or fear, chose to conceal the order from the young prince : but when Avicenna’s master became, by some un¬ known means, acquainted with the sultan’s design against his life, he was so highly offended with Avicenna for his dishonest reserve, in not com- > municating to him so important a circumstance, that he ordered him to be imprisoned. Avicenna endeavoured to justify himself, by pleading, that he had concealed the sultan’s order, from the hope of preventing those > mischiefs which he foresaw must have arisen from the discovery. ' The prince, however, suffered him to remain in prison from this time to his death, which he is said to have hastened by incontinence : he died in the fifty-eighth year of his age.* Philosophy was rather corrupted than improved by Avicenna. Though a superstitious admirer of Aristotle, he seems to have been very imper¬ fectly acquainted with the Peripatetic doctrine. His medicinal works are injudicious compilations from the Greek writers, full of obscurity and error ; nor was he more successful in his writings upon logic, metaphysics, or physics. Nevertheless, Avicenna was, for a long time, greatly admired, and much followed, not only in the schools of the Saracens, but in those of the Christians. Hebrew and Latin versions of his works are still extant ; but the translators do not appear to have been sufficiently masters of the Arabic tongue to do justice to their author, j- Thograi, a Persian of Ispahan, who was Grand Vizier to the Sultan Malich Mashud, is celebrated for his poetical talents, a specimen of which * Leo Afr. c. 7. Abulf. p. 230. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 96. Pococke, p. 362. Herbelot. p. 812. N. Anton. Bib. Vet. Hisp. t. ii. p. 6. Avic. Op. ed. Massa;. Vennet. 1608. f Hottinger. Bib. Or. p. 218. 245. Bartolocc. Bib. Rabb. t. i. p. 6. Voss, de Phil, p. 272. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 272. Mercklin. de Script. Med. p. 99. OF THE SARACENS. 429 i Chap. 1. is given by Pococke ; and for a Commentary which he wrote upon the i Republic of Plato, a philosopher to whom the Saracens paid little at- I f tenticn. After a strange reverse of fortune, he was put to death by order I of the Sultan, in the year 1121.* * * § We must not omit Al-Gazel, of Tos, or Tus, in Asia, celebrated, I among the Mahometan theologians, for his numerous treatises in defence of the Mahometan religion against the Jews and Christians ; particularly ;; for his “ Demonstration of Islamism,” and his “Treatise on the Unity of [ God.” Nevertheless, he did not escape the reproach of heresy. One of . j his pieces, whieh freely censured some of the indulgences of the Islamitic ^ I law, found at Bagdat after his decease, was condemned ; and it was ordered, I I that if any copy of this w^ork should be found in any part of the Saracen empire, it should be burned. The title of this book was, “ The Resurrec¬ tion of the Law of Science.” He also wrote a treatise, “ On the Opinions * of Philosophers;” and another, entitled, “The Destruction of Philosophers.” i After living in great splendour as a public preceptor at Bagdat, he distri¬ buted his riches among the poor, assumed the habit of a hermit, and . retired to Mecca : from Mecca he travelled into Syria, and Egypt, and staying some time, first at Cairo, and afterwards at Alexandria, he returned to Bagdat, where he died.-f- If from Asia we pass over to the Moors in Africa and Europe, we shall, during the period of which we are now treating, meet with several cele- ■ brated Arabian philosophers. Esseriph Essachali, a native of Sicily, was famous for his knowledge of medicine, astrology, and cosmography. When Roger, duke of Apulia and Calabria, having been appointed king of Sicily by Pope Anacletus, was beseiging the town of Mazzara, the inhabitants sent this philosopher t to Roger to treat with him concerning terms of surrender. Esseriph, to i interest Roger in his favour, presented him with a work upon ancient and modern geography. The king, pleased with the account which the author gave him of the design and plan of his work, ordered it to be translated into Latin. Upon reading the translation, he expressed great surprise that the Mahometans should be so much better acquainted with these subjects than the Christians, and invited the author to remain in his court. The philosopherrefused his request, and withdrew into Mauritania. Roger, how¬ ever, still continued to admire the book ; and when he was asked why he did not prefer the geography of Ptolemy, a much more learned writer, he answered, “ Ptolemy has described only a part of the world, Esseriph the whole.” This philosopher died at Cividat, in Africa, in the year 1121.|; ! Among the Spanish Saracens, Avenpace and Avenzoar are celebrated names. Avenpace, a Spaniard, wrote a commentary upon Euclid, and philosophical and theological Epistles. He was intimately conversant with the Peripatetic philosophy, and applied it to the illustration of the Islamic system of theology, and to the explanation of the Koran : on this account, he was suspected of heresy, and thrown into prison at Corduba. He flourished about the middle of the twelfth century. § Avenzoar, a native of Seville, the seat of the Caliphs, deserves notice, chiefly for the improve¬ ments which he made in the practice of medicine, and as the preceptor of Averroes. He died in the year 1168.|| • Pococke ad. Carm. Thogr. p. 4. ed. Oxon. 1661. Leo Afr. c. 13. f Pococke, 1. c. p. 371. Leo Afr. c 12. Herbelot. p. 362. J Pococke, Spec. Hist. Ar. p. 373. Leo Afr. c. 14. § Leo Afr. c. 15. Abulf. ap. Pococke Specim. p. 385. II Leo Afr. c. 16. 18. N. Anton. Bib. Hisp. t. ii. p. 232. 430 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. About the same time flourished Thophail, of Seville, famous for his medical skill, and for his knowledge of the Peripatetic philosophy. He was preceptor to Maimonides and Averroes, This philosopher employed the Aristotelian doctrine, as an instrument of enthusiasm, in the elegant tale, still extant, of Hai Ebn Yockdan* * * § a youth, who, having been ex- | posed when an infant upon the sea coast, was nourished by a hind, and grew up in the woods, without any intercourse with human beings ; and who, by the unaided exertion of his powers, attained to the knowledge of things natural and supernatural, and arrived at the felicity of an intuitive intercourse with the Divine Mind. The piece is written with such elegance of language, and vigour of imagination, that, notwithstanding the improba¬ bility of the story, it has been universally admired. It exhibits a favourable specimen of Peripatetic philosophy, as it was taught among the Saracens ; and, at the same time, affords a memorable example of the unnatural | alliance, which was now so generally established, between philosophy and fanaticism.! Thophail died about the close of the twelfth century. J Of all the Arabian philosophers and physicians the most celebrated was Averroes, § a philosopher whom Christians as well as Arabians esteemed equal, if not superior, to Aristotle himself. Averroes was born about the middle of the'twelfth century, of a noble family at Corduba, the capital of the Saracen dominions in Spain. He was early instructed in the Islamitic law, and, after the usual manner of the Arabian schools, united with the study of Mahometan theology that of the Aristotelian philosophy. These studies he pursued under Thophail, and became a follower of the sect of the Asharites. Under Avenzoar he studied the science of medicine, and under Ibnu-Saig he made himself master of the mathematical sciences. ' Thus qualified, he was chosen, upon his father’s demise, to the chief ma¬ gistracy of Corduba. The fame of his extraordinary erudition and talents ‘ soon afterwards reached the Caliph Jacob Al-Mansor, king of Mauritania, ’ the third of the Almohadean dynasty, who had built a magnificent school | at Morocco ;j| and that prince appointed him supreme magistrate and priest | of Morocco and all Mauritania, allowing him still to retain his former honours. Having left a temporary substitute at Corduba, he went to Morocco, and remained there till he had appointed, through the king¬ dom, judges well skilled in the Mahometan law, and settled the whole plan of administration ; after which he returned home, and resumed his offices.^ This rapid advancement of Averroes brought upon him the envy of his rivals at Corduba ; and they conspired to lodge an accusation against him, for an heretical desertion of the true Mahometan faith. For this purpose, they engaged several young persons, among their dependants, to apply to him for instruction in philosophy. Averroes, who was easy of access, and always desirous of communicating knowledge, complied with their request, and thus fell into the snare which had been laid for him. His new pupils were very industrious in taking minutes of every tenet or opinion advanced by their preceptor, which appeared to contradict the established system of Mahometan theology. These minutes they framed into a charge of heresy, and attested upon oath that they had been fairly taken from his lips. The charge was signed by a hundred witnesses. The Caliph listened to the * Thophail, Philos. Autodid. cum Versione Lat. a Pococke, Oxon. 1700. f This work was translated, into English by S. Hockley, professor of Arabic in Cam¬ bridge. Ed. London, 1711. 8vo. J Leo Afr. c. 17. § Leo Afr. c. 20. N. Anton. I. c. t. ii. p. 243. Bayle. Pococke Spec. p. 385. II Leo Afr. Hist. Afr. 1. ii. p. CO. ^ Leo Afr. de Vir. Ar. p. 280. Chap. 1. OF THE SARACENS. 431 accusation and punished Averroes, by declaring him heterodox, confiscating his goods, and commanding him for the future to reside among the Jews, who inhabited the precincts of Corduba, where he remained an object of general persecution and obloquy. Even the boys in the streets pelted him with stones, when he went up to the mosque in the city to perform his devotions. His pupil, Maimonides, that he might not be under the neces¬ sity of violating the laws of friendship and gratitude by joining the general cry against Averroes, left Corduba. From this unpleasant situation Aver¬ roes at last found means to escape. He fled to Fez ; but he had been there only a few days, when he was discovered by the magistrate, and committed to prison. The report of his flight from Corduba was soon carried to the king, who immediately called a council of divines and lawyers, to deter¬ mine in what manner this heretic should be treated. The members of the council were not agreed in opinion. Some strenuously maintained, that a man who held opinions so contrary to the law of the prophet deserved death. Others thought that much mischief, arising from the dissatisfaction of those among the infidels who were inclined to favour him, might be avoided, by only requiring from the culprit a public penance and recanta¬ tion of his errors. The milder opinion prevailed ; and Averroes was brought out of prison to the gate of the mosque, and placed upon the upper step, with his head bare, at the time of public prayers, and every one, as he passed into the mosque, was allowed to spit upon his face. At the close of the service, the judge, with his attendants, came to the philo¬ sopher, and asked him whether he repented of his heresies. He acknow¬ ledged his penitence, and was dismissed without further punishment. With the permission of the king, Averroes returned to Corduba, where he expe¬ rienced all the miseries of poverty and contempt. In process of time, the people became dissatisfied with the regent who had succeeded Averroes, and petitioned the king that their former governor might be restored. J. Al-Mansor, not daring to show such indulgence to one who had been infamous for heresy, without the consent of the priesthood, called a general assembly, in which it was debated, whether it would be consistent with the safety of religion, and the honour of the law, that Averroes should be restored to the government of Corduba. The deliberation terminated in favour of the penitent heretic, and he was restored, by the royal mandate, to all his former honours. Upon this fortunate change in his affairs, Averroes removed to Morocco, where he remained till his death, which happened, as some say, in the vear 1195, or, according to others, in 1206.* Averroes is highly celebrated for his personal virtues. He practised the most rigid temperance, eating only, once in a day, the plainest food. So indefatigable was his industry in the pursuit of science, that he often passed whole nights in study. In his judicial capacity, he discharged his duty with great wisdom and integrity. His humanity would not permit him to pass the sentence of death upon any criminal ; he left this painful office to his deputies. He possessed so great a degree of self-command and patient lenity, that, when one of his enemies, in the midst of a public discourse, sent a servant to him to whisper some abusive language in his ear, he took no other notice of what passed than if it had been a secret message of business. The next day the servant returned, and publicly begged pardon of Averroes for the affront he had offered him ; upon which Averroes only appeared displeased that hispatient endurance of injuries should be brought • Leo Afr. c. 20, &c. Bayle. 432 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. i •into public notice, and dismissed the servant with a gentle caution, neveris : to offer that insult to another which had in the present instance passedjjji- unpunished. Averroes spent a great part of his wealth in liberal donations ; to learned men, without making any distinction between his friends and ' j his enemies ; for which his apology w'as, that, in giving to his friends and 4 relations, he only followed the dictates of nature ; but, in giving to his enemies, he obeyed the commands of virtue. With uncommon abilities jj) and learning, Averroes united great affability and urbanity of manners. 5 In fine, he may justly be reckoned one of the greatest men of his age.* In philosophy, however, Averroes partook of the enthusiasm of the times n with respect to Aristotle, and paid a superstitious deference to his au¬ thority ; of this his preface to the Physics of Aristotle j- affords a singular proof. “ The writings of Aristotle,” says he, “ are so perfect, that none > of his followers, through a space of fifteen hundred years, have been able to make the smallest improvement upon them, or to discover the least error in them ; a degree of perfection, which is truly miraculous, and proves him to have been rather a Divine than a human being.” In another place, he says, “ Let us bless God, who has raised this man above all others in perfection, and appropriated to him the highest degree of human excel¬ lence.” And again : “ The doctrine of Aristotle is the perfection of truth, and his understanding attained the utmost limit of human ability ; so that it might be truly said of him, that he was created, and given to the world, by Divine Providence, that we might see in him how much it is possible i for man to know.” Extravagant, however, as Averroes was in his admira¬ tion of Aristotle, it is unquestionably true, that he was unacquainted with < the Greek language, and read the writings of his oracle in wretched Ara¬ bic translations, taken immediately from Latin or Syriac versions. The necessary consequence was, his Commentaries on Aristotle were nothing ' better than a confused mass of error and misrepresentation. Yet such is the power of prejudice, that many learned men, since the revival of letters, have passed high encomiums upon Averroes, as an excellent commentator. His writings of this kind were exceedingly numerous, and were so much admired by the Jews, that many of them were translated into Hebrew. ' Besides these, Averroes wrote a paraphrase of Plato’s Republic ; and a treatise in defence of philosophy against Al-Gazal, entitled Happalath Jiahappalah, commonly cited under the name of Destructorium destruc- torii ; and many other treatises, in theology, jurisprudence and medicine. He took great pains to improve the theory of medicine by the help of philosophy, and, particularly, to reconcile Aristotle and Galen ; but it does not appear that he practised physic. Few of his writings are to be met with, except in Hebrew or Latin translations. § Much has been asserted concerning the impiety of Averroes, but with¬ out sufficient proof. It is probable, however, that he adhered with more devotion to his philosopher than to Mahomet or any other legislator ; for it appears, that, after Aristotle, he held the eternity of the world, and the existence of one Universal Intellect, inferior to Deity, the external source of all human intelligence, 1| and consequently denied the distinct existence and immortality of the human soul. * Leo. 1. c. f Ap. Malebranche Recherche, &c. 1. ii. p. ii. c. 7. X Ap. Lisp. Manud. Stoic. 1. i. Diss. 3, 4. § Leo, 1. c. Pococke ad Portam Mosis. p. 112. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. lll,&c. Aver. Resp. Plated. Venet p. 1552. N. Anton. Bibl. Hisp. t ii. p. 240. Huet de Claris Interp. p. 229. Mercklin. Lind. Renov. p. i. 94. 11 Bayle. Conf. Rhodogin. Ant Lect 1. lii. c. 2. Chap. 2. OF THE SARACENS. 4.33 Besides the Arabian philosophers which have been enumerated, there were others of inferior note, who acquired some degree of celebrity by their commentaries upon Aristotle and other philosophical works, but which it is wholly unnecessary particularly to mention. There are also many great Arabian names, in astronomy, mathematics, chemistry, medicine, and other sciences ; but, for a distinct account of these, we must refer to those I writers who have traced the rise and progress of the several branches of science through the Arabian schools.* CHAPTER II. OF THE NATURE AND SPIRIT OF THE SARACENIC PHILOSOPHY. I The historical view we have taken of the rise and progress of philosophy among the Arabians, and of the lives and characters of their more cele- 1 brated philosophers, will enable us to form an accurate idea of the nature and spirit of their philosophy. This subject will not, however, require a prolix discussion ; for it is very evident, from the facts which have been 1 related, that the Arabians did not frame a new system, but merely revived I the Peripatetic doctrine, the features of which have been already deline- ! ated. In what manner this doctrine, and the general state of philosophy, were affected by their connexion with Islamism, and by the peculiar cir- ) cumstances of the Saracen nations, it may be of some importance to I remark, and we shall in this chapter endeavour to explain. Before the introduction of the Mahometan religion among the Arabians t (which happened in the year 622) their manner of living was un¬ favourable to the progress of knowledge. Leading an unsettled and roving life, in which they were chiefly employed in the care of their i flocks and herds, they had little opportunity or inducement to apply to i any kind of learning ; and it does not appear, that they had among I them any other proofs of advancement in knowledge, than that kind of : poetry and eloquence which are commonly found in the early stages of i civilization, and that attention to astronomy which was common in the j Eastern nations, and is natural in pastoral life. About the second or third I century (for there is no sufficient authority for an earlier date) we find, j indeed, that a sect arose in Arabia under the name of the Zabii, who de¬ rived their notions from the ancient religion of the Persians, and from the • dreams of the Oriental philosophy concerning the Divine nature. This t sect supposed human nature connected with the Supreme Deity by inter- ! mediate beings of various orders, powers, virtues, spirits, whom they con- i i * Vidend. Leo Africanus de Viris illustr. ap. Arabos. Fabric. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 96. j 259. Goll. de Medic, et Phil. Arab. Dormius ad Jons, de Script. Hist. Ph. 1. iii. c. 28. sect. 5. Hettinger, Bibl. Quadripart. L iii. p. ii. c. 2. Abulf. Hist. Oxon. 1663. 4to. Elmacini Hist. Saracen. Ltigd. Bat. 1625. fol. Eutychii Annales. Ox. 1658. 4to. Het¬ tinger, Hist. Orient, et Biblioth. Orient. Herbelot, Biblioth. Orient. Par. 1697. Lude- ! wig. Hist, rationalis Phil, apud Turcas. Lackeinaker de Fatis Studiorum inter Arabos. Horn. Hist. Phil. 1. 5. Bayle. Conring. Antiq. Acad. Suppl. xix, xx. Friend’s History ■ of Medicine. Voss, de Scient, Toletan. Hist. Arab. Avicen. Vit. et Op. Ed. Massse. j Venet. 1608. Merklin. Linden. Renov. Carm. Thograi Ed. Pococke. Ox, 1661. 8vo. ; Mod. Univ. Hist. v. xix. Assemanni Bibl. Or. Bibliander de Orig. et Mor. Turca- \ rum. Bas. 1550. i \ F F 434 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. ceived to be instruments of communication between the First Being and man, and to whom their religious worship was wholly addressed. They believed the bodies of the planets to be the habitations, or temples, of in¬ telligent natures ; and this notion became the basis of a fanciful and super¬ stitious system of star-worship. The Zabian sect probably derived their ,, opinions immediately from the Cabbalistic philosophy of the Jews, and from the tenets of certain Christian heretics, who, about the time when JP this sect appears to have arisen, resided in Arabia and its vicinity. But, |' whatever was the origin of this sect, it deserves little attention ; for it was no better than a nursery of idle tales and puerile superstitions. Of the latter, Abulfaragius furnishes the following example ; the Zabii, believing * in the resurrection of the dead, at the funeral of a departed friend killed a camel upon his tomb, that at the resurrection he might not be without a beast to ride upon.* Such was the state of philosophical knowledge in Arabia at the time when Mahomet appeared. This bold adventurer seized the opportunity, which the general prevalence of ignorance and superstition among his countrymen afforded him, for passing himself upon the world as a divine ' propliet. Himself wholly illiterate, and assisted by men who were better I able to practise the arts of imposture than to teach the doctrine of truth and wisdom, it is no wonder that the law, which this new prophet instituted, and to which he enjoined implicit obedience on pain of death, breathed little of the spirit of philosophy. The great object of the artificers of this law was, to suit it to the feeble understandings, and gross passions, of the ^ ignorant multitude. For this purpose they filled it with vulgar notions, and romantic fables, as remote as possible from every thing rational. They who contend, upon the authority of certain Mahometan theologians, that , whatever may be thought irrational in the Koran is to be taken figuratively, and explained in a philosophical sense, do not recollect, that the unlearned founder of the Islamitic law was a stranger to such refinements ; and that it was not till long after the establishment of Islamism, that the necessity of introducing them was discovered. And even when the unphilosophical ideas and language of the Koran obliged the teachers of Islamism, as they became more enlightened, to adopt the figurative and allegorical mode of interpretation, and produced the sects of the Asharites and Motazalitae, there still remained other sects, particularly the Moshabbehi and Ceranii,f who adhered to the vulgar notions, or chose rather to impute their apparent absurdity to human ignorance than to abandon ancient errors. The truth is, nothing could be more inimical to science, than the blind assent which Mahomet required to the doctrines of the Koran ; the violent means, which, as soon as he had acquired sufficient strength, he employed in pro¬ pagating his religion: and the barbarous edict, by which he prohibited among his followers the study of literature and philosophy. So successful was this impostor in his attempts to prevent inquiry, and to bind his vas¬ sals in the chains of ignorance, that it became a common opinion among them, that the Koran w'as a complete summary of every thing necessary and useful to be known ; and consequently, that all other learning might be safely neglected. They believed that the book itself was immediately sent down from heaven ; and violent dissensions, and even persecutions, arose upon the question. Whether the Koran was the created, or uncreated. Word of God. The first period of the Saracenic history, which includes * Abulf. apucl Pococke, 1. c. p. 139. Maim. Mor. Nebh. 1. iii. c. 29. f Pococke, i. c. p. 226. Port. Mos. Diss. vii. Chap. 2. OF THE SARACENS. 435 the Ommiadean dynasty, may be called the barbarous age of Arabian philosophy.* * * § After the accession of the Abbasidean dynasty, we have indeed seen that learning, and learned men, enjoyed the countenance and protection of the Arabian princes. But philosophy was rather called in to perform the office of a servile auxiliary to Islamism, than to resume her natural authority over the human mind, and rescue it from the tyranny of superstition. The princes themselves, rigidly tenacious of the doctrine of Mahomet, regarded with indignation every attempt to weaken its authority ; and employed their learned men rather in riveting, than in loosening, the fetters which the founder of their religion had thrown over the understandings of men.j- In the most enlightened period of Arabian philosophy, the utmost that was attempted was, to apply the principles of philosophy to the correction of the absurdities of Mahometanism. The learned professors of their schools were, indeed, thoroughly convinced, that Islamism could not long subsist, unless it were corrected by philosophy. But in endeavouring to give a philosophical air to the crudities and absurdities of the Koran, the ingenuity of learned men, restrained by reverence for authority, framed a system of opinions, in which neither the true meaning and spirit of the Islamitic law were preserved, nor the freedom of philosophical speculation was indulged ; whence numerous sects arose, in which an unnatural alliance was long maintained between philosophy and superstition. J Two mischievous consequences followed this alliance. The first Avas, that the absurd dogiuas of the Koran were by this means so far glossed over, or blended with more rational tenets, that the Mahometans imagined themselves possessed of a law, which would harmonise with philosophy and with the doctrines of other religions, and were hereby confirmed in their attachment to a system founded in absurdity, and supported by im¬ posture. The second, that when it was discovered that the letter of the Mahometan law would not easily accord with philosophical notions, and that in attempting to produce this union inextricable difficulties and endless disputes arose, some resolved at once to treat all these speculations with contempt, and, without the trouble of inquiry, to acquiesce in the doctrines of the prevailing religion, however irrational ; whilst others perplexed them¬ selves with subtle disputations, till they were lost in the mists of scepticism, or in the thick darkness of atheism. Of this latter issue of Arabian po¬ lemics, the history of Islamism affords many examples.! How ineffectual the efforts of philosophy were to solve the difficulties ■ which arose in theology, appears from the disputes which were long carried on, with great subtlety and much animosity, among the different sects of ; Mahometans, concerning the decrees of God, and the freedom of the human will. Modern ingenuity has scarcely been able to invent a distinc¬ tion on this obscure subject, which may not be found in the Arabian con¬ troversialists ; yet, after all, the question remains undecided. || Another cause of the imperfect success of the Arabians in philosophy, notwithstanding all the industry and spirit with which they prosecuted these studies, may be found in the state of knowledge among the Christians, * Pococke, p. 220. t Elmacin. 1. c. 1. ii. c. 6. 8. 16. Eutych. Ann. t. ii. p. 375. 400 — 420. 472. J Pococke, ]. c. p. 213 — 219. § Reimmann. Hist. Ath. p. 530. Elmacin. I. ii. c. 4. 1. iii. c. 6. Hottinger, Hist. Or. 1. i. c. 8. 1. ii. c. 6. Herbelot, Bib. Or. p. 929. Pococke, p. 240. II Maimon, Mor. Nebb. p. i. c. 83. Reland, de Rel. Muhammid. 1. ii. sect. 3. Po¬ cocke, p. 241. Hottinger, 1. ii. c. 6. F F 2 436 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. at the period when philosophy passed over from them to the followers of Mahomet. In the second age of Islamism, that is about the latter end of the eighth century, when philosophy began to be studied at Bagdat, the Eclectic sect being, as we have seen, nearly extinct, together with Pagan¬ ism, almost the whole Christian world professed themselves followers of Aristotle ; but derived their ideas of his philosophy, not from the pure fountain of his own writings, but from the adulterated streams of commen¬ tators, who were deeply infected with the Eclectic spirit of the Alexandrian schools, such as Porphyry, Themistius, Simplicius, and Joannes Philoponus. When therefore the Saracen princes, and chiefly Al-Mamon, became de¬ sirous of introducing philosophy among their subjects, and for this purpose invited learned Christians to their court, it was impossible that the Arabians should be instructed in any other system of philosophy than the Peripatetic, or that even of this they should form more than a very imperfect and ob¬ scure conception.* This will still morefully appear, if itbe considered, through how obscure a medium the Arabian philosophers looked into the mind of Aristotle. Not only were they unaccustomed to metaphysical abstraction, and unacquaint¬ ed with the general history of ancient philosophy, but they were even igno¬ rant of the Greek language, and were obliged to have recourse to Arabic versions, and these not taken immediately from the originals, but from Syriac translations, made by Greek Christians at a period when barbarism ^ was overspreading the Eastern world, and philosophy was almost extinct. , The first translators themselves were ill qualified to give a true representa¬ tion of the Aristotelian philosophy, so obscurely delivered by its author, [, and so wretchedly defaced by his commentators. What then was to be ^ expected from the second class of translators, who implicitly followed such ^ blind guides ? The truth is, that the Arabian translators and comraenta- 1 tors executed their task neither judiciously nor faithfully ; frequently mis- , taking the sense of their author, adding many things which are not in the original, and omitting many passages which they did not understand. These errors were transferred, with no small increase, into the subsequent Latin versions, and became the cause of innumerable misconceptions and absurdities in the Christian schools of the West ; where the doctrines of Aristotle, after having passed through the hands of the Alexandrians and Saracens, produced that wonderful mass of subtleties called the scholastic , philosophy. ■j- From these premises, it is easy to infer the true state of philosophy among the Saracens. In every branch of science, in which Aristotle led the way, the Arabian philosophers followed him as an infallible guide. Logic was diligently cultivated in their schools, but always with a servile adherence to the Aristotelian method. J In metaphysics, though some of these phi¬ losophers, particularly Averroes, reasoned with great subtlety, they chiefly made use of the abstract conceptions and nice distinctions of the Peripatetic ; philosophy, for the purpose of casting a veil over the gross and unphilo- sophical dogmas of the Koran. In morals, some of the Arabians, after the example of Aristotle, taught political and civil precepts of wisdom in popu¬ lar sentences and aphorisms ; whilst others, upon the metaphysical ground of the Aristotelian doctrine concerning the Supreme Good and the First Cause, framed a mystical system of ethics, which placed the perfection of human nature in the intuitive vision of God, and an essential union with * Hottinger, Bib. Or. c. 2. t Patricii Discuss. Perip. t. i. I. x. p. 143. Huet. de Claris Interp. 1. ii. p. 198. Rc- nauclot, Ep, in Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 812. J Hottinger, Bib. Or. c. ii. p. 218. Chap. 2. OF THE SARACENS. 437 the Divine nature. Of the former kind of moral writings are, “ A Col¬ lection of the Moral Sayings of Wise Men,” by Ibn Havasen Cusiira, and “ The Persian Rosary:”* of the latter kind, are the “Mystic Poems” of Ibn Ahmed Busiris, and an allegorical piece “ On the Love of God,” by Omar Ibn Phared.-i- The mathematical sciences were cultivated with great industry by the Arabians ; and in arithmetic, both particular and universal, their inventions and improvements were valuable but in geome¬ try, they were so far from adding any thing new to the treasures which were left by the Greek mathematicians, that they in many particulars cor- , rupted their doctrine. An Arabic version of Euclid, preserved at Rome, and published by order of Pope Sextus V., gives the propositions in a form so confused and mutilated, as to afford an unequivocal proof, that the trans¬ lator was very imperfectly acquainted with his author’s method of reasoning. A similar want of accuracy has been observed in the Arabic version of “ The Spheerics of Theodosius,” and of Ptolemy’s “ Doctrine of the Pro¬ jection of the Sphere. In medicine, to which the Arabians paid much attention, their chief guides were Hippocrates and Galen ; but, by attempt¬ ing to reconcile the doctrine of these writers with the physiology of Aris¬ totle, they introduced into their medical system many inconsistent tenets, and many useless refinements. § In the science of botany, though they made choice of no unskilful guide, and spent much labour in interpreting him, they frequently, for want of understanding the subject, mistook his meaning so egregiously, that, in the Arabian translations, a botanist would scarcely suppose himself reading Dioscorides ; nor were they more success¬ ful in other branches of natural history. Their discoveries in chemistry, which, it is confessed, were not inconsiderable, were concealed under the occult mysteries of alchymy. Even in astronomy, where they obtained the highest reputation, they made few improvements upon the Greek authors whom they followed ; as appears from the Arabic version of the Almagest of Ptolemy, and from their account of the number of the fixed stars. || There is one science, indeed, in which the Arabians must be acknowledged to have excelled all other philosophers, that which treats of the influence of the stars and planets upon the affairs of this world ; but this science, if astrology can deserve the name, owes its existence and continuance entirely to ignorance, superstition, and imposture ; and, therefore, can reflect no honour upon the people by whom it was cultivated. Upon the whole it appears, that when philosophy, in order to escape the violence of barbarism, took refuge in Arabia, she met with no very hospitable reception. The Saracens w ere too much under the dominion of authority and prejudice, to be capable of prosecuting the search after truth with an independent spirit. Wanting sufficient confidence in their own abilities, they chose rather to put them under the direction of Aris¬ totle, or any other guide, than to speculate for themselves with the free¬ dom of true philosophy : the consequence was, that notwithstanding all their industry and ingenuity, they contributed little towards enlarging the field of human knowledge. We do not mean to assert, that there were no great men among the Arabians, or that philosophy owed nothing to their exertions. We freely confess, that it was in a great measure owing to the light of learning and science, which shone in Arabia, that the whole earth was not at this time overwhelmed with intellectual darkness. But thus much may be with confidence asserted, that the advances which the Arabians made in knowledge were very inconsiderable, compared with * Hottinger, Bib. Or. c. ii. p. 259. f Ib. p. 263. + Friend, Hist. Med. p. ii. p. 12. § Ib. p. 14. ll Ib. p. 11. 438 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book V. what has been done in modern times ; and that, in the present enlightened state of the world, science can suffer no material loss, if their writings be permitted quietly to repose in that oblivion to which time has consigned them. The Arabians certainly fell far short of the Greeks in general knowledge ; and it was only in a very few particulars that they made any additions to the fund of ancient wisdom. Since the original writings of the Greeks are come down to the present times, we have little reason to regret the want of those remains of Arabian learning, which are still untranslated.* The method we have prescribed to ourselves in this work would now lead us to enter into a distinct detail of the several branches of the Arabian philosophy ; but since their tenets, as far as they are distinct from the peculiar dogmas of the Koran, are, without variation, those of the Peripatetic school, which have been already explained at large, this part of our task is superseded. We shall therefore conclude our account of the Saracenic philosophy, by subjoining, in a few words, the theo¬ logical tenets and moral precepts of the Arabians, after they were en¬ lightened by a free intercourse with Jewish and Christian philosophers. According to Al-Gazel, the doctrine of the Arabians concerning God and Spiritual Natures was as follows :f God created all things from nothing, and doth whatever he pleaseth. In his essence he is one, without companion or equal, eternal and im¬ mutable. He has no corporeal form, nor is circumscribed by any limits. He neither exists in any thing, nor does any thing exist in him. The divine essence admits of no multiplicity ; his attributes therefore do not subsist in his essence, but are his essence itself. That God exists, is known by the apprehension of the intellect in this world, and in the eternal habitation of the holy and blessed, by immediate vision and intuition. Whatever happens in nature, happens according to the will and appointment of God, whose decrees are in all things irresistible. The Law% or Word of God, is eternal and uncreated. God has created all things for the manifestation of his glory, and will reward his worshippers, not according to their merit, but according to his own munificence. Angels, the servants of the most high God, are clothed with ethereal bodies of different forms, and have difierent offices assigned them ; and, though neither their names nor distinctions are known, they ought to be loved and honoured. The souls of men are immortal, and their bodies will be raised from the dead. In the interval between death and the resurrection, souls remain in an intermediate state; and after the resur¬ rection, the good and faithful shall be rewarded, and the wicked and un¬ believing shall be punished ; but they who, after having suffered punish¬ ment, shall confess One God, will, through his favour, be released from their confinement, and placed among the blessed. J With respect to morals, Mahomet, notwithstanding all his pretensions, did little. Although he laid a good foundation, in the belief of one God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, he was so far from raising hereupon a superstructure of rational ethics, that he relaxed the bonds of morality ; partly, by representing future happiness as chiefly consisting in corporeal and sensual pleasures ; and partly, by giving his followers a code Conring. Acad. Sup. 23. p. 257. Lud. Vives de Caus. Corrupt. 1. v. p. 167. Fabr. Bibl. Gr. v. i. p. 816. t Apud Pococke Spec. p. 220 — 274. Reland, de Rel. Muham. Compend. Gllraj. 1717. Port. Mos. p. 230. t Conf. Thophail. Vit. Hai Ebn Yockdan. Ed. Pococke, Ox. 1700. Chap. 2. OF THE SARACENS. 439 jl of laws, in which atonement is made for moral defects and irregularities I , by the observance of superstitious rites and ceremonies. After the intro- V duction of philosophy among the Arabians, the ethical system of Maho- j ; met was, however, materially improved ; so that it would be unfair to ! ascribe to the whole Mahometan world, or even to the Mahometan religion i itself, as it was in process of time corrected by philosophy, all the defects and errors of the moral doctrine taught by the illiterate Prophet, j The fundamental precepts of Islamism are these : Believe in one God, and in Mahomet the prophet of God. Perform the appointed ablutions. I Pray to God devoutly at the stated seasons, and according to the pre- 1 scribed forms. Keep strictly the fasts enjoined by the law, especially the i thirty days of the month Ramadan. Let your prayers and fastings be I accompanied with alms-giving. Visit the holy temple at Mecca.* [ Besides the precepts of the Koran, the Arabians have always had I among them lessons of moral wisdom, written in verse, in the form of 11 . aphorisms. Several collections of these sentences have been made by } modern writers, from which it appears, that the Arabians, though they I did not treat the doctrine of ethics scientifically, were very capable of Ij thinking justly, and writing elegantly, on moral subjects, j- One poet, in tj particular, appeared among them, who wrote a beautiful compendium of Oriental ethics, under the title of the Persian Rosary. j; This was :) Eddin Sadi, a Persian, who, about the middle of the thirteenth century, when the Turks invaded Persia, withdrew from his own country, and ■; settled at Bagdat, for the purpose of prosecuting his studies. After expe- i riencing much vicissitude of fortune, he returned home, and compiled the f book just mentioned, which he completed in the year 1257- This work ; , has been universally read in the East; and has been translated into ! Latin, and into several modern languages. From this Rosary, which ( is divided into eight chapters, we shall cull a few of the choicest ^ flowers. * 1. Paradise Mali be the reward of those kings who restrain their resent¬ ment, and know how to forgive. A king, who institutes unjust laws, un- ; dermines the foundation of his kingdom. Let him, who neglects to raise j the fallen, fear, lest when he himself falls, no one will stretch out his hand ; to lift him up. Administer justice to your people, for a day of judgment is at hand. The dishonest steward’s hand vdll shake, when he comes to render an account of his trust. Be just, and fear not. Oppress not thy subjects, lest the sighing of the oppressed should ascend to heaven. If you wish to be great, be liberal ; for, unless you sow the seed, there can i be no increase. Assist and relieve the wretched, for misfortunes may ; happen to yourself. Wound no man unnecessarily ; there are thorns I enough in the path of human life. If a king take an apple from the ' garden of a subject, his servants will soon cut down the tree. The flock is not made for the shepherd, but the shepherd for the flock. 2. Excel in good works, and M^ear what you please : innocence and piety do not consist in wearing an old or coarse garment. Learn virtue from the vicious ; and what offends you in their conduct, avoid in your own. If you have received an injury, bear it patiently ; by pardoning • Vid. Lib. Mostatraf. ap. Pococke Spec. p. 301. Reland. 1. c. Sale’s Koran, t Erpenii Centur. Proverb. Arab. Galland. Les Paroles Remarq. des Orient. Paris, 1694. 12mo. Hottinger, Hist. Or. I. ii. c. 5. + Ed. Gentii. Amstel. 1651. fol. Lit. Persic, cum vers. Lat. fol. Amst. 1651. Lat. ver. 12mo. 1655. Hottinger, 1. c. 440 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE SARACENS. Book V. the offences of others, you will wash away your own. Him, who has been every day conferring upon you new favours, pardon, if, in the space of a long life, he should have once done you an injury. Respect the memory of the good, that your good name may live for ever. 3. In your adversity, do not visit your friend with a sad countenance; for you will embitter his cup : relate even your misfortunes with a smile ; for wretchedness will never reach the heart of a cheerful man. He who lives upon the fruits of his own labour, escapes the contempt of haughty benefactors. Always encounter petulance with gentleness, and perverse¬ ness with kindness : a gentle hand will lead the elephant itself by a hair. When once you have offended a man, do not presume that a hundred benefits will secure you from revenge : an arrow may be drawn out of a wound, but an injury is never forgotten. Worse than the venom of a serpent, is the tongue of an enemy who pretends to be your friend. 4. It is better to be silent upon points we understand, than to be put to shame by being questioned upon things of which we are ignorant. A wise man will not contend with a*fool. It is a certain mark of folly, as well as rudeness, to speak whilst another is speaking. If you are wise, you will speak less than you know. 5. Although you can repeat every word of the Koran, if you suffer yourself to-be enslaved by love, you have not yet learned your alphabet. The immature grape is sour ; wait a few days, and it will become sweet. If you resist temptation, do not assure yourself that you shall escape slander. The reputation, which has been fifty years in building, may be thrown down by one blast of calumny. Listen not to the tale of friendship from the man who has been capable of forgetting his friend in adversity. 6. Persevei’ance accomplishes more than precipitation : the patient mule, which travels slowly night and day, will in the end go further than an Arabian courser. If you are old, leave sports and jests to the young: the stream, which has passed away, will not return into its channel. 7. Instruction is only profitable to those who are capable of receiving it : bring an ass to Mecca, and it will still return an ass. If you would be your father’s heir, learn his wisdom : his wealth you may expend in ten days. He who is tinctured with good principles while he is young, when he is grown old will not be destitute of virtue. If a man be destitute of knowledge, prudence, and virtue, his door-keeper may say, Nobody is at home. Give advice where you ought ; if it be not regarded, the fault is not yours. 8. Two kinds of men labour in vain : they who get riches, and do not enjoy them ; and they who learn wisdom, and do not apply it to the con¬ duct of life. A wise man, who is not at the same time virtuous, is a blind man carrying a lamp : he gives light to others, whilst he himself remains in darkness. If you wish to sleep soundly, provide for to-morrow. Trust no man, even your best friend, with a secret; you .will never find a more faithful guardian of the trust than yourself. Let your misfortunes teach you compassion : he knows the condition of the wretched, who has himself been wretched. Excessive vehemence creates enmity; excessive gentle¬ ness, contempt: be neither so severe as to be hated, nor so mild as to be insulted. He who throws away advice upon a conceited man, himself wants an adviser. In a single hour you may discover whether a man has good sense, but it will require many years to discover whether he has good temper. Three things are unattainable; riches without trouble, science without controversy, and government without punishment. Cle¬ mency to the wicked is an injury to the good.. If learning were banished PHILOSOPHY OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 441 from the earth, there would, notwithstanding, be no one who would think himself ignorant. The whole book from which the preceding sentences are extracted, whether written from the author’s own conceptions, or compiled from other sources, deserves to be read as an elegant specimen of Arabian morals.* BOOK VI. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. CHAPTER I. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES. In the preceding books we have traced the history of Pagan, Jewish, and Mahometan philosophy, from the earliest times to the period of literary and philosophical darkness called the Middle Age. We next proceed to mark the progress of philosophy among Christians from the birth of Jesus Christ to the eighth century, when, as will afterwards appear, it suffered material alteration and corruption in the Christian schools. Although Jesus Christ demands attention and reverence under a much more exalted character than that of a philosopher, yet it will not be questioned by those who are more inclined to regard the real nature of things than to cavil about words, that the Christian religion merits, in the highest sense, the appellation of philosophy. For the weighty truths which it teaches respecting God and man are adapted to produce in the minds I of men the genuine principles of wisdom, and to conduct them to true felicity. At the same time that it enlightens the understanding, it interests the heart; exhibiting Divine wisdom in her fairest form, and supporting her ; authority by the most powerful sanctions. The school of Christ is free from the errors and absurdities with which the purest systems of Pagan philosophy abounded, and teaches every important principle and precept of religion and morals, with a degree of simplicity, perspicuity, and energy, which, in connexion with other more direct proofs, affords no inconsi¬ derable evidence of the divine authority of the Christian religion. It must, therefore, be the interest of every one, who is desirous of making a right use of his reason, and attaining true wisdom, to become a disciple of Christ. • Vidend. Boulainvillier, Vie de Mahomet. Ernest. Gerhard, de Theol. Muhammed. Reland. de Rel. Muham. Renaudot, Epist. ad Dacier de exiguo pretio vers. Arab, in Fabr. Bibl. Gr. v. i. p. 812. Friend, Hist. Med. p. ii. p. Id. Compend. Theol. Muham. Ultraject. 1717, 8vo. Pfeifer, Theol. Jud. atque Moham. Kruger de Fato Muhamm. Lips. 1759. i 442 OF THE philosophy Book VI. On these grounds, doubtless, it was, that the Christian fathers so fre- i quently spoke of Christianity under the title of True and Evangelical i Philosophy,* * * § and called the professors of the Christian faith. Divine " Philosophers.f In this application of the term, they were, however, far 1 from meaning to pay any respect to Pagan wisdom ; their intention was, j on the contrary, to intimate that the wisdom, which had been long sought j in the schools of heathen philosophers, was only to be met with in the C school of Christ. The founder of the Christian faith was early ranked, both by the enemies and the friends of Christianity, among philosophers. Lucian classes him with Pythagoras, Apollonius Tyanseus, and Alexander. Several of the Platonic philosophers speak of him as a man animated by a divine demon, and sent from heaven for the instruction of mankind. The Jews early accused him of practising magical arts. Some of the Pagan adversaries of Christianity even asserted that Christ was indebted for his doctrine to the heathen philosophers, and particularly to Plato. J On the other side, among the Christians, false stories were early circulated (probably by the Gnostics, in order to obtain credit to their fanciful tenets) concerning the supernatural wisdom of Christ in his childhood, many of which are to be found in a supposititious book§ entitled, “ The Gospel of the Infancy and other fabulous reports of a similar nature obtained too much credit in the early ages of the church. But if, without regarding either the ca- > lumnies of infidels, or the tales of superstitious believers, we adhere to the simple account given of Jesus Christ by the Evangelists, we shall find no difficulty in admitting, that he was appointed by God to teach men a kind of wisdom far superior to the subtleties of speculative philosophy, and to confirm them in the belief and expectation of a future state ; and conse¬ quently, that, whatever respect he might have claimed as a philosopher, he is entitled to much higher regard, as the Messenger of Divine Truth, and the Author of Eternal Salvation. The Apostles of Jesus Christ, who were appointed by him to teach the Gospel to all nations, like their master, relied more upon the Divine authority which attended their eiubassy, than upon any human abilities or i attainments. “ They spoke, not with the enticing words of man’s wisdom, but with the demonstration of the Spirit, and with power.” || So far were they from affecting human learning, that they frequently expressed con¬ tempt for the philosophy of the age ; because they saw that philosophers mingled with the truth many false opinions and vain fables, and involved i themselves in endless controversies, most of which were, in fact, a mere “ strife of words.” The apostle Paul, writing to the Corinthians at Coloss, i says,^ “ Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after i Christ.” This apostle was not indeed unfurnished with learning, having studied Jewish wisdom under Gamaliel, and having, as appears from se¬ veral passages in his epistles, and from some incidents in his life, acquired, * Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. fin. p. 357. Socrat. Hist. Eccl. 1. iv. c. 27. Theodoretde i Cur. Gr. Affect. 1. xii. t Clem. Al. 1. c. 1. vi. p. 642. 1. ii. p. 380. Lactant. de Op. Dei, c. i. p. 671. J Lucian. Peregr. t. iv. p. 220. August, de Civ. Dei, 1. xix. c. 23. Origen cont. Cel- sum, 1. vi. p. 279. Aug. Epist. 34. Conf. Bibl. Univ. t. x. p. 402. Balt. Def. de SS. Peres, 1. iv. c. 11. § Fabric. Cod. an. N. T. p. iii. p. 424. t. i. p. 168. Conf. Iren. adv. Hacres. 1. i. c. 17. ‘ II 1 Cor. ii. 6. ^ Col. ii, 8, Conf. Eph. iv, 6. Acts xvii. 18. Chap. 2. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 443 I j probably at Tarsus, his native place, a competent knowledge of Greek I literature. But he disclaimed all confidence in these attainments, and relied for success upon the intrinsic excellence of the Christian doctrine, and the Divine power by which it was supported. And, with respect to the rest of the apostles, they were, unquestionably, men destitute of the advantages of a learned education ; the Author of our holy religion pur¬ posely choosing his ministers out of the class of the vulgar and illiterate, that his cause might the more evidently appear to depend upon its own purity and truth, without the aid of human wisdom. There is, then, no sufficient reason for ranking the apostles of Christ, as some Christian Avriters have done,* in the class of philosophers. j" r . ' CHAPTER II. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS CONSIDERED ' IN GENERAL. ; After the example of the apostles, their immediate followers, who are distinguished by the name of Apostolic Men, were more desirous to teach the Divine doctrine w'hich they had received from Jesus Christ in i simplicity and truth, than to render themselves illustrious by any display of human learning. They had no other design than to spread the knowledge of Christ and his gospel in the world; and they executed this design with j simplicity, fidelity, and magnanimity, without the aid of rhetorical embel- ' lishments, or philosophical refinement. Their genuine epistles, particularly I those of Clemens Roman us, Ignatius, and Poly carp, bear many marks of that sincerity and zeal which so eminently distinguished the writings of j the apostles. But some pieces are ascribed to the Apostolic Men, which f carry with them many internal proofs of forgery. To this class belong : “ The Second Epistle of Clemens Roman us ; ” “ The Apostolic Canons j “The Apostolic Constitutions “ The Recognitions of Clement ; “The 1 Clementines “ The Larger Epistles of Ignatius “ The Epistle of Bar- ' nabas and “ The Shepherd of Hennas.” The Clementines, and Recog- 1 nitions of Clement, were probably written in the third century, by some ‘ Jewish Christian of Alexandria, who made Clemens speak the language ■ of an Alexandrian philosopher, in hopes of defeating the philosophers with ' their own weapons. But this practice of corrupting the simplicity of the apostolic doctrine commenced much earlier than the third century. The : first witnesses of Cliristianity had scarcely left the world, when the Shep¬ herd of Hennas appeared ; a work too strongly marked with the character of philosophical fanaticism to be received as the genuine production of an apostolic man. The writer of this work certainly borrowed from the Pla¬ tonic schools, or from the Jewish Cabbalists, his doctrines of a good or bad * Horn. Hist. Phil. 1. v. c. 3. See Bp. Horsley’s Sermon on 1 Cor. xii. 4. t Vidend. Jons. Scr. Hist. Ph. I. iii. c. 4. Lamiusde Erud. Apostc. 16. IMiscell. Lips. Obs. 96, t. v. Miscell. Berolin. p. iii. n. 11. Suidas, t. ii. p. 97. Heuraan. Act. Phil. V. ii. p. 56. Elswich Diss. de Philos, viris sac. temere affict. Sandii Interp, Paradox. I p. 151. Clerici in Joan. Ev. c. 1. % 444 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. angel attending every man, and producing all his virtuous or vicious in¬ clinations ; and of a peculiar angel appointed to preside over each animal.* The fathers of the Christian church soon departed from the simplicity of the apostolic age, and corrupted the purity of the Christian faith. This is chiefly to be ascribed to two causes : first, the practice, which at that time so generally prevailed, of clothing the doctrines of religion in an al¬ legorical dress ; and secondly, the habit of subtle speculation, which the more learned converts from Paganism brought with them from the schools of philosophy. The practice of allegorical interpretation, which the Jews had learned from the Egyptians, and which, before the time of Christ was common among them, the early converts to Christianity brought out of the Jewish into the Christian church. Some traces of this method of interpretation we find in the New Testament, particularly in St. Paul’s argument against the Jewish advocates for the perpetual and universal obligation of the Mosaic ritual, drawn from the history of Abraham, in the Epistle to the Galatians ; j- and in the typical application of the ceremonial appointments of Moses to the Christian institution, in the Epistle to the Hebrews. But a less sober and judicious use was made of this kind of language by the Christian fathers. This was more especially the case with those Gentile converts who had been educated in the Alexandrian schools, where, by the help of allegory, the several systems of philosophy were mixed and con¬ founded ; and with those Jewish Christians, who, by the same means, had been instructed in the Cabbalistic doctrines, which, before this time, had sprung up in Egypt, and passed thence into Judea. Several of those sects of Christians, who were called Heretics, particularly the Valentinian Gnostics, made use of allegorical language to disguise the unnatural al¬ liance which they had introduced between the fanciful dogmas of the Oriental philosophy, and the simple doctrine of Christ. The Orthodox fathers of the church, too, defended themselves with the same armour, both against heretics and infidels ; applying, with more ingenuity than judgment, the symbolical method of interpretation to the sacred scriptures. In the same manner in which Philo and other Alexandrian Jews had cor¬ rupted the Jewish church, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, and other dis¬ ciples of the Alexandrian school, in the second century, introduced error and corruption into the church of Christ. J The light of Christianity having, by this time, been spread through a great part of the Roman empire, many learned men, who had studied and professed philosophy, tired of the fruitless disputes which had so long been carried on among the Grecian sects, and disgusted with the infamous and fraudulent practices of many who called themselves philosophers, passed over to another master, from whom, on account of those characters of divinity which they saw stamped upon his doctrine, they assured them¬ selves of receiving that satisfaction which they had in vain sought in the schools of Pagan wisdom. Comparing the obscurity and barrenness of the speculations in which they had been engaged with the perspicuity and utility of the doctrine taught by Jesus Christ, they plainly saw, that dark¬ ness was not further from light, than the vanity of Gentile philosophy from the truth of the Christian religion. * L. i. Mand. 6. v. iv. c. 2. Hieron. in Habac. 1. i. ad. c. i. 14. Conf. Pint, de Tranq. Anim. t. ii. p. 263. Theodor, de Cur. Gr. Affect. S. 3. Censorin. de Die Nat. c. 3. Philo de Anim, c. 3. Cahbal. Denud. t. i. p. 3. p, 121. t C. iv. V. 22. X Huet. Origen, 1. ii. c. 2. Whitby on the Interpretation of Scripture, Lond, 1714. Chap. 2. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 445 It evidently appears from Justin Martyr’s dialogue with Trypho the Jew,* * * § that this comparison of Gentile philosophy with Christian wisdom was one of the principal considerations which induced him, and other phi¬ losophers, to become converts to Christianity. Accordingly we find, that when these learned men undertook the defence of Christianity against the Gentile philosophers, who supported the falling cause of Paganism by sophistry, imposture, and violence, they chiefly employed themselves in exposing the futility and absurdity of the Pagan religion and philosophy, and in displaying the superiority' of the Christian doctrine above that which had been taught in the most celebrated Grecian schools. This is the main drift of those apologies for Christianity, which were written by Justin Martyr, Tatian, A thenagoras,Theophilus,Hermias, Clemens Alexandrinus, Hippolitus, Origen, Eusebius, and other Greeks ; and by Tertullian, Mi- nucius Felix, Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius, Julius Firmicus, and other Latin fathers : writings to which the cause of Christianity Avas at that time much indebted, and which, even in the present day, if read with a due attention to the state of philosophy and religion at the period in which they were written, will amply repay the labour of a diligent perusal. Rejecting with contempt the whole apparatus of Pagan superstition, the Christian fathers naturally transferred the aversion which they conceived against this ancient monument of human folly, to those systems of philo¬ sophy which they saw employed by the learned in its support. Justin Martyr j- exposes the absurdities of the poetical theology of the Pagans, and undertakes to prove, that their philosophical doctrine concerning divine natures was not less absurd. All the early fathers of the Christian church labour to overturn the principles upon which the several Grecian sects were founded, and to show that they were inconsistent with each other, and with truth and reason. Such was their zeal in this argument, that they did not spare even Plato himself, whom, nevertheless, they acknowledged to have thought more judiciously and profoundly upon divine subjects than any other philosopher. J It was a circumstance which greatly increased the aversion of the Chris¬ tian fathers to Pagan systems, that they saw innumerable heresies springing up in the church, which arose from the Oriental philosophy, as it was taught in Egypt, in conjunction with Pythagoric and Platonic dogmas. § The dreams of the Orientalists concerning the Divine nature were multi¬ plied without end by the Christian Gnostics, particularly by Valentine, the founder of a sect which arose in the second century, and spread through Egypt, Syria, and Asia Minor. || This fanatic conceived the divine nature to be a vast abyss, in the pleroma or fulness of which existed, as emana¬ tions from the first fountain of being, ^ons of different orders and degrees. The source of jLons Valentine called Bython. To this he united a princi¬ pal, which he called Ennoia, or Sige: from the union of these he supposed to be produced Nous and Aletheia, and from these, in succession. Logos, Anthropos, and Ecclesia ; among the remote descendants of whom was Jesus Christ, and below him the Demiurgus, or Creator of the world, who held the middle place between God and the material world. This fanciful system (similar to that of the Jewish Cabbala, and doubtless derived from * P. 217, &c. f Cohort, ad GrjEcos. J Tertull. adv. Nationes, 1. ii. Lactant. Int. Div. 1. iii. c. 2. Cyprian. Epist. 55. Aug. De Civ. D. i. viii. Theodor. Therap. ]. v. § Iren. adv. Her. 1. ii. c. 14. Tertull. Prsescr. c. 7. de Anim. c. 17. Pseudo-Orig. Philosophum. 1. i. p. 5. 11 Iren. 1. iii. c. 3. Tertull. contr. Valent. Justin. M. Dial, cum Tryph. p. 349. 446 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. the same source, the Oriental doctrine of emanation*) was highly displeas-; ing to those Christian fathers who were disposed to think more soberly and reverently concerning the Divine nature. When they saw the doctrine of Christ corrupted by such absurd fictions, they were naturally led to inveigh against that false philosophy, from which they supposed them to have ori¬ ginated. \ Notwithstanding the proofs with which the writings of the Christian fathers abound, of their enmity to Pagan philosophy, considered as a sys¬ tem of doctrines opposed to the Christian faith, it is, however, certain that many among them were well acquainted with the dogmas of the Grecian sects, and, after their conversion, endeavoured to render their knowledge of philosophy subservient to the Christian cause. Having been in their youth instructed in this kind of learning, they now borrowed, from the Pagan schools, weapons in defence of Christianity. They examined in detail the tenets of ancient philosophers, that, where they found them erro¬ neous, they might expose their futility, and hence display the superior excellence of the Christian religion ; and that where they appeared conso¬ nant to truth, they might make use of them, in their catechetical instruc¬ tions, to prepare the minds of their pupils for the reception of the doctrines of Divine Revelation. This latter use of philosophy was frequent in the Christian schools of Alexandria, conducted by Clemens, Pantaenus, Origen, and others. These Christian philosophers did not scruple to avail them¬ selves of all the helps, which their learning afforded them, in the exercise of the arts of logic and rhetoric. They industriously enriched their writ¬ ings with the moral doctrines and pi’ecepts of the ancients, as far as they would coalesce with the Christian institutes. Without addicting themselves to any sect of heathen philosophers, they selected from each whatever they judged to be consistent with the doctrine of their Divine Master, and capable of forwarding the great end of their office as teachers of Chris-^ tianity. In fine, from the time that the simplicity of the apostolic age was forsaken,, the Christian fathers studied the writings of the ancients, first,' to furnish themselves with weapons against their adversaries ; next, to sup-i port the Christian doctrine, by maintaining its consonancy to reason, and its superiority to the most perfect systems of Pagan wisdom ; and, lastly, to adorn themselves with the embellishments of erudition and eloquence. Basil wrote a distinct treatise upon the benefits which young persons might receive from reading the writings of heathens. J His pupil, Gregory, Thaumaturgus, in his panegyric on Origen, insists largely upon the same topic ; highly commending him for having, after the example of his pre-i ceptor Clemens Alexandrinus, industriously instructed his pupils in philo¬ sophy. And there can be no donbt, that Greek learning, of every kind, was at a very early period admitted into the Christian schools ; not, however, without repeated cautions to young persons, to distinguish carefully between the true and the false, the useful and the pernicious, in the writings of the * The Valentinian heresy is supposed by Irenaeus (a) and other Christian fathers, and by several modern writers, through their inattention to Oriental learning, to have been borrowed from the Grecian philosophy ; but the contrary is evident from the similarity of this heresy to the Cabbalistic system, which has been shown to be of Oriental origin ; .y. and from the testimony of Theodotus, whose account of the Valentinian and other Gnostic heresies (6) is entitled, Epitome of the Doctrine called Oriental in the time of Valentinian. f Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. i. p. 278. J Conf. Origen. Philocal. c. 13. Hieron. Ep. 84. ad Magn. (a) Uteres. 1. ii. c. 14. {h) Apud Op. Clem. Alex, et Fabr. Bibl. Gr. vol. v. p. 105. || Chap. 2. OF THE ANCIENT CHIIISTIANS. 447 ancients, and always to keep human learning in due subordination to Divine wisdom.* The fathers of the Christian church are, then, neither on the one hand to be considered as by profession philosophers, nor, on the other, to be denied the credit of any acquaintance with philosophy. Their great object was to apply philosophy to the illustration, confirmation and defence of Divine Revelation. We are not, therefore, to search in their writings for philosophical tenets, raised upon rational principles, and supported by logical arguments ; nor shall we find among them, strictly speaking, any philosophical sectarians, such as Speusippus and Xenocrates were among the ancient, or Plotinus and Porphyry among the modern Platonists. But, though they were not properly philosophers, it must not be inferred, that they gave no preference to any particular sect. Whilst they were averse to the Grecian philosophy in general, as inimical to the Christian cause, and inveighed against every Pagan system, as containing many things con¬ trary to the true doctrine of Christ, they were willing to acknowledge, that every sect taught some principles not inconsistent with this doctrine, and were most inclined to favour those sects which taught tenets most conso¬ nant to it. Throughout the various systems of philosophy, the Christian fathers saw many truths dispersed, which they supposed to be beyond the reach of liuman reason, and which, therefore, they believed to have been bor¬ rowed from the Hebrew scriptures, or to have been rays of heavenly ivis- dom originally proceeding from the pure fountain of Divine Revelation. These relics of sacred truth, which they conceived to be scattered through the various sects of philosophy, they were exceedingly desirous to collect, and to incorporate with the doctrine of Christianity. Hence the high en¬ comiums which we frequently meet with in their writings, upon this kind of Eclectic philosophy. Clemens Alexandrinus says, j- “ I do not call that philosophy, which either the Stoics, the Platonists, the Epicureans, or the Peripatetics, singly teach ; but whatever dogmas are found in each sect to be true, and conducive to the knowledge and practice of piety and justice, these, collected into one system, I eall philosophy.” Justin Martyr,^ Gregory Thaumaturgus,§ and Lactantius,|| express the same sentiment. We are not, however, to confound the Eclectic philosophy of the Christian fathers with that of the Ammonian school; since the former were directed in their selection by a notion peculiar to themselves, that whatever was valuable in Pagan philosophy was the remnant of some former revelation from the Aoyoe, or had been purloined from the Hebrews or Cliristians, and might therefore be fairly claimed as the property of the Christian church. By comparing the preceding observations, we may easily account for the different, and apparently contradictory, language which the Christian fathers held concerning the Gentile philosophy: some of them, particularly Clemens Alexandrinus and Augustine, speaking of heathen wisdom as lawful spoil, which may be usefully employed in the service of the church ; and of cer¬ tain philosophers, as being, in their notions of the Divine nature, almost Christians : whilst others represent heathen philosophy as so pernicious and mischievous in its nature, that it could only be the work of the devil. In order to reconcile these seeming inconsistencies, it is only necessary to ob¬ serve, that wherever the Christian fathers spoke in commendation of ^ * Greg. Naz. Carm. i. p. 33. f Strom. 1. i. p. 288. J Dial, cum Tryph. p, 218. ‘ § In Orig. p. 10. |1 Inst. 1. vii. c. 7. 448 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. philosophy, they meant'to limit their approbation to certain truths, which they conceived to have been originally communicated by Divine Revelation; but that, when they inveighed against it, their censure fell upon those sys¬ tematic masses of error, which they ascribed to human invention. The virulence with which the supporters of Pagan superstition assaulted Christianity, sometimes led its advocates, in return, to load the Gentile philosophy with invectives, which, though they may be in part excused, cannot be justified. Their contempt and indignation did not, however, fall indiscriminately upon every sect ; they estimated the merit of each by its supposed affinity to Revelation, in the purity of its doctrine concerning God and Divine things. Hence their severest censures were pointed against the Peripatetic and Epicurean sects. The doctrines of the Peripatetics ^ concerning Divine Providence, and the eternity of the world, chiefly ex¬ cited their aversion against this sect ; but, besides this, they were much displeased with Aristotle, for having furnished heretics and infidels w'ith : the weapons of sophistry. The system of Epicurus, which excluded the Deity from the government of the world, and admitted no expectation of a future state, so directly contradicted the fundamental principles of the Christian religion, that it is not surprising that it should have awakened great indignation in the friends of Christianity, especially as they misappre- i hended the nature of his moral doctrine, and credited the calumnies, ^ which had long before this time been circulated concerning his personal : character. ■ There were not wanting, however, among the Christian fathers, advo¬ cates for different sects of Grecian philosophy. After the establishment of the Ammonian sect, w^hen Origen and his followers, with many others, favoured the Eclectic method of philosophising, which had been followed in the Alexandrian schools, they easily persuaded themselves, that as a coalition had in these schools been effected between Plato and Aristotle, it would not be difficult to accomplish a similar coalition between Jesus Christ and Aristotle. Others reasoned in the same manner wfith respect to the doctrines of Stoicism. The Epicurean was almost the only sect which ' met with no patrons among the Christian fathers. But the sect, which, for the reasons already assigned, obtained most a favour in the Christian school, was the Platonic. None of the Christian f fathers, indeed, entertained such an opinion of the perfection of the Pla- | tonic system, as to subscribe implicitly to its principles and tenets; but they « imagined, that they found in the writings of Plato many Divine truths, 1 which he had received, either directly or indirectly, from the Hebrews, and which they had therefore a right to transfer from the Academy to the Church. Clemens Alexandrinus, Eusebius, and Augustine, were so strongly prepossessed with this notion, that they fancied a wonderful similarity be- ' tween the theology of Plato and that of Moses. Clemens * speaks of Plato as the philosopher of the Hebrews, whose doctrine concerning God, and Virtue, and a Future State, agrees with that of the scriptures : with Nu- ' menius, he calls Plato the Athenian Moses ; and he even asserts, that J Plato, in his Thecetetus, describes the Christian life. Eusebius, in his S Preparatio Evangelica,-\ “ Evangelical Preparation,” quotes many pas- I' sages from the Dialogues of Plato, to show how nearly his sentiments and | language approach to those of the sacred writings. Augustine, in some r parts of his works, prefers Plato to every other heathen writer ; and con- j tends that, in many particulars, especially those which relate to God, he S * Strom. 1. i. p. 315. t L. ii. Chap. 2. QF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 4t9 was a Christian philosopher. He afterwards, in a distinct chapter, inquires wlience Plato derived that knowledge, by which he so nearly approximated to the Christian doctrine. Plaving in a former work given it as his opinion, that Plato, in his journey into Egypt, had either conversed with the pro¬ phet Jeremiah, or read the Hebrew scriptures, he now retracts this opinion, because he finds, upon further examination, that Plato was born near a hundred years after Jeremiah was in Egypt, and that the Greek version of the Jewish law was made under the Ptolemies, about sixty years after Plato’s death ; and substitutes in its stead an unsupported conjecture, that Plato received his information concerning the Hebrew scriptures, by conversing with some learned interpreter of the law. This opinion concerning the Divine origin of Plato’s theology was en¬ tertained on grounds equally precarious with the conjectures of Augustine, by the general body of the Christian fathers. They thought, that Plato, * during his residence in Egypt, could not fail to become acquainted with I the Jewish law, of which they believed, but without any sufficient authority, that a Greek version had been made prior to that of the Septuagint under Ptolemy Philadelphus. They conceived, that Pythagoras, in his Oriental j journey, must have had frequent opportunities of conversing with theJew- I ish prophets, and that through his schools the doctrine of Moses must have I passed to Plato. They were confirmed in this opinion, by observing the doctrine, which was at this time received among the Jews, with the Pla- ! tonism of the Alexandrian schools. For, from the age of Aristobulus, the Jews had, as we have seen, admitted Egyptian, Oriental, and Platonic i dogmas into an intimate alliance with the simple doctrine of their sacred books ; and, in order to give credit and authority to the innovation, had 1 pretended that Moses was the original author of this philosophy. This I was maintained by all the learned Egyptian Jews, particularly by Philo ; and from these, the notion would naturally pass over to the Christians, by many of whom, doubtless, it was entertained before their conversion to i Christianity. After what has been already suggested, in preceding parts of this work, : to show the improbability of the opinion, that Pythagoras or Plato Avere I instructed by the Hebrews, and to account for the pains which Philo and other Platonising Jews took to give their notions the sanction of a Divine : origin, it is unnecessary here to enlarge upon the subject. We shall only^ ' remark, that, in forming this opinion, there were two points in which the fathers were greatly deceived : first, in supposing that the Jews freely : communicated their doctrines to their neighbours, when it appears from ; their whole history, that they studiously separated themselves, in all reli¬ gious concerns, from the heathens ; secondly, in conceiving that the Pla¬ tonism which was at that time professed was the genuine doctrine of Plato.* There can be no doubt, that a strong predilection for Platonic tenets prevailed among those Alexandrian philosophers who became converts to the Christian faith. These philosophers, who, whilst they corrupted the system, had been accustomed to entertain the highest reverence for the name of Plato, easily credited the report, that the doctrine of Plato con¬ cerning the Divine nature had been derived from Revelation, and hence thought themselves justified in attempting a coalition between Plato and Jesus Christ. A union of Platonic and Christian doctrines was certainty attempted in the second century, by Justin Martyr, Athenagoras/* and * Just. M. Cohort, ad Graec. Clem. Adm. ad Gent. p. 477. Stromat. 1. i. p. 305, 1. iv. p. 477. 1. V. p. 560. Conf. Lamius de Trinit. 1. ii. iii. G G ' 1 450 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI:1 Clemens Alexandrinus, in whose writings we frequently meet with Pla¬ tonic sentiments and language : and it is not improbable, that this corrup¬ tion took its rise still earlier. In opposing the Gnostic heresies, those ^ Christian teachers who had been instructed in the Alexandrian doctrines, adopted from them whatever they thought consonant to Christian truth, and favourable to their cause. From the time that Ammonius Sacca, ink'ii third century, the fathers treated more largely upon these subjects, as hs may be seen in their Homilies, but in a manner which rendered their ^ 0 moral writings of litlle value. s* 1 Among the causes which promoted the corruption of their moral doc- I IK? trine, we may reckon the practice, which they borrowed from the Alexan- » i U drian Jews, of affixing an allegorical meaning to the words of scripture.'* This method of interpretation, as Le Clerc justly remarks, enabled them to 1 i, put any construction upon particular texts which suited their present pur- pose. What absurd interpretations they gave of the Old Testament (with ? the Hebrew original of which, by the way, scarcely any of them, except Jerornand Origen, were acquainted, as sufficiently appears from their im-xii plicit reliance on the Septuagint version) may be easily seen by consulting!'^ i their works. § Indeed it w^as not to be expected that they should succeed j f better, when they undertook to draw moral doctriae from the sacred scrip- | ^ tures, withoilt strictly adhering to the rules of sound criticism, and without ■ being accurately acquainted with the general principles of morals. To what an absurd extreme of rigour the fathers carried their ideas of morality, may be seen in their doctrines concerning the sexual passion; They commonly held a second marriage to be unlawful; and Chrysostom maintained, that it was a species of fornication ; and that whilst this indul¬ gence was permitted by God, fornication became lawful. || With respect to matrimony, they admitted three degrees of merit: the lowest, matri- ’■ -i ■} ’ I -I t monial fidelity ; the second, matrimonial abstinence ; the third, perfect ^ 4 celibacy. Clemens Alexandrinus^ represents it as a meretricious practice | . * B. Montfaucon. Collect. Nov. Patr. Script. Gr. t. ii. p. 113. Phot. Cod. 36. f Tom. ii. Op. p. 189. J Amb. 1. ii. c. 3. t. iii. p. 17. § See examples of this in Barbeyrac de la Morale des Peres, c. ii. sect. 3. II Chrysost. Horn. 32. in Matt. xix. Peedag-. 1. iii. c. 1. ii. c. 10. Chap. 2. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 453 I for a woman to look at herself in a mirror; “ because,” says he, “by* making an image of herself, she violates the commandment, which prohibits the making of the likeness of any thing in heaven above, or on earth beneath.” As a further example to the same purpose may be mentioned, the doctrines of the unlawfulness of putting out money to interest, of using musical instruments in churches, and of taking any kind of oath.* Another principal cause of the corruption of the Christian doctrine of I morality was, that it was very early tinctured with the enthusiastic spirit of ' the Alexandrian philosophy. Many of the Christian fathers were infected ; with the practical, as well as the speculative errors of this school. To this , source we are to trace back the numerous adulterations of the simple I morality of the New Testament, which are to be found in “ The Shepherd of Hennas,” and in the writings of Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Athenagoras, I and Tertullian. This corruption chiefly discovered itself in a peculiar > species of fanaticism, consisting in a certain mystical notion of perfection, ! which originated from a principle common to Platonists, Orientalists, and Onostics ; that the soul of man is imprisoned and debased in its corporeal I habitation, and in proportion as it becomes disengaged from the incum- ■ brance, and purged from the dregs of matter, it is prepared for its return to the Divine nature, the fountain from which it proceeded.-j- The early 1 Christians appear to have been led into this system, and into all the un¬ natural austerities which sprung from it, by observing the extraordinary sanctity of the Therapeutic sect among the Jews,;}; and of many ascetic Platonists, who, in this respect, followed the example of the Egyptian Pythagoreans. Emulous of the fame which both Jews and Heathens had obtained by their voluntary mortiflcations, and, perhaps too, inspired with an enthusiastic notion, that they should by this means approach nearer to God, and be better prepared for heaven, many Christians, even so early as the second century, retired into solitary places, where they devoted them¬ selves to abstinence, contemplation, and prayer.§ It is impossible to enu¬ merate the erroneous opinions, and absurd practices, which this false idea of perfection introduced into the Christian church, or to say how grossly it corrupted the Christian system of morals. The clear result of these general observations on the circumstances, opinions, and writings of the Christian fathers, is, that they contributed ■ little towards the improvement of true and sound philosophy. Whatever abilities or learning they possessed, (and in several instances these were not inconsiderable) their peculiar situation, as well as the general state of phi¬ losophy, prevented them from making any important advances in science. , Through several centuries, they partook of the spirit of the Alexandrian school, and the Eclectic method of philosophising Platonised Christianity ; and when, in process of time, the philosophers themselves began to for¬ sake Plato, and follow Aristotle, the Christian fathers preferred the Sta- girite as the more accurate philosopher. In this preference they were confirmed by the example of the Saracens ; and hence arose that perni¬ cious corruption, both of theology and philosophy, the Scholastic System. At the same time, the Adulterated Platonism of Alexandria continued among the Greek Christians, and produced The Mystic Theology. Thus the church was at once disturbed by two monstrous productions in philosophy, of which we shall treat in the sequel. || t Conf. Barbeyrac, c. 6. 9, 10. 15. f Clem, Alex. Strom. 1. vi. p. 412. + Philo de Vit. Contempl. § Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. ii. c. 16. Conf. Past. Herm. et. Apol. Athenag. II Vidend. Mosheim. Diss, de Caussa supposit. lib. inter. Christ, sect. 1. et 2. Huet, OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. 451 CHAPTER III. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS IN PARTICULAR. From the beginning of the second to the seventh century, which may be considered as the commencement of the Middle Age, many learned men arose in the Christian church, who studied and applied philosophy in the manner explained in the preceding chapter. A distinct but brief account ■ of the principal of these, as far as respects the subject of this work, we now proceed to lay before the reader, referring him for other particulars to i ecclesiastical historians. The Christian fathers may be divided into two classes: those who flourished before, and those who flourished after, the institution of the Eclectic sect : and this distinction is of considerable consequence in the present inquiry. The first class commences with Justin Martyr ; the second, with Origen. The apostolic fathers, who had derived their knowledge of Christianity, and their habits of thinking, from the Evangelists and Apostles, were more desirous of imitating their simplicity of sentiment and expression, than of excelling in subtle speculation. Hence we find in their genuine writings but a few traces of the Grecian or Alexandrian philosophy. But ■ when men, who had been educated in the Pagan schools, became converts to the Christian faith, they brought with them their philosophical ideas and language, and associated them with the doctrine of Christianity. Among these Christian philosophers, the first, and one of the most cele- >1 brated, was Justin, who, on account of the testimony which he afterwards i bore to the Christian cause, is usually distinguished by the title of “ The v Martyr.” He was born at Neapolis, or Sichem, in Palestine, about the beginning of the second century. His father, whose name was Priscus, i was a Gentile Greek, and sent him to Alexandria to be instructed in j| Grecian learning. In his youth, as he himself relates, he studied, first the Stoic, and afterwards the Peripatetic philosophy, under different masters. ( Not, however, finding in either of these schools the satisfaction he wished i concerning the Divine nature, and having been refused admission to the J Pythagorean school for want of the necessary preparatory instruction and ) discipline, he determined to addict himself to the study of the doctrine of I Plato, who, for his sublime notions concerning God and religion, had long ' obtained the name of The Divine Philosopher. Under the direction of an able and judicious Platonist of Alexandria, he prosecuted this study with Dem. Ev. Prop. iv. Origenian. 1. ii. c. 1. sect. 4. Baptista Crispus de caute legendo Platone, Rom. 1594. fol. Petav. Dogm. Theol. t. ii. 1. 1. c. 8. Balt. Defense des S. < Peres accus. de Platonisme. Bull’s Defence of the Nicene Creed. Sand, de Trinit. t Sandii Nucleus Hist. Eccl. Le Clerc, Bibl. Univ. t. x. Bibl. Choisie, t. xii. Epistola i sub nom. Liberii. Basnage Hist, des Juifs, 1. iv. p. 79. Fabr. Bibl. Gr. v. hi. p. 39. 176. Buddsei Isag. in Hist. Theol. 1. ii. c. 3. Dupin. Bibl. des Auct. Eccl. t. i. p. 203. ’ Blount. Cens. cel. Auct. p. 213. Blondell. de Sybillis, 1. i. c. 26. Mosheim. Diss. ■ de turbata per Platon, rec. Eccl. Dallteus de Usu Patrum. Souveiain. Platonisme i dcvoillS. Chap. 3. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 455 great delight, “ finding,” as he says, that tlie contemplation of incor¬ poreal ideas added wings to his mind, so that he hoped soon to ascend to the true wisdom.”* That he might proceed without interruption in this favourite pursuit, Justin withdrew to a place of retirement near the sea. He had not been long in this place, when in one of his solitary walks, he was accosted by an old man of venerable aspect, whom some suppose to have been Poly carp ; a supposition which Justin himself favours, by calling himself a disciple I of the apostles, which seems to imply that he had been instructed by some apostolic man.f Whoever he was, this old man, in his conversation with Justin, discovered no slight acquaintance with the Platonic philosophy : , for he made use of the Platonic principles and language, to which he found Justin attached, in order to conduct him to the knowledge of a more pure and perfect system. The discourse of this reverend preceptor inspired i Justin with an earnest desire of perusing the writings of the prophets and 1 apostles ; and when he had read them, he confessed, that the gospel of ! Christ was the only certain and useful philosophy. About the year 133, he embraced the Christian faith; still, however, retaining the habit of a I philosopher. Justin, after his conversion, retained a strong attachment to the Platonic II system, and applied his knowledge of this system to the explanation and defence of the Christian doctrine. Perceiving, or imagining, in many par- I ticulars,an agreement between Platonism and Christianity, J he concluded, j that whatever was valuable in the former had either been communicated to Plato, by inspiration, from the Logos, or first emanation of the Divine nature, or had been transmitted by tradition from Moses § and the 1 Hebrew prophets, and might therefore be justly claimed as belonging to , Divine Revelation, and incorporated into the Christian creed. All good doctrine, according to him, proceeds from the Logos, and, on that account, 1 wherever it is found, of right belongs to Christians. “ Next to God,” says k he, “ we revere and love the Logos of the underived and ineffable Deity, I who for our sake became man, that partaking of our infirmities he might I heal our diseases. All writers, through the seed of the Logos sown within 1 i them, are able [obscurely to discern those things which have a real ex- ► istence.” And in another place : j] “We are instructed that Christ is the first begotten son of God, and have already shown, that he is the Logos I of which the whole human race partakes, and that whoever lives according to the Logos are Christians, even though [for their neglect of Pagan divi- , nities] they have been reckoned atheists: as, among the Greeks, Socrates, ' * Dialog, cum Tryphone. f Epist. ad Diognet. p. 501. Conf. Euseb. Hist. Ec. I. ii. c. 3. et Phot. Cod. 234. i J Apol. ii. p. 50. 78. § Though Justin repeatedly asserts the doctrine of Plato concerning the Logos to have been derived from Moses, there is no proof that this was in truth the case. It is therefore probable that Justin, from an undue fondness for his former master, endea¬ voured, in order to support his assertion, to find the Logos in the Old Testament. His proofs, that the Logos, an emanation from the Divine nature, was the creator of the world, rest upon fanciful interpretations of scripture, inconsistent with good sense and sound cri¬ ticism, as any one may be convinced who will be at the pains to examine his explanations of Gen. i. 26. xviii. 1, &c. xxviii. 11 — 19. Exod. iii. 1 — 6. Prov. viii. The truth seems to have been, that Justin, being of an enthusiastic turn, imagined Christ to have been the Logos, the first of those emanations of the Divine nature of which Plato spoke ; and that he fancied his own mind to have been, in a supernatural manner, enlightened, (a) to discover him as the Logos in the writings of Moses and Solomon. See this opinion ably supported in Lindsey’s Second Address to the Students of Oxford and Cambridge, i ch. ii. ' (a) Dial, cum Tryphone, p. 154, 155, I j 1 II Apol. ii. p. 83. 45G OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. 1 Heraclitus, and the like ; and among barbarians, Abraham, Ananias, | Azarias, Misael, Elias, and many others.” li From these and other passages* * * § in the writings of Justin, it appears,' that he understood by the term Logos, not the reasoning faculty of the ^ j human mind, but, after Plato, the emaning reason of the Divine nature; > | that he conceived this Divine reason to have inspired the Hebrew prophets, and to have been the Christ who appeared in flesh ; that he supposed it i to have been participated not only by the Hebrew patriarchs, but by the ^.i! more excellent Pagan philosophers ; and consequently that he looked upon i ! every tenet in the writings of the heathens, which he could reconcile withal : the doctrine of Christ, as a portion of Divine wisdom which Christians might justly appropriate to themselves. Having learned from Plato and,^ his followers, in the schools of Alexandria, that the knowledge of God is^ alone to be gained by the contemplation of ideas, which have their primary® seat in the Divine Logos ; and that the human mind, in consequence of its nature as proceeding from the soul of the world, is capable of contemplating^ those Divine ideas, by means of which it may ascend to the knowledge of^ God, Justin was necessarily led to conclude, that man can only arrive at^ Divine science through the medium of the Logos. Hence he referred all* Christian knowledge to the perception of the Divine reason inhabiting in* man; and thus laid the foundation of an error, still retained in some* Christian sects, that Clirist, or the Word, is a substantial ray of Divine light* internally communicated to man. Justin also borrowed from Plato hisM notion of angels employed in the government of the elements, the earth,* and the heavens, and many other tenets not to be found in the scriptures. -I'M On the wliole, it cannot be doubted, that Justin Martyr mixed Platonic* notions and language wdth the simple doctrine of Christianity, and wrote* concerning God and Divine things like a Christian Platonist. He must,* nevertheless, be acknowledged to have been a faithful and zealous advocate* for Christianity ; for, in consequence of an attack which he made upon the^ Cynic philosophy, Crescens the Cynic, who with the rest of the philoso- Ja j)hers enjoyed the patronage of the Emperor Aurelius Antoninus, raised a* persecution against him and his brethren, in which this excellent man fell® a martyr in the cause of Christ. This happened in the year 163. Tatian, by birth a Syrian, a Sophist by profession, | who flourished* about the year 170, after his conv'ersion from heathenism to Christianity, became a disciple of Justin Martyr, and accompanied him to Rome, whcre;^ he partook with his master the hatred and persecution of Crescens.§^ After the death of Justin, excelling more in the powers of imagination than^ of judgment, he gave the reins to the former, and framed a new system ofM * In his dialogue with Trypho, Justin says, (a) “ I will bring you another proof from the scriptures, that in the beginning, before all creatures, God produced from himself a j,,. Rational Power (d 9e6s yeyei/rjKe Svya/uiy rivd ej eaurnS \oyiKTios) whicli is called by the^, holy spirit the glory of God, sometimes wisdom, sometimes an angel, sometimes God, sometimes Lord and Logos. — He has this name (Logos) from his being subservient to his lather’s counsels, and from being produced by his father’s will, as we experience in ourselves.” See the passage at large, wdth remarks, in Prikstlev’s History of Early Opinions concerning Jesus Christ; (dj a valuable work, in which it is proved at large,,- that the notions ot the first Christian fathers concerning the Divine nature originated in the Platonic schools, and that these notions gradually produced the doctrine of the 'I'rinity, which, from the time of the Council of Nice, was embraced as a fundamental article of faith in the Christian church. (a) Dial. p. 2GC. (5) Vol. ii. p. .56. i I Apol. i. }). 44. Epist. ,ad Diognet. p. 4D8. X Orat. p. 170. 173. cJ. Paris. I § Eugeb. Hist. Eccl. I. ii'. c. 20. Ilieion. dc S. E. c. 20. I Chap. 3. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 457 fanciful opinions, called. The Heresy of the Encratitie.* His apology for Christianity, entitled, Oratio ad Grcecos^ “ An Address to the Greeks,” the only genuine work of this father Avhich remains, every where breathes the spirit of the Oriental philosophy. Tatian teaches, that God, after having from eternity remained at rest in the plenitude of his own light, that he might manifest himself, sent forth from his simple nature, by an act of his w'ill, the Logos, through whom he gave existence to the universe, the essence of which had eternally subsisted in himself. “ The Logos,” he says, “ through the will of God, sprung from his simple nature QE\{]fxaTi Se rijg aTrXorrj-og avrov Trpoirrj^q Aoyog. This first emanation, which, after the Alexandrian Platonists, he calls the Logos, and which, like the Adam Kadman of the Cabbalists, is the first medium through wdiich all things flow from God, he represents as proceeding, without being separated from the Divine nature. Matter is conceived by Tatian to have been the production of the Logos, sent forth (irpo pE(o\r]fxGri) from his bosom. And the mind of man is, according to him, Aoyog ek Trig XoyiKfjg hvvapLEwg, reason produced from a rational pow er, or an essential emanation from the Divine Logos. He distinguishes between the rational mind and the animal soul, as the Alexandrian philosophers between vovg and ^^e Cabbalists between Zelem and Nephesh. The world he supposed to be animated by a subordinate spirit, of which all the parts of visible nature partake ; and he taught that demons, clothed in material vehicles, inhabit the aerial regions ; and that above the stars, Aions, or higher emanations from the Divine nature, dwell in eternal light.-j- In fine, the sentiments and language of Tatian upon these subjects perfectly agree with those of the Egyptian and the Cabbalistic philosophy, whence it may be pre¬ sumed, that he derived them, in a great measure, from these sources. After Plato, this Christian father maintained the imperfection of matter as the cause of evil, and the consequent merit of rising above all corporeal appetites and passions; and it was, probably, owing to this notion that, with other fathers, he held the superior merit of the state of celibacy above that of marriage ; and that he adopted, as Jerom relates, the Gnostic opinion, that Christ had no real body. The tenor of Tatian ’s Apology concurs with what is known of his history, to prove, that he was a Platonic Christian. Little regard is therefore due to the account which is given of his opinions by Epiphanius, who w^as unacquainted with the manner in w'hich Christian heresies sprung from the Oriental philosophy, the com¬ mon source, as we have seen, of the Egyptian, Cabbalistic, and Gnostic systems. Theophilus of Antioch, born of Gentile parents, and in his youth well instructed in human learning and Pagan philosophy, after his conver¬ sion became an able advocate for Christianity. He was appointed bishop of Antioch in the year 168. Having long enjoyed an intimate friendship with Autolychus, a learned Pagan, he w^as exceedingly desirous of con¬ verting him to the Christian faith, and for this purpose wrote an Apology for Christianity, in which he exposed, with much ability, the superstitions and absurdities of Paganism, j; Several things in this apology discover the writer’s predilection for the Platonic system, and his inclination to adapt * Epiphan. Haeres. xlvi. 1. t. i. p. 390. Theodoret. Haer. Fabr. 1. i. c. 10. Philastr. de Haer. c. 48. i- Orat. ad Graec. p. 138 — 159. Clem. Alex. Str. 1. i. p. 320. 1. iii. p. 335. Excerpt. Theodot. Cl. Al. p. 80G. Orig. contr. Cels. 1. i. p. 1C. De Orat. sect. 13. Euseb. Hi&t, Ec. 1. iv. c. 11. 10. 29. Hieron.de S. E. c. 29. 1 Apol. ed. Wolf. 1. ii. sect. 14, &c. Ed. Oxon. 1700. 458 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. it to the Christian doctrine. Particularly, in speaking of the Logos, as proceeding from the Divine nature, and as the agent in the Divine opera¬ tions, he makes use of Platonic ideas and language ; doubtless, in hopes of reconciling his friend Autolychus, who was conversant with the writings of philosophers, to the Christian system. His doctrine is, that God had al¬ ways Avithin himself his Logos, or wisdom which he produced by sending forth from his bosom before the universe was created ; and that this Logos was the minister, by whom he made all things, and who afterwards de¬ scended upon the prophets. We may also rank among the Platonic fathers, Athenagoras, the author of “ An Apology for Christians,” and of “ A Treatise on the Re¬ surrection of the Body.” It appears from his writings, that he was a native of Athens, and that he passed his youth among the philosophers of his time. He flourished towards the close of the second century. After he became a convert to Christianity, he retained the name and habit of a philosopher, probably in expectation of gaining greater credit to the Christian doctrine: among the unconverted heathen. In his apology he judiciously explains! the notions of the Stoics and Peripatetics concerning God and Divine i things, and exposes, with great accuracy and strength of reasoning, their! respective errors. He frequently supports his arguments by the authority i of Plato, and discovers much partiality for his system. In what he ad- ! vances concerning God and the Logos, or Divine reason, he evidently mixes the dogmas of Paganism with the doctrines of Christianity.* According to Athenagoras, God is underived, indivisible, and distinct from matter ; there are middle natures between God and matter ; from the beginning, God, the eternal mind, being from eternity rational, and' the Logos within himself : the Son of God is the Reason of the Father in idea and energy ; for, since the Father and Son are one, by him and through him all things are made : the Logos was produced, that the ideasF of all things might subsist, and they are contained in his spirit. I On the imperfect and untractable nature of matter ; on angels, demons,’ ; and other natures compounded of matter and spirit ; and on other philoso-’ pliical topics, Athenagoras reasons with all the subtlety of the Grecian'- schools ; SO' that, in every -page, you see him to be by profession a philoso-’ pher. One cannot peruse his writings, without admiring in them a happy ,' union of Attic elegance and philosophical penetration. In moral philosophy/ , . he adopted the common austerities, particularly with respect to marriage.V The second century probably produced the learned work, entitled,'? “ Hermias’s Ridicule of the Gentile Philosophers. ’’■j' The tenor as well;. , as the title of the work renders it probable, that it was written by some/^ philosopher who had been converted to Christianity. It contains no in-ii elegant compendium of the Greek philosophy. The author of the piecey^ is unknown. Another writer of great distinction in this early period of the Christian )¥''■ church is IreNjT;us, probably a native of Smyrna. He Avas a disciple of(^ | Polycarp and other apostolic fathers, and was Avell read, not only in sacred I learning but in ancient philosophy. Visiting the Western churches, he became first Presbyter, and afterwards, in the year 177, bishop of Lyons. J He employed his learning and industry in reflating the Gnostic heresies, Avhich had, even in the first age of the church, arisen from the union of * Apol, Athen. Ed. Par. p. 5 — 39. Phot. Cod. 234'. f Basil. 1553. 8vo. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. v, p. 88. Oxon. 1700. ad Calc. Tatiani. J Euseb. Hist. Ec. 1. v. p. 170. Chap. 3. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 459 the dogmas of the Oriental, Egyptian and Platonic philosophy with the I doctrine of Christ. It is, however, to be regretted, that this learned and zealous advocate for Christianity, having been less conversant with the Oriental than the Greek philosophy, did not perceive the true origin of the heresies which he undertook to refute. Upon a comparison of his writings with the Platonic system at that time taught in Alexandria, it will also be acknowledged that his representation of Christian doctrines is strongly tinctured with Platonism. He speaks of the Son as the minister and in¬ strument of the Father in the creation of the world, and says, “ that God ! had no need of the ministry of angels in forming the world, when he had ! his Son, and his image, ministering to him.” This doctrine he advances i in refutation of the Gnostic notion, that the Demiurgus, or creator of the I world, was a Divine emanation far inferior to the Logos.* * * § In several other |, particulars, Irenaeus borrowed the ideas and language of the Alexandrian I Platonists. He attributed a subtle corporeal form to angels and to the I human soul, and held that the latter, after death, retains the figure of a i man.-j- The hope of immortality he derived, not from the nature of the j human soul, but from the will of God. He conceived man to consist of I three parts, body, soul, and spirit, j His moral doctrine was by no means I free from superstition. I About the beginning of the third century flourished Tertullian, a I native of Carthage. He appears to have been a convert from heathenism ' to Christianity. In his writings may be discovered many traces of an ac- ! quaintance with ancient jurisprudence. Tertullian was intimately conver- : sant with the several sects of Grecian philosophy, and, with Irenaeus, sup¬ posed the heresies of the times to have been derived from this fountain. Seduced by a lively imagination, which appears in all his writings, and by his zeal against the Gnostic doctrine of jLons, which he ascribed to the Platonic notion of immaterial forms, or ideas, he banished all pure intelli- ; gence from his system, and maintained that all intelligent beings, not ex¬ cepting even God himself, though not visible, are material. “ Who can i deny,” says he, “ that God, though a spirit, is a body ? for spirit is a body i of a peculiar kind. Even those beings which are invisible to us, have, ii with God, a body and form of their own, by which they are visible to God alone, since what proceeds from his substance cannot be unsubstantial. ”§ Tertullian inveighs with great bitterness against the several sects of the Greek philosophy, and calls philosophers the patriarchs of the heretics. || ' Nevertheless, in refuting them, he frequently makes use of Platonic notions |t I and language. Concerning the Son of God, he says, that there was a time » : when he did not exist. In argumentation Tertullian is weak, futile, and > sophistical. On moral subjects he held many absurd opinions ; particu- t : larly with respect to marriage, war, and the power of magistrates. With ) several other Christian fathers, he wore the philosopher’s cloak ; a dress . . which seems indeed to have been commonly worn by those who took upon i them the character of Christian philosophers, or devoted themselves to an < ascetic life,^ as we find Tertullian did after he became a Montanist. None of the fathers of this period merit higher distinction, for erudition ! in general, or for the knowledge of philosophy in particular, than Clemens * Iren. Herses. 1. iii. c. 8. n. 3. 1. iv. c. 7. n. 4. c. 38. n. 3. 1. ii. c. 30. n. 9. c. 25, n. 8. ' Tertull. in Val. c. 5. Hieron. Ep. 83. Epiph. Hoer. 31. c. 33. t Heraes. 1. ii. c. 34. p. 168, 1. ii. c. 19. n. 7. J L. v. c. 7. 1. ii. c. 19. n. 6. § Advcrs. Praxeain, c. 7. , II I)c Praescript. c. vii. p. 232. Adv. Ilermog. c. viii. p. 269. ' i ^ Salmas, de Pallio. 460 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. Alexandrinus ; nor was any one among them led further astray, by philosophical subtlety, from the simplicity of the Christian faith. This Christian father, who flourished between the years 192 and 217, early de¬ voted himself to study, in the schools of Alexandria, probably his native city, and had many preceptors.* As he himself relates, “ One of these was an Ionian ; a second was from Magna Grcecia; a third, from Ccelo- Syria; a fourth, an Egyptian; others came from the East, of whom one was an ^ Assyrian, and another a Hebrew a passage Avhich, by the way, clearly proves, that those who studied at Alexandria did not confine themselves to Greek philosophy and literature, but engaged in the study of Oriental learning. His Hebrew preceptor, whom he calls the Sicilian bee, by whom sincere and incorruptible truth had been collected from the prophets and ; apostles, was unquestionably Pantsenus, a Jew by birth, but of Sicilian 1 extraction, who united Grecian with sacred learning, and was attached to i the Stoic philosophy. 'j- Clement so far adopted the ideas of this preceptor, | as to espouse the moral doctrine of the Stoics. In other respects, he fol- i lowed the Eclectic mode of philosophising. It does not however appear, j that he was a follower of Ammonius, the father of the Eclectic sect. It is ) more probable, that before Potamo, or rather Ammonius, gave this method < the form and name of a sect, Clement, like many other of his fellow-citizens and contemporaries, selected for himself, from the several sects, such te¬ nets as best agreed with his own judgment. Whilst the Pagan philosophers "5 pillaged the Christian stores to enrich the Eclectic system, this Christian father, on the contrary, transferred the Platonic, Stoic, and Oriental dog- •’ mas to the Christian creed, as relics of ancient tradition originating in Di¬ vine Revelation.;!; He expressly asserts, that philosophy was communicated to the Greeks from heaven, as their proper testament or covenant ; and that it was to them, what the law of Moses was to the Hebrews, In hopes ■ of recommending Christianity to his catechumens, (for, after Pantsenus, he had the charge of the Christian catechetical school in Alexandria, )§ ; Clement made a large collection of ancient wisdom, under the name of Stromata; assigning this reason for the undertaking, that much truth is mixed with the dogmas of philosophers, or rather covered and concealed 5 in their writings, like the kernel within its shell. || This work is of great '( value, as it contains many quotations, and relates many facts not elsewhere preserved. But, though the object of his labours was laudable, it must be confessed that his inclination to blend heathen tenets with Christian doc¬ trines rendered his writings in many respects injurious to the Christian cause. His vast reading encumbered his judgment ; and his injudicious ’• zeal sometimes led him into credulity, if not into dishonesty. He admitted I the authority of doubtful, and even of spurious writings. He quotes as 1 authentic the work entitled, “ The Preaching of Peter and Paul,”^ which '? Jerom acknowledges to be spurious. In like manner, he admits the i doubtful authority of Aristobulus, Aristseus, and others, and on this ground * maintains the inspiration of the Septuagint version of the Hebrew scriptures. The erroneous explanations which Clement gives of the tenets of the Grecian sects betray both prejudice and precipitation. As one example of this, out of many others which might be selected from his writings, we i * Strom. 1. i. p. 274. Euseb. Hist. Ecc. 1. v. c. 2. t Vales, ad Euseb. 1. v. c. 10, 11. Chron. Ann. t. ii. an. 185, Phot. Cod. 118. i Hieron. Ep. 84. J Strom. 1. i. p. 313. § Phot. 1. 3. II Strom. 1. i. p. 278, 279. 1. i. c. 3. p. 83. 1. iii. p. 443. J ^ Strom. 1. vi. p. 036. Conf. Pabr. Cod. ap. N. T. p. 797. Hieron. de Scr. Eccl. c. i. I p. 19. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 461 Chap. 3. I shall mention the manner in which he supports the assertion, that Plato I agrees with Moses in his account of the production of the world. “ Plato ! affirms,” says he, “ that the world was originally produced (yeyortVat) from I some principle, and speaks of God as the former and father of the universe ; herein declaring, that the world is not only begotten, but begotten as a son I from a father : a representation equally inconsistent with the Mosaic I doctrine of creation, and with Plato’s notion of the formation of the world : from pre-existent matter. We frequently find Clement adopting Platonic and Stoic tenets as Christian doctrines, and thus sowing the seeds of error in the Christian church. He speaks, for example, of the Christian doctrine, respecting the I government of the passions, as coincident with the Stoic doctrine of apathy, 4 and makes the perfect Christian a character exactly similar to the wise man of the Stoics. He even falls so far into the rant of the Porch, as to adopt their absurd language, concerning the possibility of attaining absolute I independence and perfection.-j- ' Among the doctrines of Clement are these : :}: that the Logos is the I image of the father, and man the image of the Logos ; that the Logos proceeded from God for the purpose of creation ; that the world is pro¬ duced from God, as a son from a father ; that there are two worlds, the sensible and the intelligible ; that angelSj are corporeal ; that the Greeks received their wisdom from the inferior angels ; that man has two souls, the rational and the irrational ; that the perfection of human nature consists in the contemplation of ideas; and that the stars § are animated by a ra¬ tional soul ; positions which approach nearer to the Platonic or the Gnostic systems, than to the simple doctrine of Christianity. Clement also asserts, that Plato received his doctrines of ideas from Moses, and intimates, that the Egyptians borrowed their doctrine of transmigration from the He¬ brews. |j From these particulars, the philosophical spirit and character of Clement of Alexandria may be easily inferred. What fruit is produced will appear in the history of his pupil Origen. I The Christian fathers, in the period we have hitherto considered, formed different ideas of ancient philosophy, and applied its dogmas differently, t according to their respective talents and modes of education. Butin the ' third century, when Ammonius, following the idea of Potamo, framed the Eclectic system, and had a numerous train of disciples, a new order of Christian preceptors arose, who addicted themselves to this new sect, so far as to teach Christianity after the manner of the Amrnonian school.^ The most celebrated of this class of Christian fathers was Origen, who had I ‘ many followers, and whose tenets had an extensive and lasting influence I upon the state of opinions in the Christian church. Origen,** called also, on account of his invincible perseverance and I patience, Adamantius,'{'"|' was born at Alexandria, in the year 184 or 185. From his childhood he enjoyed the benefit of a liberal education. He I became an early catechumen in the Christian school of Alexandria under Clement, by whom he was introduced to an acquaintance with philosophy, and impressed with a strong persuasion of its utility as preparatory to the ” Strom. 1. V. p. 592. Conf. p. 593—595. f L. vi, p. 649. J Strom. 1. V. p. 592, 593. Admon. ad Gent. p. 62. Strom. 1. v. p. 553. 1. vii. ' p. 702. Paedag. 1. iii. c. 2. p. 222. 1. i. c. 6. Strom. 1. vi. p. 648. 1. i. p. 272. 1. vii. p. 718. § In Eclogia. Phot. Cod. 109. H Strom. 1. v. p. 553. 1. vi. p. 633. ^ Ilieroc. apud Phot. Cod. 214. , ** lluet. Origeniana. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. v. p. 237. Suidas. ff Epiph. Hter. 64. c. 73. 462 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. study of Christian truth * Thus prepared, he passed over, with great avidity^ from the initiatory instructions of Clement, to the philosophical school of Ammonius,-!- which was frequented both by Pagans and Chris- tians. This philosopher, as we have already seen, was a man of wild imagination and fanatical spirit, who, despising the simplicity of the Chris¬ tian doctrine, revolted to Paganism, and from the dogmas of the Oriental and the Grecian philosophy framed a new system. In order to gloss over his apostacy from Christianity, he was particularly desirous of admitting Christian doctrines into his crude and inconsistent chaos of opinions, and claimed to himself the merit of reconciling philosophy with revelation. Under such a master, it may be easily conceived, that Origen would become well acquainted with the writings of the Greek philosophers; and this is expressly attested by Eusebius. At the same time, by the aid of ready ability and great industry, he made himself master of all the learning of the times. :j: VV^ith these qualifications, Origen, about the eighteenth year of his age, opened a school in Alexandria for the instruction of youth in grammatical and philosophical learning. The circumstance which led him to take upon him this charge so early, reflects too much honour upon his memory to be omitted. His father Leonidas having suffered martyrdom, all his property was confiscated, and Origen ’s mother, with six children, was left without any other support than the bounty of certain Alexandrian matrons. In these circumstances, Origen undertook the instruction of youth, to furnish his mother and her family with the means of subsistence, and his filial piety was amply rewarded ; for his school soon became so famous, that it was crowded with young men both of Christian and Pagan families, and he acquired a considerable portion of wealth.§ After the death of Clement, when Origen took upon him the charge of the Christian catechetical school, he closely followed the steps of his pre¬ decessor ; taking great pains to instruct his pupils in the tenets of the several sects of philosophy, as the most probable means of convincing them of the superior excellence of Christianity. At the same time he inculcated upon them, by precept, authority, and example, an austere and rigid sys¬ tem of morals. I j The severity of his own manners may be inferred from several circumstances mentioned by Eusebius ; particularly, that he wore no shoes, nor more than one coat ; and that he prevented all sexual desires by voluntary emasculation ; an unusual kind of self-denial to which he was probably led by an injudicious explanation of certain Christian precepts. Having in this manner raised an eminent school, in which the Alexan¬ drian philosophy was employed to illustrate and establish the doctrine of Christianity, Origen found little difficulty in spreading his tenets beyond Alexandria, through Palestine, Syria, and other countries which he visited, partly to negociate certain ecclesiastical affairs, and partly to escape the violence of Demetrius, bishop of Alexandria. In the course of his journey he passed through Greece, and made some stay at Athens, where he attended the schools of the philosophers, who at this time enjoyed the patronage of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius. At last he settled at Caesarea, where he taught both sacred and profane learning to a numerous * Euseb. Hist, Ec. 1. vi. c. 3, 6. •}• Ib. c, 19. X Suidas in Origen. Hieron. de. Scr. Eccl, c. 54. Euseb. 1. c. 1. vi. c. 2. 20, § Euseb. 1. c. c. 2, 3. II Euseb. 1. c. Epiph. Hser. 64. c. 2. 61. c, 1. Greg. Thaumaturg. Pareg. p. 10, &c. Ed. Hoesh. Chap. 3. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 463 train of disciples, among whom was Porphyry.* Origen died in the year 253. By the help of lively talents, a ready elocution, and great industry, Origen was one of the most popular preceptors of the age; and was therefore able, not only to disseminate his opinions far abroad during his life, but to transmit them to succeeding times. It will therefore be necessary to take some notice of the sources, and the leading heads, of his doctrine. The allegorical method of explaining the writings and traditions of the ancients, long practised in Egypt, having been adopted by the Jews who had been educated in the Alexandrian schools, and particularly by Philo, these examples were followed by Origen ; and thus a fanciful method of interpreting the scriptures was encouraged, which opened a wide door to error and delusion. As the Alexandrian philosophers had, by this expe¬ dient, been able to accommodate the Pagan mythology to their respective systems ; and as Ammonius had employed it to reconcile the supposed truths of Revelation with his new-modelled Platonism ; so Origen hoped, by the same method, to establish a union between Heathen philosophy and Christian doctrine. His fundamental canon of criticism w'as, that wherever the literal sense of scripture was not obvious, or not clearly consistent with his tenets, the words were to be understood in a spiritual and mys¬ tical sense : a rule by which he could easily incorporate any fancies, either original or borrowed, with the Christian creed. The principal tenets of Origen are these : The Deity is limited in his operations by the imperfect nature of matter. The Divine nature is the fountain of matter, and is itself, though free from gross corporeality, in some sense, material. God, angels, and the souls of men, are of one and the same substance. There are in the Divine nature three vTrodraaEie, sub¬ sistences. The son, proceeding from the father like a solar ray, differs from, and is inferior to him : he is the first emanation from God, dependent upon him, and his minister in creation. Minds are of various orders ; and, according to the use or abuse of liberty, they are placed in various regions of the world, which was made for this purpose. Angels are clothed with a subtle corporeal vehicle. Evil spirits are degraded by being confined to a grosser body ; and in these they are purged from their guilt, till they are prepared to ascend to a higher order. Every man is attended both by a good and a bad angel. Human souls were formed by God before the bodies, into which they are sent as into a prison, for the punishment of their sins : they pass from one body to another. The heavenly bodies are animated by souls, which have preserved their purity ; and these souls are capable of predicting future events. All things are in perpetual rotation, receding from, and at last returning to, the Divine fountain : whence an eternal succession of worlds, and the final restoration of the souls of bad men, and of devils, after certain purgations, to happiness.-j- The souls of the good are continually advancing in perfection, and rising to a higher state : matter itself will be hereafter refined into a better substance ; and, after the great revolution of ages, all things will return to their source, and God will be all in all.J These tenets, which approach nearer to the doctrine of Ammonius or * Euseb. 1. c. c. 3. 18 — 20. Hieron. de Scr. Ec. c. 54. + Contra Celsum. In Joan. t. ii. p. 49 — 70. De Principiis, I. i. ii. iv. Phot. Cod. 117, 234, 235. Hieron. Ep. 59. Epipb. Haeres. 64. c. 17. Huet. Origeniana. t Philocal. c. i. Princ. 1. i. c. 6. 12. 1. iii. c. 6. 1. ii. c. 3. Phot. 234. Huet. Orig. 464- OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. Plotinus than to that of Christ, may be ultimately traced up to that ema-. native system, which gave rise to Gnosticism and to the Jewish Cabbala.! It is much to be regretted that Origen, who had, unquestionably, talents and merits superior to most of his contemporaries, should have suffered! himself to be so far misled by the authority of Clement, and the example of the apostate Arnmonius, and by a fondness for allegory, as thus to attempt to unite the dreams of a mystical system of philosophy with the simple doctrine of Christianity. The fatal eflPects of this unnatural combination] were widely extended, and long experienced. Whilst the Alexandrian philosophy had many patrons in the Christian] church, the systems of other sects were not without their admirers. The Stoic doctrine found an advocate, as has already been said, in Pantaenus." The Peripatetic philosophy, though it contradicted the Christian system,] particularly in its dogmas concernijig the eternity of the world, and con-i cerning Divine Providence, was studied,, first by the heretical, and after¬ wards by the orthodox sects, in order to furnish themselves with logical' armour in defence of their respective opinions. Anatolius* of Alexandria, whose extensive acquaintance with phi¬ losophy and literature qualified him for the undertaking, at the request of the Alexandrians, who lamented the failure of the Peripatetic school, attempted, with respect to the doctrine of Aristotle, what Plotinus had ex¬ ecuted with respect to that of Plato. Making the tenets of the Peripatetic sect the basis of his system, he incorporated with them other doctrines, both Pagan and Christian, and thus formed a new school, in which Aris¬ totle was the chief master. But, none of his commentaries upon Aristotle being extant, the particular manner in which he philosophised is unknown. After residing many years in Alexandria, Anatolius (on what occasion is uncertain) went into Syria ; he afterwards became bishop of Laodicea, about the year 270. This Christian father was well skilled in mathemati¬ cal learning, and wrote a work called “ The Paschal Canon,” of which a Latin version remains, and “Institutes of Arithmetic,” extracts from which are preserved in a collection, entitled, Theologumena A.ritlimetica. Some fragments of his philosophical writings are collected by Fabricius;'|- whence it appears that, after the example of Pythagoras, Plato, and Aristotle, he made mathematical learning subservient to philosophy. The aspect which philosophy had assumed among the Christian fathers in the third century it retained in the fourth. Many learned men, who were well acquainted with Greek literature and philosophy, after the ex¬ ample of their predecessors, employed their ability and learning in opposing Pagan superstition, and contending for the Christian faith: and in this important service they laboured with great success. Still, however, the prejudice in favour of the Platonic doctrine, as either immediately or ulti¬ mately derived from the Divine Logos, and therefore a part of Kevelation, remained among them, and continued to fix and perpetuate the errors which it had introduced. Among the names which distinguish this period, the principal are Arnobius, Lactantius, Eusebius Pamphilus, Didymus of Alexandria, and Augustine. Arnobius, an African by birth, and a rhetorician by profession, from a warm patron of Gentile superstition became a zealous defender of the Christian faith ; but his zeal far surpassed his judgment. He depreciates human reason, and maintains the uncertainty of all human knowledge: he rests the belief of the existence of God upon no rational argument, but ^ Euseb. Hist. Ecc. 1. vii. c. S2. Hieron. de Scr. Ec. c. 73. t Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 274. v. v. p. 277. ' Chap. 3. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 465 j upon an innate principle. With the Platonists, he imputes the disorders of nature to the imperfection of matter. In fine, it is in vain to search for accurate reasoning in the writings of this father, whose education, talents, : and principles, led him to excel in eloquence rather than philosophy.* Lactantius, a pupil of Arnobius, and probably an African by birth, is justly celebrated for several elegant treatises. His principal object \vas to expose the errors and contradictions of Pagan writers on the subjects of theology and morals, and hereby to establish the credit and authority of , the Christian religion ij- and his works are written with much purity and elegance of style, and discover great erudition. Several material defects r< must, however, be remarked in this writer. He frequently quotes and j! commends spurious writings as if they were genuine, and makes use of sophistical and puerile reasonings. J Of his puerilities, a specimen has been ,| given in the preceding chapter; and others may be seen in what he has li advanced concerning the pre-existence of souls, the millennium, the coming I of Elias, and many other topics in theology. Lactantius sometimes falls into egregious mistakes, through his deficiency in physical knowledge. : Speaking of the human body, he says, “ Of many of its parts none can ;i explain the power or use but the Maker: who, for example, can explain the use of the kidneys, the spleen, the liver, the bile, or the heart ?”§ I What inexcusable ignorance in a writer of no inconsiderable erudition ! Upon the subject of morals, Lactantius has occasionally said excellent things; II but they are mixed with others, injudicious, trifling, or extrava¬ gant. He maintains that war is in all cases unlawful, because it is a viola¬ tion of the commandment. Thou shalt not kill.^f He censures navigation and foreign merchandise, condemns all kinds of usury, and falls into other . absurdities on moral topics. We must not, however, dismiss Lactantius without mentioning, to his credit, that he acknowledges,** that when Py¬ thagoras and Plato visited barbarous nations, in order to inform themselves concerning their sacred doctrines and rites, they did not become acquainted ' with the Hebrews; an observation which, had it been earlier admitted, ‘ might have prevented many mistakes in the history of philosophy. Lac¬ tantius flourished at the beginning of the fourth century. Eusebius Pamphilus of Caesarea, born about the year 270, is a writer who deserves to be mentioned with particular respect. This learned bishop, entertaining the common notion, that the ancient philosophers had received many truths, either immediately or by tradition, from Divine Revelation, whilst in other particulars their writings were full of absurdities, I contradictions, and falsehoods, undertook to raise upon this ground a de- ■ fence of the Divine original of Christianity. This great design he com¬ pleted in two valuable works, his Preparatio et Demonstratio Evangelica, “ Evangelical Preparation and Demonstration,” both which have happily escaped the ravages of time. In providing ipaterials for this wwk, Euse¬ bius industriously extracted from ancient writings of every kind whatever was suitable to his design ; whence these pieces contain many fragments of books which have long since been lost. Had this celebrated writer been more free from prejudice ; had he taken more care not to be imposed upon * Arnob. de Christ. Rel. Ed. Canter, Conf. 1. i. c. 8, 9, 20, 27, 39. 1. ii. c. 2, 9, 11, 12. ■f Instit. Divin. Ed. Lugd. 1567. I Ib. 1. i, c. 5. § De Opif. Dei,c. 14. I] As a proof that Lactantius, notwithstanding all his defects, was capable of thinking justly and liberally, we shall refer the reader to an excellent passage, in which he strenuously asserts the right of private judgment in religion, and calls upon all men to employ their understandings in a free inquiry after truth. Vid. Instit. 1. ii. c. 7. For a further account of the writings and opinions of Lactantius, see Lardner’s Credibility, part ii. c. 65. ^ Inst. 1. t. c. 20. ** L. iv. c. 2. II H 466 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. [ by spurious authorities ; had he more clearly understood, from the leading ^ principles of each sect, its peculiar language ; had he distinguished the m pure doctrine of Plato from that of the later Platonists ; had he more ac- curately marked the points of difference between the tenets of the sectarian u philosophers and the doctrine of Christ, his works would have been much more valuable. With their present defects, they should be read with li caution ; and particularly with a constant recollection of the partiality which !•; Eusebius, with other Christian fathers of this and the preceding centuries, entertained for the Platonic doctrine, on the ground already explained. Eusebius has also rendered great service, both to the Christian and the philosophical world, in his “ Ecclesiastical History,” his “ Chronicon,” his “ Refutation of Hierocles,” and other works. Didymus of Alexandria, a catechetical preceptor, though blind from his infancy, gained such an extensive and intimate acquaintance with philosophy, mathematics, and Greek literature, that he was esteemed a prodigy of learning. He was a pupil of Origen, and wrote in defence of his master ; but his writings are lost. He flourished at the close of the fourth century. Chalcidius,* the commentator upon the Timseus of Plato, has been ranked by manj^ writers among the Christian fathers ; but it is doubtful whether he was a convert to Christianity. About the beginning of the fifth century flourished Augustine, who Avas born at Tagaste in Africa, in the year 354. After a course of gram¬ matical study, he was introduced to the knowledge of philosophy at Car¬ thage. In early youth he was more addicted to pleasure than to learning ; but when he became conversant with the writings of Cicero, they improved his taste, and inspired him, as he himself confesses, with an ardent thirst after wisdom. Not meeting with the satisfaction he wished from the Greek and Roman writers, he applied himself to the study of the scriptures : but he was too offended with the simplicity of their style, and threw them aside to return to his favourite orator. At the age of twenty years, he became acquainted with the works of Aristotle ; and the abstract notions of the Divine nature which he collected from this philosopher, led him to adopt the Manichaean doctrine o’f two independent principles, the one good, the other evil ; thinking the latter a necessary substitute for Aristotle’s prin¬ ciple of privation. At this time he so far receded from the Christian faith, as to be of opinion that Jesus Christ Avas nothing more than a man of unparalleled Avisdom. By a vigorous exertion of his faculties in the study of philosophy, he at length discovered the futility of the Manichaean system, and abandoned it. To escape the solicitations of Faustus, a leader of the Manichaeans, he Avithdrew to Rome, where he undertook the profession of rhetoric. Still, however, he retained so much of his former system, as to ascribe his evil propensities to a distinct nature Avithin him, and to conceive of the Deity as in some sense corporeal. In order to extricate himself from these errors, he now determined to take refuge in Academic uncer¬ tainty, and abandoning philosophical and theological speculations, gave himself up entirely to the study of eloquence. His sceptical turn having created him many adversaries at Rome, he removed, by the advice of Symmachus, to Milan, Avhere he opened a rhetorical school.'|" » Conf. Moslieim de turbata per recent. Plat. Eccl. sect. 30. Beausobre Hist. Ma- ^ nich. p. 1. p. 479. Cave, Hist. Lit. Script. Eccl. p. 125. I Confession, 1. i. c. 9. n. 14. c. 13. n. 20, 21. 1. ii. c. 3. n. 3, 5, 8. 1. iii. c. 3. n. 6. c. 4. n. 8. o. 5. n. 9. c. 6. c. 7. n. 12. 1. iv. c. l(i. n. 28. 1. vii. c. 5, 19. 1. iv. c. 2. n. 3. c. 3. n. 4. c. 15. ti. 24. 1. v. c. 3. n. 3. c. 5, 13. Chap. 3. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 467 At Milan, Augustine, in the midst of his perplexing doubts, met with Ambrose, a Christian teacher of great probity and eloquence. By him he was instructed, more accurately than he had before been, in the doctrines t of Christianity, and brought back to the acknowledgment of the Christian I faith. The way was prepared for his conversion by th§ perusal of the j writings of some later Platonists, which he found adapted to raise his con- i ceptions above material objects to the contemplation of the Divine nature j as a pure mind, the fountain of all intelligence. Finding this doctrine fully confirmed, and other important truths clearly taught, in the holy ! scriptures, Augustine from that time devoted himself to the service of Christ, and returned to Africa, where he rose to great distinction in the church.* The particulars of his life, from this period, more properly belong to ecclesiastical than to philosophical history. He died in the year 430. , Although Augustine, after his establishment in the Christian faith, II treated philosophy in general with contempt, he had, nevertheless, a strong i attachment to the Platonic system, as accommodated to the system of f emanation by the later Platonists.-j- This appears in many of the Christian t tracts, particularly in the eighth book of his most learned and elegant work I De Civitate Dei, which treats of natural theology, according to the doctrine f of Plato. This partiality is, without question, to be ascribed to the cause, which has been repeatedly assigned for the same predilection in other I Christian fathers, the prevailing opinion, that the truths which are found ii in Plato, on account of the source whence they were derived, are to be I received as the dictates of Divine wisdom. This opinion, however, he |1 afterwards saw reason to retract.;}; ; On the whole, it will not be denied by those who are acquainted with r the writings of Augustine, that he was a great man and an able defender ► of the Christian cause ; but at the same time it must be acknowledged, I that he laboured under the common prejudices of the times, and that these f frequently betrayed him into absurd opinions, unsatisfactory reasonings, and fanciful interpretations of scripture. A system of logic appears in the I i works of Augustine, whieh was afterwards commonly used in the schools through the Middle Age : it is more properly Stoic than Platonic. § i Among the more eminent Christian Platonists of the fifth century was Synesius,!! an African bishop. He is chiefly celebrated for his eloquence, ! an elegant specimen of which remains in his Dion, a treatise on the manner in which he instructed himself. He studied philosophy and mathematics j at Alexandria, at the time when its schools were adorned with the female ! philosopher Hypatia, and the eminent mathematicians, Theon, Pappus, and Hero. Under his female preceptor, upon whom he lavishes the highest ! praises, he became acquainted with Alexandrian Platonism. At an early age, he acquired such distinction among his fellow-citizens, that he was sent upon an embassy to the Emperor Arcadius. Upon his return, through the influence of Theophilus, bishop of Alexandria, he was engaged to take upon him the profession of Christianity ; but his love of retirement and study long prevented him from accepting any ecclesiastical office. At last, however, he reluctantly complied with the entreaties of Theophilus, and took upon himself the episcopal charge of the city of Ptolemais. Synesius held opinions not perfectly consistent with the popular creed, as he himself * Conf. I. v. c. 14. De Utilit Cred. c. 8. Conf. 1. vii. t Contra Acad. 1. ii. c. 2. n. 4, 5. Conf. 1. vii. c. 20, 21. ' + Retractat. 1. i. c. 1. § Biblioth. Lat. Fabr. t. iii. p. 519. j II Evagrius, 1. i. c. 15. Niceph. 1. xiv. c. 15. Phot. Cod. 26. Siiidas. • H H 2 468 OF THE PHILOSOPHY Book VI. candidly confesses in a letter to his brother; he rejected, particularly, the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. In his Hynrns he adapts the Triad, or rather Quaternion, of the schools to the received Christian doctrine of the Trinity.* If the language of these mystical odes be com¬ pared with that of the Gnostics and Cabbalists, with the theology of Pro- clus, and the Zoroastrean Oracles, it will be easily seen, that Synesius was a more worthy disciple of Hypatia than of Jesus Clirist.-t- About this period flourished Dionysius, a writer falsely called The Areopagite, who has been ranked, without any sufficient evidence, among the apostolic men. If the writings which bear this name be fairly compared with those of Proclus and Plotinus, little doubt will remain, that this pretended Dionysius did not write earlier than the fifth century ; for his works abound with the mystical trifles of the Plotinian school. Yet this fanatic found means to pass his productions upon the Christian world as of the apostolic age, and hereby greatly contributed to foster an enthu¬ siastic spirit both in the Eastern and the Western churches. The Christian philosophers hitherto noticed chiefly flourished in the Eastern countries. In the Western world, the irruptions of barbarous nations almost extinguished the remains of learning and science ; whence, through several succeeding centuries, we meet with few names which deserve a place in the history of philosophy. Some stars, however, of con¬ siderable lustre, if not of the first magnitude, appeared to dissipate the darkness of this period. The first of these, in order of time, is Claudianus Mamertus, § a learned presbyter of Vienna, who flourished about the year 460. He is celebrated for his eloquence, and his general knowledge ; and particularly for his acquaintance with the dialectics of Aristotle, which were made use of by the orthodox fathers, as weapons both offensive and defensive against heretics. He wrote a treatise “On the state of the Soul.”|| At the beginning of the sixth century appeared a writer of great eru¬ dition and distinguished genius, Anicius Manlius Torquatus Seve¬ rinus Boethius. He was born of a noble family at Rome, and was early sent to Athens to learn the Greek tongue, and to study philosophy. In the school of Proclus, he became acquainted with the Eclectic system ; and from the commendations which he bestows upon Porphyry, as the best interpreter of Aristotle, he seems to have united the Platonic with the Aristotelian doctrine. He translated the treatise of Aristotle and Porphyry on Categories, and illustrated them with notes. But his most valuable work is his book, De Consolatione Philosophic^, “ On the Consolation of * We subjoin the following specimen for the amusement of the learned reader : ATr\6TriTas aKpoTi]rci>v 'Eyw'cracra Kal rsKovaa 'Tnfpovfflois \oxelnis Odev avT-i] irpodopovcru. Aid TTpoorScrnopov fldos Movas dpp7)Ta TptKopv/xBov dx&a' d\Kav 'TTrepouaios Se irayli 'Sreperai KaWei ttoiSwv Aird Kevrpov re Bvooi'tuv riepl KfyTpou Tf pvlvrwv. Hymn i. v. 22, &c. t Hymn iii. v. G. Conf. Epistol. Synes. § Sidon. Kp. i, Alan. Encyclop. p. 311. I Suidas. ij Ed. Barthii. Cygn. 1655. OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIANS. 469 j Chap. 3. I i! Philosophy;” in which, after the Eclectic manner, he has blended, for the purpose of his work, the tenets of Plato, Zeno, and Aristotle, but without any notice of the sources of consolation which are peculiar to the Christian system. In the elegant verses interspersed with this work, the intelligent ; reader will discover many traces of the Platonic philosophy, as it was then 1 taught by Syrian, Proclus, and Marinus. Boethius wrote two treatises, I De Arithmetical “On Arithmetic;” five books, De Unitate et Uno^ “On \': Unity and One ;” Institutio Musica, “Institutes of Music,” and other pieces.* He had formed a design of translating all the works of Plato i; and Aristotle into Latin, but was prevented from executing his purpose by I a premature death. Having with great freedom censured the conduct of j Theodoric, he was banished into Persia, and, after a short interval, be¬ headed. It was during his exile that he wrote, for the relief of his own j mind, his Treatise on Consolation, which discovers an extent of learning, |j and purity of taste, worthy of a better age. Boethius died about the I year 526. j! Towards the close of the fifth century flourished .®neas Gaza, a Ij Pagan by birth, by profession a Sophist, a disciple of Hierocles, and, !i after his conversion, a Christian philosopher. His dialogue, entitled ; Theophrastus, in which he maintains the immortality of the soul, and the i! resurrection of the body, has rescued his name from oblivion. In this I poem, although he professedly writes against the Platonists, the doctrines :j of Platonism and Christianity are confounded.f I In the sixth century, Zecharias, surnamed the Scholastic, acquired t some distinction among Christian philosophers. Pie was educated at I I Alexandria, and at length, for his learning and piety, w as placed at the ii head of the church of Mitylene, in Lesbos. Gaza wrote a treatise against ! the Manichseans, “On the Doctrine of Two Principles in Nature;” and “a Dialogue against the Eternity of the World.”;}; Another Christian i philosopher, who wrote upon the same subject, against the disciples of 1 Proclus, was Joannes Philoponus, a grammarian of Alexandria. He • ! was more inclined to the Peripatetic than the Platonic system, and wrote ; j commentaries upon Aristotle. Philoponus was protected by Amrum, the j Saracen commander, in the year 640, w^hen he was probably about eighty I years of age ; for he was patriarch of Constantinople under the Emperor ' ! Justin IL§ The last name which w'e shall add to this series of Christian fathers, who might be ranked among philosophers, is that of Nemesius,]] whose i age is omcertain, but is supposed by his editor^ to have flourished about ' the close of the fourth century. He w-as the author of a treatise “ On the I Nature of Man,” which is one of the most elegant specimens now extant ' of the philosophy which prevailed among the ancient Christians. The writer relates and examines the opinions of the Greek philosophers on the subject of his dissertation with great perspicuity of thought and correct¬ ness of language. But the treatise is chiefly curious, as it discovers a degree of acquaintance wdth physiology, not to be paralleled in any other writers of this period. He treats clearly concerning the use of the bile, the spleen, the kidneys, and other glands of the human body, and seems to have had some idea of the circulation of the blood. In fine, though, on * Fabr. Bib. Lat. t. i. p. 612. t. iii. p. 202. I Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. i. p. 427. v. vii. p. 99. v. xiii. p. 458, 508. I Cave, Hist. Lit. Scr. Ecc. p. 227. Fabr. Syllab. Script, ile Ver. Cli. R. p. 107. I § Fabr. 1. c. p. 108, et Bib. Gr. v. vii. p. 358. v. ix. p. 363. Pilot. Cod. 21.5. 255, 275. I ii Fabr. Syll. c. 2. sect. 30. ^ Fraef. Edit. Oxon. Sec Friend’s Hist. Physic. 470 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. account of the uncertainty of his date, Nemesius is mentioned last in the present series, he merits a place of no inconsiderable distinction among the ancient Christian philosophers.* BOOK VII. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. CHAPTER I. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE GREEK CHRISTIANS, FROM THE SEVENTH CENTURY TO THE TAKING OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE TURKS. Having related the philosophical history of the ancient Christians, that is, of those who lived in the first six centuries of the Christian era, our plan requires that we proceed to inquire into the state of philosophy in the period of darkness called the Middle Age, which lasted from the beginning of the seventh century till the revival of letters in the fourteenth.’ About the beginning of this period, under the Christian emperors, the Sectarian philosophy, together with Pagan superstition, was nearly extinct : and, in consequence of the irruption of the Northern Barbarians, almost the whole Western world was overwhelmed with intellectual darkness.^ This part of the history of philosophy resembles a barren wilderness, where the traveller is fatigued with beholding dreary wastes, in which he meets with scarcely a single object to relieve his eye, or amuse his fancy. Yet in order to preserve the connexion of facts, and account for the state of philosophy after the revival of letters, it will be necessary to trace with attention the great changes through which philosophy passed during this period. The order we shall observe will be, first to represent the state of philosophy in the East to the taking of Constantinople, when the Eastern world ceased to philosophise, and the Greek philosophers passed over into the West; secondly, to relate its condition in the Western world from * Vidend. Cave’s Lives of the Fathers, and Eccl. Antiq. Tenzel. Exerc. Select, p. i. p. 179, 210. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. v. p. 50, 81, 88. Fabric. Syllog. Script, de Ver. Christ. Rel. Longuerve de Tatiano ap. Orat. Ittig. de Haeresiarch. sevi. ap. c. 12. Petav. Dogm. Theol. 1. i. c. 3. Iluet. Orig. 1. ii. c. 2, 9. Ittig. select, cap. Hist. Ecc. s. ii. c. 3. Huet. de Fab. Rom. p. 53. Massuet. Diss. ad Irenseum. Whiston's Prim. Clirist. p. iv. art. 7. Deyling. de Iren. Test. Ver. sect. 42. Vine. Lirin. Commonit. c. 24. Pamelii Vit. Tertulliani. Barbeyrac de la Morale des Peres, c. 6. 8. Dupin. Bibl. Scr. Ecc. t. i. p. 104. Le Clerc. Bibl. Un. t. x. p. 175, 193. R. Montacutius Orig. Eccl. 1. ii. p. 52. Clerici Ep. Crit. i. p. 18. Otium Vindal. Mel. i. Gaudentii Diss. de Compar. Dogm. Orig. cum Dogm. Platonis, Flor. 16.39. De la Rue Pra?!. Op. Orig. Cudwmrth’s Intell. System, c. v. s. iii. sect. 34. Journal de Scavans, 1734. May, Art. 4. Le Clerc, Ep. vii. Histoire de Boete, Par. 1715. 12®. Tillemont Mem. Eccl. t. xii. de Synesio. Boysen. Diss. de Phil. Syncsii. Lardner’s Account of the Christian Fathers in his Credibility of the Gospel History, Part ii. passim. Chap. 1. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 471 i the seventli to tlie twelfth century ; and lastly, to subjoin the history of the Scholastic Philosophy, which flourished from that time to the revival of letters. i The fate of the Platonic school having been already related, it is only necessary to remind the reader, that although the Pagan philosophers, who, in consequence of Justinian’s interdict, had taken refuge in Persia under I Chosroes, returned about the middle of the sixth century into the Roman empire,* the Eclectic sect, as such, did not long survive. Still, however, the spirit, and many of the tenets of this school, remained among the I clergy of the Christian church, the generality of whom tenaciously adhered I to opinions which, inconsistent as they were with the pure doctrine of I Christianity, had been embraced and propagated by the Christian fathers. The followers of Origen, whose tenets were chiefly borrowed from the Alexandrian philosophy and theology, were particularly attached to this sj'stem. Of these the greater part were monks, who were induced, by a superstitious zeal for the rigorous discipline which he established, to pro¬ fess his doctrine in the face of persecution. The enthusiastic spirit wliich was fostered by the writings of Origen, and by those of the supposed Dionysius already mentioned, established in the monasteries a mystical kind of theology, which was from this time embraced both in the Eastern and Western world. From the commencement of the same period, the Aristotelian philo¬ sophy, which had for several past centuries languished, began to revive and flourish. In the early ages of the Christian church the tenets of Aristotle being understood to militate strongly against the doctrines of Christianity, the Christian fathers had in general been exceedingly adverse to the Peripatetic sect. But, when the orthodox clergy saw the ingenious ! and successful use which many heretics made of the art of logic, they I began by degrees to endure, and at length to admire and study, the dialectics of Aristotle, which were now translated into the Syriac language by Christians living under the Saracens. In the numerous contests, which were at this time conducted with so much acrimonv among the several sects of Christians, each had recourse to these artificial methods of disputing. At a time when men were daily losing sight of common sense and simple truth, every champion for a system, whether orthodox or heretical, imagined that he rendered eminent service to the church, when he covered its supposed doctrines with the formidable redoubt of definitions and syllogisms. Thus the Aristotelian philosophy gradually rose into repute, till at length it so far triumphed over Platonism, that, whilst we only meet with a few individuals among the Greek Christians who were acquainted with the Platonic philosophy, great numbers studied and taught the Peripatetic. The more celebrated of these we shall distinctly mention. The first who, after Philoponus, distinguished himself among the Greek Christians as an admirer, and, as far as was not wholly inconsistent with his Christian profession, a follower of Aristotle, was Joannes Damas- CENUS. He flourished at the beginning of the eighth century. In early life he filled a high station in the court of the Saracen Caliph ; but after¬ wards retired to the monastery of St. Sabas, that he might be at leisure to prosecute his studies. With due allowance for the age in which he lived, he was a great master of mathematical and philosophical learning. The Arabians were much indebted to this Christian philosopher for their Procopius in Anccdotis. 472 deliverance from barbarism. Among his writings are an explanation of OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. dialectics, under the title of CajAta Philosophical “Hoads of Philosophy;’’ ■ “ Dissertations on the Three Parts of the Soul, the Four Virtues, and the ^ I Five Faculties;” “ Sacred Parallels ; ” and “ An Accurate Delineation of ■ the Orthodox Faith.”* Thjs latter work is, perliaps, the first attempt which was made to apply the language and arrangements of the Peripa- I tetic philosophy to theology, and to form what has since been called, A ; |l Body of Divinity. Hence some have considered Joannes Damascenus as jl the father of the Scholastics. It is certain that his example was afterwards ; ■ followed by a long train of Christian writers ; to him therefore ought, in i 1 some measure, to be ascribed the mischiefs which arose from the alliance ‘. jl which he introduced between Jesus Christ and Aristotle. k I Under the Eastern emperors philosophy and learning in the eighth ^1 century seemed ready to expire. Besides the general torpor which appears ^ I to have at this time overspread the minds of men, the harassing incursion S I of the Arabians into the empire, and the spirit of barbarism which pos- |lI sessed the reigning princes, may be mentioned as causes of the general ttl decay of knowledge. Zonaras relates a wonderful instance of ferocity in f&l the Emperor Leo the Isaurian : -I- that his librarian, and twelve other U learned men, who lived in a royal college, and were supported at the H public expense, having ventured, in a consultation upon some affair of U state, to give their opinion in opposition to that of the emperor, the H monster ordered the building where they slept to be set on fire, and the fl| whole fraternity perished in the flames. If this story, through the known H inaccuracy and partiality of the writer, be somewhat doubtful, it is, how- n ever, certain, that this prince abolished many schools which had subsisted from the time of Constantine, and persecuted with great severity many learned men who were deemed heretics. Succeeding emperors, however, probably excited by the example of the Saracen Caliphs, formed a design of recalling philosophy, and reviving * learning ; and, by the help of a few able and industrious scholars, pe.rhaps * effected as much as the times would permit. Michael and Bardas, in par- M ticular, discovered an inclination to become patrons of letters; they insti- * tuted schools of various kinds, and appointed teachers with liberal salaries. J The Emperor Constantine Porphyrogenetes, by the encouragement* which he gave to able preceptors, promoted the study of arithmetic, * geometry, astronomy, and philosophy. This emperor was himself, in the ninth century, the pupil of an eminent scholar, Michael Psellus, H whom, however, he afterwards suffered to be accused before him of* apostacy from the Christian faith. Psellus, to wipe off this calumny, sub- M mitted, at an advanced age, to receive instruction in the Christian mys-* teries; after which he wrote many treatises, which are often erroneously® ascribed to the younger Psellus. Among these is a dialogue “ On the* Operations of Demons,’’ which breathes so much the spirit of the Platonic® schools as to render it highly improbable that it was written by a Peri- «, patetic in the eleventh century.§ M. This Psellus had a disciple named Leo, who, for his singular attain- ments in philosophical learning, was called The Philosopher. He became an eminent preceptor in rhetoric, arithmetic, philosophy, and other,;* sciences; first in the island of Andros, and afterwards at Constantinople. ^ Op. Ed. S, M. Le Quien. Par. 1712. 2 vols. fol. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 777. f Ann. t. iii. p. 12.3. + Zonar. t. iii. p. 129. § Leo Allatius de Pscll. p. 2. Chap. 1. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 473 1: I 1 I t [ I ; ^ ' / It To increase his learning, he visited the libraries of many distant monas¬ teries. One of his pupils being taken prisoner by the Saracens,* aston¬ ished his victors by solving a problem which had perplexed the Saracen philosophers. Upon this, the Caliph Al-Mamon, inquiring by whom he had been instructed, sent a messenger to his preceptor, to invite him to his court ; but Leo, not thinking it safe to receive the letter, ordered it to be delivered to the Emperor Theophilus, through the hands of his secretary. The emperor immediately rewarded Leo, and appointed him to the charge of a public school. After the death of Theophilus, Leo was dismissed from his office because he was an enemy to the v'orshipping of images ; but was afterwards restored to his honours by Bardas, and appointed head of the professors of learning and science in Constantinople. Under the auspices of this Leo, who is not to be confounded with the sixth emperor of that name, literature revived.'!' In this period, however, the chief place is unquestionably due to Photius, the learned patriarch of Constantinople, whose merit was equal to his fame. He excelled in grammatical learning, poetry, and eloquence, and was well acquainted with philosophy, medicine, and all the science of the age. A valuable proof of his erudition remains in his Sibliotheca, or “ Literary Memoirs,” containing extracts from various authors, with original remarks, which abundantly prove the writer’s extensive learning and critical penetration. This work is a valuable treasure, to which we are indebted for our knowledge of many writings, particularly in philosophy, which would otherwise have been entirely lost. A man furnished with such various learning, and endued with such superior talents, in an age of almost universal ignorance, must have been deemed a prodigy of wisdom. It is not therefore surprising, that he was advanced to the senatorial rank in the state, and to the highest dignity in the church. By the authority of Bardas, Ignatius was deposed (whether justly or unjustly we shall not inquire) from the patriarchal see of Constantinople, and Photius was appointed in his room. In the next reign this great man was, chiefly in consequence of theological disputes, dismissed from his station and suf¬ fered severe persecutions ; of which he esteemed it not the least, that, being deprived of his library, he was denied the consolation of reading. He was afterwards restored to the emperor’s favour, and his patriarchal honours, and was entrusted with the education of the young princes. Through the jealousy of the clergy, and the intrigues of the court, Photius was, however, again in his old age deposed and banished. J Leo the Sixth, the son of the emperor Basil, who himself assumed the purple in the year 889, acquired so much learning and wisdom under his illustrious preceptor, as to obtain a place among the philosophers of the age. In the language of eulogy, it was said, 'O Se ^tXoffo^wraroc ev Bacn- Xevai Ai(i)v, Among princes, Leo was the greatest philosopher.§ But after all, it is difficult to say, how far this emperor is indebted to his real merit, and how far to clerical adulation, for his fame. In the remains of his Avritings,|] he appears in no other light, than that of a skilful astrologer. \ ■ Besides these principal restorers and patrons of learning and philosophy * Zonaras, t. iii. p. 129. .Scyliza Curopalates in Clironico. i f Allatius, 1. c. p. V. Hanckius de Byzant. Scrip, p. i. c. 26. X Hanck. de Byz. Script. 1. c. sect. 7. Nicetas in Vit, Ignatii. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ix. p. 463. Phot. Ep. 97, 174. ( I § Ilanck. 1. c. c. 23. Allat. p. 5. Zonar. t. iii. p. 141. I il Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. vi. p. 364, 431. 474 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. among the Greek Christians in the Middle Age, several other learned rneuti came forth from the school of Leo the philosopher, whose names, in this dark period, must not be wholly omitted. These were Nicetas David, a Paphlagonian, who at the close of the ninth century wrote a life of Saint Ignatius ; Michael of Ephesus, known among the Greek interpreters of Aristotle ; Magentinus of Mitylene, who wrote a Commentary on Aris¬ totle’s Analytics; Eustratius, who explained the dialectics and morals of Aristotle; Nicephorus, a rigid monk of the thirteenth century, who .> was the preceptor of Theodore Lascar, and wrote an Epitome of the 1 Aristotelian Logic and Physics;* Georgius Pachymerus, a native of r Nice, who lived in the thirteenth century, from whose manuscripts has been edited a compendium of Aristotelian philosophy ;-|- Theodore X Metachita,J a Constantinopolitan of the fourteenth century, known among Aristotle’s commentators ; Nicephoras Gregoras, who wrote several philosophical works ; Georgius Cyprius, celebrated for his acquaintance with Greek learning ; and Georgius Lapitha, who is mentioned as a logician and an astronomer.§ To this list must be subjoined, as entitled to peculiar distinction, Michael PsELLUS the Younger, a learned Christian of the eleventh century, whose genius and industry raised him above the level of his age- He was by birth a Constantinopolitan, of consular rank, and flourished under the Ein-_ peror Constantinus Monomachus. The female historian, Anna Comnena, speaks of him as one who had been more indebted for his attainments to his own excellent talents than to the instructions of his preceptors ; and adds that, having made himself master of all the wisdom of the Greeks and the Chaldeans, he was justly esteemed the most learned man of the age.’ Thus furnished he became the chief instructor of the Constantinopolitan youth. He was at the same time the companion and the preceptor of the emperor, who was so captivated by the studies and amusements in which Psellus engaged him, that, according to Zonaras, he neglected the concerns of the empire. The Byzantine historians complain, that the emperor, de¬ luded by the head of the philosophers (the title with which Psellus was honoured) lost the world. ^ Towards the close of his life, Psellus met with a powerful and successful rival in John of Italy, who, through the favour of Botaniatas Nicephorus, the successor of Michael, was invested ! with the honours which Psellus had enjoyed. Psellus retired into a monas-T tery and soon afterwards died. The time of his death is uncertain. His works, which have been much celebrated, are “ Commentaries upon Aristotle’s Logic and Physics;” “A Compendium of Questions and Answers ;” and “ An Explanation of the Chaldean Oracles.” The two' latter works prove him to have been conversant not only with Grecian, but with Oriental philosophy. After the time of Psellus, the Greek empire declining, learning and^ philosophy were much neglected. There were, however, about the time* when Constantinople was taken (which happened in the year 1451) several"'^ learned men among the Greek Christians, who merit a place in the annals f of philosophy ; but the confusion which at this time prevailed in the East,’ ^ obliged them to quit their monasteries, and to seek for refuge in a more hospitable region. This circumstance occasioned the return of Grecian * Ed. Aug. Vindel. 1606. f Ed. Oxon. 1666. 8vo. X Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ix. p. 215, 218. § Hanck. I. c. Allat. de Psell. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 116, 130 — 152. v. ix. p. 365. V. vi. p. 300, 383, 466, 635. v. x. p. 666. Ann. Coninen. Alexiad. )>. 453. II Alex. 1. V. ^ Zonar. t. iii. p. 127. Hanck. 1. c. p. 483. pi Chap, 2. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 475 i ' learning and philosophy into Europe; for, after the Greek empire was I! destroyed by the Turks, the friends of literature and science, despairing n! of meeting with protection and encouragement among barbarians, fled I into Italy, and there, as we shall afterwards see, purchased an immortal j name by the revival of letters.* I 1 chapter n. OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE WESTERN CHRISTIANS, FROM THE SEVENTH TO THE TWELFH CENTURY. From the Christian philosophers of the East, during the Middle Age, we now pass to those of the West. Upon a general survey of the facts which have been already collected, and are hereafter to be adduced, with respect to the state of philosophy in this obscure period, there is one circumstance, which will appear too evi- i dent to be disputed, and which will deserve particular attention ; namely, I that both the Scholastic and Mystic theology, which sprung up in this i period, owed their rise and increase to the mixture of the dogmas of Pagan I philosophy with the doctrines of Christianity. Although these two systems ; of theology differ in their leading characters ; the former attempting to I I derive the confirmation of Divine truth from philosophy ; the latter calling l| in its aid to support the spirit of fanaticism ; the true origin of both will i: be found to have been, an injudicious application of the Peripatetic and '■ Platonic philosophy to the illustration of theology. The seeds of the i Scholastic theology were sown, when the dialectics of Aristotle were first ! introduced into the controversies of the church ; and the Mystical theology i took its rise, when the enthusiastic notion of union with God, and other fanatical principles, taught by the Alexandrian philosophers, were em¬ braced among Christians ; and was established, when the spurious writings of the pretended Dionysius obtained credit and authority in the Christian world. From the Peripatetic school, Christians learned to perplex the I truth by subtle disputations ; and from that of the later Platonists, they I received a powerful bias towards enthusiasm. Hence, with the professed I design of exploring truth, they enveloped it in a cloud of obscure notions t and subtle distinctions ; and, under the pretence of producing sublime I piety, enfeebled and enslaved the human mind by the extravagances of i mysticism ; in both ways opposing the true spirit, and obstructing the j natural operation of Christianity. I From the time of Boethius, whose learning gleamed through the dark¬ ness which then overspread the western regions, ignorance so generally I prevailed, that at the beginning of the seventh century, a scholar, or ; philosopher, even of moderate attainments, was, in this part of the world, ; rarely to be found. This is, doubtless, in a great measure, to be ascribed to i the barbarism of the Northern conquerors, and to that depravity of man¬ ners, which had long prevailed in the nations whom they conquered. But the evil was greatly increased by the hostility which the Emperor Justinian I * Vidend. Asseman. Bibl. Orient. Vatican, t. i. Hottinger, Bibl. Orient, c. iii. p. 291, et Hist. Eccl. sect. viii. Hanck. de Byzant. Script. I 476 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. exercised against the whole race of philosophers. His inveterate aversion to those who still continued to profess the Pagan religion, induced him to shut up the schools of philosophy which still remained at Athens, and to deprive the professors of the salaries which former princes had appointed. Whilst some of the chief supplies of learning were thus cut otf, the general prevalence of barbarous manners rendered it unsafe to travel in search of, knowledge. The intercourse between the Eastern and Western countries becoming on this account less frequent, the Greek language fell into neglect , in the West; so that, in a short time, scarcely any one in this part of thej; world was capable of reading the ancient Greek authors ; and those who'- were desirous of reading the works of Aristotle or Plato, were obliged to content themselves with imperfect Latin translations. The political spirit of the times, too, was exceedingly unfavourable to learning. At a period,''^ when the natural ardour of the human mind is damped by tyranny, it is' scarcely possible that it should exert itself with vigour in the pursuits ofj science. Add to this, that the Barbarian princes, who took more delight in arms than letters, were little inclined to afford encouragement and patronage to philosophers. These were great evils. But a still more fruitful source of ignorance'^ and barbarism remains to be mentioned, namely, the general prevalencejj of a superstitious and bigoted contempt of philosophy. The mischiefs! which sprung from this source were so extensive and lasting, that we must give it a distinct consideration, and endeavour to account for its existence. About the beginning of the second century, astrologers, Chaldeans, and other diviners, disgraced the profession of philosophy by assuming the title of mathematicians. By this name they were commonly known, and this signification of the term was in general use for several centuries. In the Justinian code we find a chapter under this title,* * * § De Maleficis et Mathe- maticis, “ On Sorcerers and Mathematicians and one book of the Theo- dosian Code prescribes the banishment of mathematicians out of Rome, and all the Roman cities, and the burning of their books. Impostors, who passed under this appellation, rendered themselves extremely obnoxious to princes and statesmen by the influence which their arts gave them over the minds of the vulgar; and it was thought necessary, for the safety of the state, to subject them to rigorous penalties. f This aversion to mathe¬ maticians, or diviners, passed the more easily from the Pagans to the Christians, as it was a general persuasion among the latter, that a disposi¬ tion to pry into futurity was culpable, and even impious. Hence, not only were books written against the practice of divination, but bishops from their councils and synods issued statutes and canons against those who followed the arts of divination, or magic ; and their popular discourses dissuaded the people from hearkening to them. The thirty-sixth canon of the council of Laodicea orders them to be banished. J Gregory, bishop of Rome, whose negative merit obtained him the surname of Great, adopted this decree. § And thusTar, perhaps, the conduct of the clergy, as guardians of religion, might admit of some apology ; but this ignorant bigot proceeded much further. Inflamed with blind zeal against every thing that was Pagan, Gregory gave orders that the library of the Palatine * L. X. Tit 18. Conf, Nodes Attic. 1. i. c. 9. Sext. Emp. adv. Math. 1. iv. sect. ult. 1. V. sect. 9. Euseb. Praep. 1. vi. c. 1. Suet. Tib. c. 14. 36‘. f Fabrottus ad. t. 10. 1. 16. Cod. Theod. de Pagan, p. 37. Jul. Firmic. Math, 1. i. c. 7. I In Pliotii Nomocaii. Tit. ix. c. 25. § Sarisberiens. Policrat. 1. i. c. 9. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 477 Chap. 2. I Apollo, a valuable collection of books formed by the Roman emperors, I I and kept in the temple of Apollo, adjoining to the palace, should be com- ; mitted to the flames.* This order, so disgraceful to the episcopal chair, I and of such irreparable injury to posterity, was issued under the notion of li confining the attention of the clergy to the sacred scriptures. This story, Ij which we relate on respectable authority, is the more credible, as it per- i fectly agrees with the spirit of this ignorant pontiff, who despised all profane , I learning as unworthy of a Christian. Of this we have a curious proof in his letter to a teacher of grammar, reproving him for polluting, with hymns to Jupiter, that tongue vvhich ought to be employed in celebrating the I praises of Christ, and exhorting him to desist from the vain pursuit of human learning, f It is easy to perceive, that the authority of this renowned prelate, whose singular sanctity procured him a degree of veneration among I the vulgar little short of idolatry, would not fail to create a general pre- ij judice against learning of every kind : and no one, who reflects how easily the ignorant vulgar are led wherever their teachers please, will be surprised, that, from this time, men regarded as profane every study which was not sanctified by the authority of the church ; and thought that ! they made an acceptable offering to the Lord, when they consigned to the I flames the valuable remains of Greek and Roman literature. I What reparation did this zealous guardian of the purity of Christian doctrine make, for the depredations which he committed upon ancient learning ? Did he provide precepts of wisdom more consonant to sacred : truth, or more suitable to Christian piety ? This his vanity prompted him j to undertake ; and this his ignorant and servile followers, for several I centuries, imagined that he had accomplished. From a bigoted contempt I of heathen morality, he thought it necessary to furnish the church with a pure system of Christian ethics, and drew up his celebrated Book of I Morals. And such was the opinion which was entertained of his piety and learning, and such the reverence which was paid to his authority, that ! the work was received with universal admiration. About forty years after j his death, in the pontificate of Theodore, whilst a council was sitting at j Toledo, the king of Spain sent a bishop to Rome, to request from the pontiff a copy of Pope Gregory’s Morals. The pope detained the mes- i senger three days, pretending that the book could not be found ; the bishop L i passed the third night in prayer in the church of Peter and Paul, and in > the morning reported, that about the middle of the night, he had had a vision of those heavenly apostles, who informed him of the place in which this ) sacred book lay concealed. The book was accordingly found and delivered , to him by the hands of the pontiff.| This bishop, whose name was Taio, I afterwards collected, from these writings of Gregory, four books of sen- ! fences, which at this day sleep in libraries, without much injury to the i learned world : and the same task was repeated by three different eccle- . i siastics in the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth, centuries. So long did the Morals of Gregory retain their credit and authority in the church. Not- ' ! withstanding all this, no one who now examines this famous production will hesitate to pronounce the book a confused mass of superstitious trifles, and mystical absurdities ; such as might have been expected from a writer, who, in the dedication of his work, expressly disclaims all attention to style, ‘ and even to grammar, judging it unworthy of a Christian bishop “ to I restrict the words of celestial wisdom by the rules of Donatus.” ! * Sarisberiens. Policrat. 1. ii. c. 26. 1. viii. c. 19. t.Ih. 1. ii. c. 29. 1. ix. Ep. 48. ;J: Anon, in app. ad. Cone. Tolet. vii. 476 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. In the midst of all the discouragements, which were at this period cast in the way of letters by those from whom it ought to have received support and patronage, there were, however, a few who ventured to converse with authors that treated on subjects of human learning and philosophy. These authors, who were called Secular Writers, and may be considered as the tj classics of the Middle Age, were Marcianus Capella, of Madaura in li Africa, who, in the fifth century wrote Novem Lihrorum Satyra, a work which, without prspicuity or elegance, treats of grammar, dialectics, geometry, arithmetic, astrology, and music ; — Boethius, the author of the book jDe Consolatione, concerning whom it is difficult to say, whether he owed his authority more to his knowledge of the Grecian language, or to the intimate friendship which is said to have subsisted between him and Saint Bernard; — Aurelius Cassiodorus, who wrote a treatise on the seven branches of learning, -eagerly read by the learned men of these times ; — Macrobius, a writer already noticed, whose erudition and per¬ spicuity made him exceedingly valuable to these schools; — Firmicus Maternus, whose treatise De Mathesi, or Astrologia Apotelesmatica, was i much valued; — and Chalcidius, whose Commentary upon the Timseus I of Plato afforded great scope for the profound speculations of the philo- a sophers of the Middle Age.* * * § j With such guides, it was impossible for those who, in this period of | blind superstition, dared to turn their eyes towards profane literature and science, to make any considerable proficiency in knowledge. Many of the ii{ writers, whom we have mentioned as the classical authors of this age, do not professedly deliver precepts of liberal arts, or elements of philosophical s science, but intersperse them with subjects of a different kind ; while others f are employed in recondite speculations, the result of the most profound u study of philosophy. In order to understand, and profit by either of these i classes of preceptors, it is evident that the pupil must have acquired a much larger share of preparatory knowledge, than could be commonly I attained at a period, when genius was neglected, and the ancients were almost unknown. Besides the profane or secular writers, above-mentioned, the scholars of this age chose for their oracle and guide the pious and learned Saint Augustine,f who was so great a master of the dialectic art, that in a dis¬ pute which he held with Ambrose, he obliged that saint to have recourse to his prayers, that he might not be caught in the web of Augustine’s sophistry. j; A summary of the precepts of logic, and an explanation of the Categories, introduced into the schools under the name of Augustine, i were esteemed invaluable treasures of philosophical learning, and were used as the chief text books in public lectures : § till at length the sagacity of the Benedictine monks, who edited the works of Augustine, saw reason to reject them as spurious ; because the dialectics which he wrote were, as he himself attests, written upon Pythagoric and Platonic principles ; whereas, the pupil’s manual taught the dialectics of the Stoics ; and because the book of Categories asserted the existence of antipodes, which Augus¬ tine had denied. 1 1 Yet these spurious books obtained, and for some cen¬ turies preserved, the highest credit in the schools. * Fabr. Bib. Lat. tom. i. p. 638, 644, 651. tom. iii. p. 185, 209, 218. t. iii. p. 97, 145. ' Sarisb. Policrat. 1. ii. c. 19. 1. viii. c. 10. Trithem. de S. E. c. 201. Cassiod. Op. Ed. Rothomag. 1676. Metalog. I. iv. c. 9. p. 890. f Barbeyrac de Phil. Mor. Patr. Praef. p. 39. J Amb. Serm. 92. § Launoius de Scholis cel. c. 59. art. 1. p. 178. Id. de Fort. Arist. c. 5. p. 197. 11 De Civit. Dei, I. xvi. c. 9. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 4-79 I j Chap. 2. I i If the poverty of these sources of instruction be compared with other I unfavourable circumstances of the times, it will not be thought surprising, ; that the seventh century afforded no writers of distinction ; though doubt¬ less, there were, even at this period, men, who in less disadvantageous sit¬ uations, would have risen to eminence in philosophy. This would, pro- i bably, have been the case with Isidore, archbishop of Seville, who attained that dignity in 595, and died in 636. He appears to have been a man of considerable reading, and his writings are valuable for the numerous ex¬ tracts they contain from Latin books which are now lost. His principal works are, his OrigineSy “ Derivations,” which is not merely an etymolo¬ gical work, but treats on many miscellaneous topics in mathematics and physics; and his book “On the Nature of Things,” which contains many fragments of Nigidius, Varro, Suetonius, and others. The works of Isidore were of great use in the subsequent ages, in which the ancients were little read. In the eighth century, learning and philosophy, which had, as we have seen, nearly expired in the East, were in the West so far from reviving, that they seemed in danger of being entirely lost. Of the state of know¬ ledge at this period some judgment may be formed, from the eighth canon of the council of Toledo, which required that every clergyman should be able to read and chant the psaltery, and to perform the ceremony of bap¬ tism. The best singer was at this time reckoned the most accomplished priest. In the reign of Charlemagne, a violent dispute arose between the singers at Rome, and those in France, concerning the merit of their respective performances, which was brought before the emperor, and de¬ cided in favour of the Romans, who had been instructed by Pope Gregory. The Roman singers valued themselves so highly upon this circumstance, that, in the course of this controversy, they did not scruple to call their Gallic brethren ignorant rustics and brutes.* The attention which was at this time universally paid to music, contributed greatly towards establishing the dominion of barbarism; for whilst the ecclesiastics were chiefly occu¬ pied in this pursuit, learning and philosophy, through the whole Western world, were forgotten. Ignorance and indolence, cherished by this passion for music, prevailed to such a degree, that those who were ambitious to obtain some reputation as philosophers, looked no further than that part of philosophy which treats of music, and wasted their time in writing books upon the art of chanting and singing. j- The credit of affording an asylum to philosophy and learning, at a time i| when they seem to have been banished from courts and cities, is commonly t given to monastic institutions. And the monks of St. Benedict, in par- I ticular, have obtained much praise as the first patrons of letters. But the ' world is less indebted to this order than is commonly supposed. Benedict i himself was an enemy to learning. Though his education had introduced I him to the knowledge of letters, he voluntarily relinquished all profane literature, and disirous to please God alone, devoted himself to a monastic I life, scienter nescvus, et sapienter indocius, knowingly ignorant, and wisely unlearned.;|; The candidates for admission into this order were indeed required to receive preparatory instructions, and for this purpose schools I were erected ; but it does not appear that any provision was made in these I schools for study of any kind, either secular or sacred; the candidates seem ■ * Launois de Scliol. cel. c. i. p. 3. + Fabric. Bibliogr. Antiq. c. xi. p. 3^8. Id. Bib. Lat. Med. t. i. p. 644. t Anton. Summa Histor. Tit. xv. c. 13. Coming. Acad. Ant. Diss. iii. Id. Suppl, 30. 480 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. to have been wholly employed, either in manual labour, or in such religions m exercises as were judged necessary to form them to habits of piety and ■ sanctity. And the case was the same with respect to other celebrated || monastic institutions.* * * § The truth, therefore, seems to be, that there was | no direct establishment in these societies for the encouragement and pro- 4 pagation of learning ; but that a long course of leisure and retirement naturally led the monks to seek relief from the fatigue of absolute inaction ft in speculation and study ; and that in this manner monasteries gradually ^ became seats of learning. This good end was probably promoted by « Cassiodorus, who about this time wrote Institutiones Divmce et Humane, I “ Lectures on Subjects of Divine and Human Learning,” for the use of his own monks. At this period, when the Lombards and other barbarians had established the empire of ignorance in Italy, and the Saracens had, by the terror of I their arms, dispersed the small remains of learning in Spain and France, l philosophy, now so disguised as scarcely to be known, and the Muses, with their lyres now almost unstrung, could find no other secure retreat, than J in the islands of Great Britain and Ireland. f Several schools of learning \ were at this time established in Ireland, to which the English sent their li children for education ; and from these nurseries many scholars returned ^ to England and obtained great reputation. It is probable, that the British ' youth were sent to the Irish schools to study philosophy ; for Eric says,;J; t “ What shall I say of Ireland, who, despising the dangers of the sea, is i migrating to our coasts with almost her whole train of philosophers ? ” ' England seems to have been much indebted to Ireland for the learned > men, whose names distinguished this period of her history. One of the most celebrated scholars of this age was Theodore Cilix, of Tarsus, a monk, who about the middle of the seventh century was ^ created archbishop of Canterbury by Pope Vitalian. He brought into England a large collection of Greek and Latin books, and being himself a tolerable proficient in the metrical art, in astronomy, in ecclesiastical cal- i culations, and in music, he instructed others in these branches of learning. His successors, Berechtwald, Tobias bishop of Rochester, Aldhelm of Sherborne, and others, made some efforts towards the advancement of knowledge. § But this feeble light could do little towards the dispersion of the Cimmerian darkness which had overspread the w'orld. Notwith¬ standing their laudable exertions, Bede, one of the greatest lights of the eighth century, speaks of it as a fact not to be observed without tears, that the church was continually becoming weaker and more corrupt. || The Venerable Bede^ was born in 672, or 673, at Jarrow, in Dur¬ ham; acquired the elements of learning in the monastery of Saint Peter, and was ordained a priest by John of Beverley, bishop of Horgulstad, or Hexham. Though the fame of his learning obtained him an invitation from Pope Sergius, he chose to remain in his monastery, and prosecute his studies. He wrote many books, of which the most valuable is his Ecclesiastical History. Bede had great merit, not only in the diligence with which he studied both sacred and profane literature, in an age so * Baillet. Vit. nov. SS. Basnage, Hist. Eccl. 1. xxi. c. 4. t. iv. p. 1621. Holsten. Cod. Regul. Rom. 1661. G. Naud. Conject. Caus. Kempens. p. 155. f Sulgeri vet. Biog. apud Camden. J In Vit. S. Germani. Conf. Alenin in Vit. Willibrord.* § H. Spelman ad A. C. 668. t. i. p. 1.52. Cave, p. 387. Gudin, de Scr. Ec. t. i. p. 1655. Bedae Hist. Ang. I. iv. c. 1, 2. Conring. 1. c. p, 285. II Expos. Alleg. in Sara. 1. iv. c. 2. Bedee Hist. Cont. 1. i. c. 8. Bed. Op. t. iii. p. 151. Chap. 2. CHRISTIANS IN- THE MIDDLE AGE. 481 unfavourable to learning, but in the pains which lie took to disseminate knowledge. He was conversant with the writings of the ancients, and drew from those pure fountains his knowledge of mathematics, physics, and philosophy. His erudition so far exceeded that of the generality of his con¬ temporaries, that they set no bounds to their admiration. His writings became the chief guide of youth in their academical studies, and furnished popular discourses, which, under the authority of the bishops, were read by the clergy to the people. On these accounts he obtained the appella¬ tion of the Venerable Bede.* And it cannot be doubted that his industry was indefatigable, and that, considering the disadvantages under which he laboured, his attainments were great ; but, either he wanted that strength of judgment, without which a great philosopher can never be formed, or the errors and prejudices of his age were obstacles in his way, which he had not vigour of mind sufficient to overcome. His philosophical works are, for the most part, compilations from former writers, which contributed little towards the improvement of science, and which, in the present advanced state of knowledge, will scarcely repay the trouble of perusal. Bede died about the year 735. Another Englishman of great distinction, at this period, was Alcuin, a pupil of Egbert, archbishop of York, Under his preceptor, who was an eminent patron of learning, and himself a learned man, he acquired the knowledge not only of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, but of mathematical and philosophical science. After the Venerable Bede, he became an eminent teacher both of languages and sciences in the university of Cambridge. Charlemagne, hearing of his fame, invited him, in the year 793, to his court, and admitted him to his confidence. It was, probably, through the advice and direction of this learned man, that Charlemagne founded many schools in France, Germany, and Italy. After acquiring just fame for the services he had rendered to learning, he died, at an advanced age, in the year 804. j- But neither the learning of Alcuin, nor the authority of Bede, nor the power of Charlemagne, could subdue the ferocity and barbarism of the times. Even in the most celebrated schools of this age, the field of in¬ struction was confined and barren. In philosophy, nothing was studied but mathematics and logic: and the latter was taught in a trifling and useless manner, from the book before mentioned, attributed to Augustine. Neither preceptor nor pupil was at this time to be found, who desired, or dared to attempt, greater things. The circle of instruction, or the Liberal Arts, as the term was then understood, consisted of two branches, the trivium, and the quadrivium ; the trivium included grammar, rhetoric, and dialectics ; the quadrivium comprehended music, arithmetic, geometry, and astro- • nomy. The respective objects of these seven liberal arts are, after the manner of the times, thus quaintly expressed in two memorable verses : Gramm, loquitur, Dia. rera rfoce^, Rhet. verba colorat ; Mus. canit, An. numeral, Geo. ponderat, Ast. colit astra. These seven heads were supposed to include universal knowledge. He who was master of these w'as thought to have no need of a preceptor to explain any books, or to solve any questions which lay within the compass of human reason ; the knowledge of the trivium having furnished him with * Ouclin. tie S. E. t. i. p. 1672. Fabr. Bib. Lat. Med. t. i. p. 496. Bal. Script. Aiig Cent. i. p. 84. Fuller, Praef. aJ Res Angl. ap. Blount. Cens, p. 340. t Pagi ad A. C. 796. n. 22. Maibillon, sec. iv. Bened. p. 1. Laun. 1. c. p. 15. 31. Conring. Ant. Ac. Diss. iii. p. 75. Alcuin. Op. Par. 1612. Bal. Cent, i. p. 110. Fair, Bib. Lat. Med. t, i. p. 134. 482 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. i; S • I the key to all language, and that of the quadrivinm having opened to him;V; the secret laws of nature.* 4; At a period, where few were instructed in the trivium, and very few s ' studied the quadrivium, to be master of both was sufficient to complete i the character of a philosopher. When physics were almost entirely neg- a lected ; when morals were only taught in wretched compilations, after the •} ’ model of Pope Gregory’s Moralia ; and when Cassiodorus, Capella, Isidore, and Augustine, supplied the place of the ancients, how wretched must ha^vea-” been the state of knowledge ! especially when it is added, that the liberal arts were only taught in monasteries, and scarcely ever studied by any but , j the clergy, who were thought sufficiently learned, if, besides an acquaint- ' ■ ance with church music, they were tolerable masters of thetrivium. Be-jt! yond the precincts of the cloisters and schools, the name of learning wasR scarcely known. Military exploits were the business, and gross luxury thcK amusement, of the nobles ; the inferior laity were sunk in extreme indo-w lence, and never dreamed of requiring a reason for their religious belief or* prejudices ; and the clergy and monks had no desire to awaken that spirit ofjj inquiry, which is so hostile to superstition and spiritual tyranny. Jfl Through the ninth century, notwithstamling the efforts which were madeB for the revival of learning, about its commencement under the auspices offll Charlemagne, ignoranite and barbarism were still predominant. NothingIH contributed more to that general contempt and neglect of learning, w'hichMB so strongly characterises this period, than the shameful depravity of the I clergy, of the enormity of whose vices the synodical statutes and canons, a as well as the history of these times, afford abundant proofs. Though many schools were erected, and though some of these produced men whose names ■ deserve a place in the history of literature and philosophy, the united efforts jl of the few, who at this period wished well to the cause of learning, were il unable to counteract the powerful operation of that indolent and licentious a spirit which prevailed among the ecclesiastics. I In England, indeed, Alfred,'!' for his superior wisdom and merit justly I styled the Great, did every thing which, at such a period, it was possible ■ for example and authority to effect, towards reviving the love of learning ■ and philosophy. In the midst of all the cares of his busy and troublesome a reign, he is said to have devoted eight hours of every day to study and a devotion. By this persevering application, he made such proficiency in the * knowledge of grammar, rhetoric, philosophy, history, mathematics, and 4 poetry, that he had, among his contemporaries, in point of learning, few >1 equals, and no superiors. His writings, among udiich was a Saxon trans- * lation of Boethius De Consolatione, are a sufficient proof of his learning, ii At the same time that he encouraged letters by his example, he made use ii of every means in his power to banish barbarism from his kingdom. He * ? invited learned men from all countries to reside in Britain, and made ample < provision for their support in the capacity of public professors. He founded ■ i the university of Oxford, so celebrated in Academical History from that - time to the present day : and instituted Professorships in grammar, rhetoric, : = philosophy, and theology. In the execution of this laudable design, he was ■ much assisted by Neot, a monk. Ingulf, abbot of Ci’oyland, speaking of Alfred, says, J “ he was so assiduous in > sacred reading, that he always t carried in his bosom a psalter, or some other edifying book ; and he ^ * J. Sarisber. Metalogr. 1. i. c. 12. f Iceland, c. 115. Life ofAlf. Ed. Lond. 1574. Conf. Camden, Cave, Oiidin. Fabr. ' Bib. Lat. Med. t. i. p, C9. Brian Twyn. Apol. Ant. Oxon. T. Cains Vind. Ant. Ox. I J Hist. Croyland, ap. Oudin. 1. c. p. 312. Chap. 2. CHUISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 483 invited learned foreigners to his palace, to assist him in his studies, and afterwards bestowed upon them ecclesiastical honours. Grinibald, who was famous for his knowledge of the scriptures, and his skill in church music, he sent for from France, and appointed him abbot of the new monastery which he had erected at Winchester. Joannes Scotus, an eminent philo- h sopher, he appointed abbot of the monastery of Atheling ; and other men I bf distinguished learning he advanced to the higher stations in the church.”* * * § f But these meritorious efforts for the restoration of science and learning were soon rendered abortive by the incursions of the Danes, and the sub¬ sequent cruelties of Harold, which overwhelmed the whole country, not excepting the schools, in confusion and calafnity. From this time, to the Norman conquest in the eleventh century, knowledge in England was at so low an ebb, that, according to William of Malmsbury,-]- both sacred and ])rofane learning were become obsolete, and the clergy were scarcely able to stammer out the words of the sacrament; and he who understood gram¬ mar was admired by the rest as a prodigy of learning. We must not omit to mention, among the learned men of this century, ItABANus Maurus,;[; pupil of Alcuin, and afterwards a preceptor in the monastery of F ulda, in Hesse. It was his custom, and that of his colleagues, not only to instruct their pupils in theology, but in every kind of literature and science ; for “ these learned men thought, that no one could understand the scriptures, who was unacquainted with human learning.” § Rabanus acquired sohigha reputation for knowledge and piety through all Germany and France, that many of the nobility entrusted him with the education of their sons. In the year 847 he was advanced to the see of Mentz. || Rut the first place among the scholars of this age is certainly due to Joannes Scotus, surnamed Erigena. He is said by some writers to have been a native of the town of Ayr in Scotland, and by others to have been born in Herefordshire. For his profound knowledge of philosophy, he obtained among the writers of the Middle Age the appellation of Scotus the Wise. Having early acquired (by what means is not certainly known) an uncommon stock of erudition, he penetrated further than any of his contemporaries into the mysteries of the Grecian, and especially the Alex¬ andrian, philosophy. The fame of his learning reached Charles the Bald, . who invited him into France, admitted him to his intimacy, and gave him the direction of the university of Paris. But a circumstance soon after¬ wards arose, which brought upon him much obloquy and persecution. The Greek emperor, Michael the Stammerer, had, in the year 824, sent over, ■ as a present of inestimable value to the Western emperor, Lewis the Mild, the treatises of the supposed Dionysius the Areopagite, which had long : been held in great veneration among the Greek Christians. This book, Charles the Bald, who could not read Greek, was earnestly desirous of pe¬ rusing in a Latin translations This desire was doubtless increased by the opinion which at this time universally prevailed, though without any proof, thatDionysiusthe Areopagite, or St. Denys, was the first Christian teacher, or apostle, in France. At the request of the emperor, Joannes Scotus undertook the task of translating the books of this Dionysius, “ On the Ce¬ lestial Monarchy ;” “ On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy “ On Divine Names;’’ and “ On Mystic Theology.” These books were received with great eagerness by the W’estern churches. The translation, however, * Conf. Tolydor. Virgil, de Invent. Rer. c. 71. 1 L. iii. Conf. Matt. Westmonast. Cliron. Ann. 839. + Laun. c. 8. Pagi Crit. Antib. ad A. SH. n. 28. Maibill. Sec. iv. Ben. p. 1. § Tritbcm. Cbron. Ilirs. An. 813. |1 Trithem. de S. K. c. 247. I I 2 484 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book vii;« being made without the pope’s license, and containing many things con-» trary to the received faith of the church of Rome, the pope, Nicholas the J First, was highly displeased, and wrote a threatening letter to the emperor,'*® requiring that Scotus should be banished from the university of Paris, and ; sent to Rome. The emperor had too much respect for Scotus to obey; . the pope’s order; but Scotus thought it advisable for his safety to retire'"' from Paris, and after the death of the emperor is said to have returned^ into England.* It was the translation of this book which revived the knowledge of Alex-® andrian Platonism in the West, and laid the foundation of the mysticalWi system of theology which afterwards so generally prevailed. Thus philoso-;^ phical enthusiasm, born in the East, nourished by Plato, educated in AlexA^j andria, matured in Asia, and adopted into the Greek church, found its way, under the pretext and authority of an apostolic name, into the Western church, and there produced innumerable mischiefs. Erigena was expert in metaphysical subtleties, and applied them to the -{! elucidation of theological tenets. He wrote a book “On the Nature of .^1 Things,” which Gale disturbed in its quiet repose, and published under the "I title of Joanni Scoti ErigencB de Divisione Naturce Libri quinque diu i desiderati,^ “ Five books of J. Sc. Erigena, long wished for, on the Division i of Nature.” At the entrance of the work, he divides nature into that which |i creates and is not created ; and that which is created and creates ; that which i is created and does not create; and that which neither creates nor is created, f If the reader wishes for any further specimen of the singularity of Joannes 1 Scotus, let him attend to the following argument for the eternity of the ‘ world. ;J; “ Nothing can be an accident with respect to God ; consequently, , \ it was not an accident with respect to him to frame the Avorld : therefore, : God did not exist before he created the world ; for if he had, it would have 5 happened to him to create ; that is, creation would have been an accident c of the Divine nature. God therefore precedes the world, not in the order of time, but of causality. The cause always was, and is, and will be, and '' therefore the effect always has subsisted, doth subsist, and will subsist ; that > is, the universe is eternal in its cause.” Hence he taught that God is all ’ things, and that all things are God ; by which he probably meant the same ; with the Oriental, Cabbalistic, and Alexandrian philosophers, and, after ^ these, with the followers of Origeu, Synesius, and the supposed Dionysius, f that all things have eternally proceeded by emanation from God, and will 1 at length return into him as streams to their source. Accordingly, he says, f that after the resurrection nature itself will return to God ; God will be all in all, and there will remain nothing but God alone. § f These brief specimens are sufficient to show, that the philosophy of Eri- ^ ' gena was founded in the enthusiastical notions of universal deification ; and j consequently, that he is rather to be ranked among the fanatical than among the atheistical philosophers. By introducing into the Western church the fi books of the supposed Dionysius, he sowed the seeds of that mystical the- [ ology, which afterwards spread through the church, and which has not to I this day been entirely eradicated. The monastic life, which afforded so '■ much leisure for indulging the flights of imagination, and so many oppor- ji tunities for an ostentatious display of piety, was peculiarly favourable to the i propagation of enthusiasm; and the ignorance of the times made it perfectly * Forciun. 1. iv. c. 19. Cliron. Scot. Ed. Galaei. Conring’. Ant. Ac. Supp. 31. G. Malmsbur. de Gest. Keg. Ang. 1. ii. c. 4. S. Dunelni. Kecapit. ad A. C. 882. Mat. Westra. Flor. Hist, ad A. 883. Roger Hoveden. Ann. ad. 883. Maibillon, i. c. t 0.xon. 1G81. : lb. 1. iii. p. 185. § P. 232. Chap. 2. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 4-85 easy for those, who were inclined to practise upon vulgar credulity, to exe¬ cute their design. It is no wonder, therefore, that the dreams of mysti¬ cism were, under the authority of a supposed apostolical name, extensively propagated. But we shall have occasion to treat of this subject more fuliv in another place ; it may suffice for the present to have shown, by what channel the stream of enthusiasm, which Origen and other fathers brought into the Eastern church, passed over to the West. Besides the learned men who have already been mentioned, the ninth ! century produced a few others whose names should not be omitted. Egin- iiART,* secretary to the Emperor Charlemagne, had philosophy sufficient to be capable of correcting the terrors of Charlemagne, when, upon the appearance of a comet, that emperor inquired of him, what fatal change this phenomenon portended, by quoting the words of the prophet: “ Be not thou afraid of the signs of heaven.” He wrote the life of Charlemagne in a style superior to the general taste of the age.-|- Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims, distinguished himself by the zeal and ingenuity with which he maintained the controversy of the times concerning predestination, and by his attention to moral philosophy. He wrote treatises “ On the Character and Office of a King;” “ On Virtues and Vices and “ On the Different Faculties of the Mind which were chiefly designed to correct the man¬ ners of the age in which he lived.;! Paul Winfrid,§ a monk of Cassel, M'as, for his learning and ability, much esteemed by Charlemagne : he stu¬ died not only theology, but history, poetry, and philosophy. Agobard, bishop of Lyons, in the midst of the general neglect of physical study, wrote a treatise on hail and thunder, in which he endeavoured to correct the absurd suppositions of the vulgar ; and another, in wdiich he inquired into the natural causes of an epidemic epilepsy. Grimbald, invited from France to England by Alfred, greatly promoted the study of letters in England. Eric,^ a monk of Auxerre, was preceptor to Lotharius, the son of the emperor Charles the Bald. He appears from his writings to have been better acquainted with the Greek and Latin tongues than most of his contemporaries, and to have been capable of producing, from bis own stores, more useful works than his Collectanea, which, after the bad taste of the age, is a collection of scraps from Bede, Augustine, Jerom, and others. The feeble exertions of these and other learned men, in the schools and monasteries which Avere dispersed through the Western world, were wholly insufficient to destroy the empire of barbarism, at a period when public affairs, and private luanners, united to establish it. Whilst civil discord reigned through almost every part of Europe ; in the midst of the wars of the Normans in France, the dissension of the brothers Lotharius, Charles, and Louis, and the irruptions of the Huns into Pannonia and Germany, and of the Normans and Danes into England, it was impossible that learning and philosophy should flourish ; especially when it must be added, that those who alone might seem likely to promote them, the monks and clergy, were sunk in luxury, idleness, drunkenness, and debauchery. It is not therefore difficult to assign suflicient causes for the ignorance of this period, which prevailed to such a shameful degree, that instructions were given by the pope to the bisliops, that they should make inquiries through the parishes of their respective districts, whether the officiating clergy could * Maibillon, Sec. iv. Baned. p. i. t Kd. Schniink. Traj. ad llhen. 1711. 4to. EpisL Eginli. Ed. Weinsk. Frank. 1707. + Tritheni. c. 261. § Pet. Diacon. de Illu.st. Vir. Casin. c. 8. II Cave, Hist. L. p. 438. Dom. de Colon. Hist. Lit. de Lyon. t. ii. p. 93. ^ Fabr. 1. c. t. ii. p. 327. Maibill. Ann. t. i. p. 422. 486 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book Vli: read the Gospels and Epistles correctly, and give them a literal interpreta-j tion. Another part of this inquiry into the learning of the clergy was, “I whether they could repeat, memoriter, the Athanasian creed, and under-\ stand its meaning., and were able to explain it in familiar language.*^ Gislemar, an archbishop of Rheims, being called upon before his consen oration to read a portion of the Gospels, was found so shamefully ignoranG as not to understand the literal meaning of the passage. The thick darkness, which had now so long overspread the world, was] not in the smallest degree dispersed in the Tenth Century. At th^ beginning of this century, in the synod of Rheims, among other grievous complaints, it was said,f “ Whilst even at Rome scarcely any one has as much learning as would be necessary for a porter, with what front shall any one dare to teach what he himself has not learned?” The wretched state of learning and philosophy at this time may be inferred from the narrow limits of that course of instruction, which was supposed to compre* hend the whole circle of knowledge. The trivium and quadrivium, as already explained, in which natural, moral, and metaphysical science was unknown, were now the utmost extent of the learning of the scliools; and very few advanced beyond the trivium. If dialectics were more studied and practised than in the preceding century, they were applied to no other purpose than to maintain frivolous, but often fierce, contentious on theo¬ logical dogmas. John of Salisbury complains “ Men at this time waste their whole lives in controversy ; even disputing in the public streets. When too old for any other employment, they still retain their fondness for debate; always seeking, but never arriving at truth, because they are ignorant of the ancients, or disdain to adopt their opinions, for ever framing new errors of their own, or, through poverty of iudgiuent, retailing the opinions and sayings of others, and compiling an inconsistent* mass, out of which each author would find it difficult to recover his own.” These contentions may not improperly be considered as the infancy of the scholastic philosophy ; they did not, however, hinder the goieral preva¬ lence of a most astonishing degree of ignorance. The records of these times mention § a bishop of Paderborne, who had so entirely neglected the study, not only of the quadrivium, but the trivium, that he was not able, to read the psalter without committing the most ludicrous blundei's.]] This universal ignorance was accompanied with universal superstition and cre¬ dulity. It is at present scarcely to be conceived how easily the most extrava¬ gant and absurd tales of marvellous events and miracles were believed, and how much influence the clergy, by means of these tales, not\vithstandirig their heinous immorality, every where obtained. How far corruption of manners now prevailed among them, may be conceived from the advice of Edgar, king of England, to his clergy,^ in which he upbraids Ihetu with luxury, grossness of language, lasciviousness of manners, and neglect of duty. When the clergy, who alone pretended to learning, were thus infamous for their vices, it was impossible that learning itself should not fall into contempt among the laity. Every trace of literature and philo¬ sophy must at this period have been lost, had they not met with a few zealous patrons and able supporters. the patrons of literature which this age produced, are the Among * Reginon. de Disciplina Eccl. sub. init. f Raron. ad Ann. 992. u. 2.'5. J Metalog. 1. ii. c. 7. § Leibnitz, Coll. Scr. Rruiis. t. i. p. boo. II He read, Benedic domine rfgibua et reginis mulls et miilabus tuis, lor famuUs et faviulobus tuis. ^ Spelman. Conf. Baron, ad Ann. 925. n. 9, 10. Chap. 2. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 487 emperors Otho the First and Second, who had themselves some learning, and afforded provision and encouragement to learned men ;* and Athel- STAN and Edgar, kings of England, the former of whom employed certain Jewish converts to translate the Old Testament into English, and j himself wrote several books in English and Latin, among which was a I treatise on astrology. f Among the supporters of literature we find, in England, Bridferth,;}; ; who, besides commenting upon Bede, wrote a treatise De Principiis [ Mathemaiicis, “On Mathematical Principles,” and Computus Latinorum, Groecorum, Hcehrceorum, et Anglorum, “ On the Methods of Computing I among the Latins, Greeks, Hebrews, and English,” preserved in the , Bodleian Library; Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury, who, besides ( the encouragement which he gave to the study of liberal arts in others, himself wrote several books, among which is a treatise “ On Occult Philo¬ sophy;” Ethelwold and Oswald, who with Dunstan, were preceptors to Edgar. In France, Remigius, Constantine, and Abbo, monks j who appear to have been, for the period in which they lived, well read in I letters and philosophy ; and in Germany, Nanno, of Stavern, in West bViesland, who, in the tenth century, wrote a Commentary upon Plato, De Legibus et de Republica ; and upon Aristotle, De Ccclo et Mundo, et de Ethicis : Baldric, preceptor to Bruno, tlie brother of Otho the Great; and others. § One of the most celebrated among the learned of this country was Gerbert, a native of Orleans, archbishop of Rheims, and afterwards Pope Sylvester II. He merits a distinguished place in the list of natural philosophers, on account of the skill which he at this period acquired in mathematics, mechanics, hydraulics, and astronomy. Dithmar, writing concerning Gerbert, says:|] “He was well skilled in astronomical obser¬ vations, and far excelled his contenqioraries in various kinds of knowledge. After his banishment from France, he fied to the emperor Otho, and ' during his stay with him at Magdeburg, he made a clock, which he cor¬ rected by observing through a tube^ a certain star by which sailors are guided in navigation.” The knowledge of nature which Gerbert pos¬ sessed, so far surpassed that of his contemporaries, that they thought him possessed of magical power; and Benno, a cardinal who owed him a grudge i'or his opposition to the see of Rome, invented and circidated a tale of his holding converse with the devil.** His Epistles, of which one hundred and sixty-one are still extant, contain many curious particulars respecting natural philosophy. •|'-|' Sylvester IL died in the year 1003. Numerous causes concurred, in the Eleventh Century, to rivet the chains of ignorance. The eruptions of barbarous nations spread terror and desolation through many of the more civilized parts of Europe. The Christian world, prompted by superstition, undertook the romantic design of expelling the Turks from Palestine. Besides this, literature and philosophy met with new interruptions and discouragements. The small portion of learning which remained was studiously confined within the walls of monasteries by ecclesiastics, who found that the best way to * IMaibill. Prsef. in Sec. v. liened. Laun. c. 21. Conring. Ant. Acad. Supp. 42. t Pits. p. 173. X Leland. c. 136. § Fabric. Bib. Lat. Med. t. v. Conring. Ant. Sujtp. 4-3. II Chron. 1. vi. p. 309. Conf. Tritbem. c. 301. Latin, p. 79. ^ Telescopes not being yet in use, this was probably nothing more than an open tube, intended to keep off the surrounding rays of light. ** I,eo Urbevitan. in Deliciis Erudit. Lamii, t. ii. p. 163. Baron. Ann. 100 ff Ed. Masson. Par, 1611. 4to. Fabr. Bib. L. Med. t. iii. p ‘>27. ‘ 488 OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE Book VII. preserve the undisturbed possession of their wealth and power, was to keep the laity still more ignorant than themselves. At the same time, the laity were, through superstitious credulity, not disinclined, for the safety of their souls, to submit their understandings to the direction of the priests; and were easily persuaded, that learning and philosophy were nothing more than handmaids to theology, and therefore could be of no use but to the clergy. And, indeed, how could the unlearned think otherwise, when they saw, that the learned themselves made no other use of philosophy than to furnish them with weapons, with which they fought against each other with as much violence, as the Christians against the Saracens ? Men employed in civil or military life would take little interest in these contro- i versies ; they would freely leave the clergy in possession of their philo¬ sophy, whatever it might be, and be content to admire, without imitating, 't a kind of excellence which they did not fully comprehend, and which they J saw productive of no good effects. Even among the clergy, most of those | who aspired after some distinction were contented with making themselves j masters of the principles and practice of music ; an art which was at this time in such high repute, that no one who was ignorant of it was judged qualified for any scholastic or theological office ; and they who excelled in it were ranked among philosophers of consummate erudition. So violent was ) the passion for music, that even prinees were ambitious of excelling in it. i Robert, a king of France, was eminently skilled in this art, and acquired I great credit by singing with his clergy.* Notwithstanding all this, it does i not appear that music was commonly studied or taught upon mathematical | principles. Some improvement, however, the art received from the monks i of this period. Guido Aretine, a Benedictine, acquired great fame by expressing the musical notes in a nevv scale, nt, re, mi, fa, so, la, in order 1o facilitate the learning of this art.j- He is said to have taken the words , ' from a hymn of Paulus Diaconus on John Baptist Ut queant laxis Re sonare fibris y[l ra gestoriim ¥ A muli iuortcm So he polhitis La bits reatam, ' Sancte Joannes. He made this invention public in his Micrologos, or two books Z)e Mu- sica. After all, this invention was no very material improvement upon the ancients; for before Guido, the musical scale had tyventy notes; and the octaves were as well distinguished among the Egyptians by seven vowels, or, by the method which Pope Gregory introduced, the use of the first seven letters of the alphabet.§ Nevertheless, the eleventh century was not without its learned men. Though science and the arts met with little encouragement from the princes of this period, there were not wanting scholars, whose genius and industry enabled them in some measure to rise above the difficulties of their situations, and whose literary and philosophical labours cast some rays of light upon this gloomy period. Oliver of Malmsbury excelled his contemporaries in the knowledge of mathematical and natural phi¬ losophy. Ingulphus, secretary to William the Conqueror, devoted him¬ self to study, in the university of Oxford, and made Aristotle his guide in philosophy, and Cicero in rhetoric. || Eulbert, a pupil of Gerbert, who * Trithem. c. 304. f Si^eherl, c. 144, et in (llirnn. aJ Ann. 1023. I \V'eizitis in Ilcortologin, ]i. 263. § Vos.':, cle Scieiit. Math. c. 22. sect. 7. Et tie Viribus Rytlimi, p. 01. II Fabr. t. iii. p. 80. Chap. 2. CHRISTIANS IN THE MIDDLE AGE. 489 cnjo5'ed the patronage of Robert king of France, and of Canute king of England, was esteemed one of the most learned men of the age.* Be- RENGER, of Cologne, was a great master of the dialectic art, and displayed much courage as well as good sense by the opposition which he made against the doctrine of transubstantiation ; an absurd dogma, which nothing but such a total neglect of philosophy as disgraced the Middle Age could have produced. Bruno, J of Cologne, a pupil of Berenger, and preceptor and counsellor to Pope Urban the Second, retired into monastic life, and founded the order of Carthusians. Lanfranc, arch¬ bishop of Canterburj', opposed the heresy of Berenger, and employed the weapons of dialectics with great ingenuity and address in defence of tran- i substantiation. His writings § are celebrated for the purity of their I Latinity. Anselm, || who was also preferred to the archbishopric of ! Canterbury, applied the subtlety of logic to theology. As an example of his refinement may be mentioned his arguments for the being of God, de- • rived from the abstract idea of Deity, afterwards resumed by Des Cartes. I His writings, 51 On the Will of God ; Free Will; Truth; The Consistency of the Doctrine of Divine Prescience, with that of predestination, and other points, which abound in logical and metaphysical abstractions, entitle him to the honour of having largely contributed towards preparing the way for ' the Scholastic system, which soon afterwards universally prevailed. To this list must be added Hermannus,** a self-taught German, who wrote i Latin corrections of some part of Aristotle’s works, and who seems to have been the first writer in the West who translated Arabic books into Latin. On the whole, though Gerbert, Anselm, and some others, were versed i in the subtleties of logic and metaphysics, they were so far from restoring true science, that they involved the study of philosophy in new embarrass¬ ments. The few who, by the help of superior genius and industry, raised themselves above the ordinary level of the times, lost themselves in the clouds of metaphysics. They were wholly employed in attempting to explain abstract notions of theology, by terms almost without meaning ; hereby accumulating frivolous controversies, and obtruding upon the ; church new refinements in theological speculations, which soon grew up into that monstrous form, to be described in the next book, the Scholastic pliilosophy. A circumstance whieh greatly increased the confusion and obscurity which prevailed in the schools at this period was, that for want of an ac- I curate knowledge of the Greek tongue, dialectics were not studied in the original writings of Aristotle, but in the wretched Manual of Augustine, ! which was generally used, in the public schools. The original works of ' Aristotle, notwithstanding thepains which Nannus, Hermannus, and others, had taken to translate select parts, lay neglected till the beginning of the , twelfth century, when his logical and metaphysical writings, lately brought from Constantinople, were rendered into Latin, and read in the university of Paris. From this and other causes, the study of dialectics produced nothing but frivolous disputes and fruitless logomachies ; of which this century affords a memorable example in the controversy wdiich was raised by Rosceline,'|”|' whether tlie personal distinctions in the Trinity be real or * Tritlicm. c. 315. Laun. c. 40. 1 Laun. c. 5. W. Malmsb. Hist. Angl. I. iii. p. 113. Sigebert, c. 15 t. ! I Laun. c. 4, § Ed. Par. 1G46. || Tritbeni. c. 351. 51 *^75. 1727. i '** Tritlieni. Ann. IIer,'5. I. i. p. 148. Fabr. L. Med. t. iii. p. 705. ft II. Gandavensis de Sc. Ec. c. 5. p. 118. 490 or THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. Book VII. nominal; whence afterwards arose the metaphysical sects of the Realists and Nominalists.* CHAPTER HI. OP THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. SECTION I. OF THE STATE OF PHILOSOPHY IN GENERAL FROM THE TWELFTH CENTURY TO THE REVIVAL OF LETTERS. The dialectic philosophy, loaded with metaphysical subtleties, which had been studied and professed by sevei’al of the clergy towards the close of the eleventh century, began, at the opening of the twelfth, to be publicly taught in the schools, and to take the lead of every kind of learning. Abelard, who was a young man at this time, gave this account of the com¬ mencement of his studies at Paris :-{• “ Preferring the study of logic to all others, and the disputation of the schools to the trophies of war, I entirely devoted myself to this pursuit, and, like a Peripatetic philosopher, travelled through different countries, exercising myself, wherever an opportunity offered, in these contests. At length I came to Paris, where this kind of learning had for some time been cultivated, and put myself under the tuition of an eminent and able preceptor, William de Champeaux.” He proceeds to i-elate several particulars concerning the disputes Avhich were carried on in this school upon the subject of universals, which sufficiently prove, that philosophy was wasting its strength upon trifles, and that it was now, perhaps, more than ever, the employment of the philosophical w'orld, to dispute de lana caprina. If it be asked, why dialectic philosophy was at this time in such high esteem, the obvious answer is, that it was supposed to be the key of theo¬ logy, without which it would be impossible to unlock the mysteries of sacred wisdom. It was on account of this supposed alliance between logic and theology, that the former was made the principal object of study in all the schools, and that those who excelled in the dialectic art were regarded with the highest admiration, and attended by crowds of pupils. Besides this general cause for the universal prevalence of a taste for logical dis¬ putations, there were other collateral circumstances, which at this period contributed to produce the same effect. The Aristotelian philosophy had now for several centuries been studied by the Saracens, and was at this time taught in their schools in Spain. These schools were visited by many of the Western Christians, who learned 1 , • V ') h I r I < * Vidend. Fabric. Bibl. Ecc). Hamb. 1718. fol. Triihemius de Script. Eccl Miraei t Auctarium de Script. Eccl J, Sarisber Folicrat. et Metalog. Op. Lugd. Bat. 1638. ( Laiiii. de Scholis celeb. Hamb. 17*7. Conrin. Aiitiq. Acad. Diss. iii. Fabr. Bibl. Lat. ij Med. (!t Infim. Reclienberg. de Orig. Theol. Myst. ap. Exerc. in N. Test.^ . I Hist.^Calain. suar. c. iii. _ * | Chap. 3. S. 1. OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. 491 Arabic, that they might be able to read translations of Aristotle, and other philosophical writers, in that language, and who afterwards translated many Arabic books into the European tongues. The first person who undertook this task, seems to have been Constantine Afer,* a monk of Cassino. He travelled into the East, and spent thirty years among the Arabians, Persians, Indians, and Egyptians, making himself master of the learning of each nation ; after which he returned to the monastery of Cassino, and spent the rest of his days in translating books from various languages. He is said to have been master of Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldaic, Arabic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Indian, Greek, Latin, and Italian. Others were inspfred with the same desire of acquiring that learning among the Arabians, which their own country would not afford. Daniel Morley,-]' of Norfolk, a student in the universities of Oxford and Paris, visited Spain, and learned mathe¬ matics in the Arabic tongue at Toledo ; and after his return wrote a book, De inferiori et superiori Parte Mundi, “ On the Lower and Upper Part i of the World,” which he dedicated to John, Bishop of Norwich ; and an¬ other, De Principiis Mathematicis, “ On the Principles of Mathematics.” Robert Retin, archdeacon of Pampelona, in Spain, after travelling among the Saracens, both in Europe and Arabia, wrote a Latin translation of the Koran. Adelard,§ an English monk of the Benedictine mon¬ astery at Bath, in the reign of Henry the First, went among the Saracens in search of mathematical and physical science, and, having learned Arabic, translated from that language many Greek writings, among which were the Elements of Euclid. Other translators appeared about the same time, by whose industry the logical and metaphysical writings of Aristotle were dispersed through France, Germany, and Italy. || Another cause which served to establish a general taste for the Peripa¬ tetic philosophy, and particularly for the Aristotelian logic, was, that about this period many Greek copies of the writings of Aristotle were brought from Constantinople into the West. Before this time, though they had been read in the original by a few monks more learned than the rest, the greater -part had been contented with the translations of Victorinus and Boethius. But, at the beginning of the twelfth century, the original writings of Aristotle were studied in Paris; whence they were introduced among the Germans, by Otho of Freisingen, in the time of Abelard.^ The guardians of the church observed with an apprehensive and jealous eye the inundation of new opinions, which this fondness for logical dis- ! putations introduced. Almaric, who taught theology at Paris, appeared to the second Parisian council, in the year 1209, to have imbibed many errors from the study of Aristotle, and fell under their ecclesiastical cen¬ sure. David de Dinanto, a disciple of Almaric, soon after shared the same fate : and the writings of both, which, after all, contained doctrines rather Platonic than Peripatetic, were sentenced to be publicly burned. This sentence was followed by a general prohibition of the use of the phy¬ sical and metaphysical writings of Aristotle in the schools, by the Synod of Paris, and afterwards, under Pope Innocent the Third, by the Council of the Lateran.** These violent measures, howev r, were so far from exterminating the * Pet. Diacon. Auct. ad Leonis Cbron. Cassin. 1. iii. c. 35. Trithem. c. 286. t Leland, c. 220. Pits. p. 254. X Huet. de clar. hit. p. 230. § \V. Malmsb. ). ii. c. 10. Leland, c. 171. . II Trithem. c. 477. Ann. llirs. t. i. p. 596. j Gassend, Lxerc. Parad. adv. Arist. E.\. iii. Laun. dc Fort. Arist. c. 1. lleltnold. de Slavis, 1. ii. c. 9. I ** Laun. de Fort. Ar. I. c. Rigord. in Piilioei und. Script, p. 208. I 492 OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. Book Vir. evils against which the}’’ were directed, that they in fact increased them ; for when those who adopted this new method of philosophising perceived the jealousy and displeasure which it raised among the heads of councils and synods, they became so much the more tenacious of the right which had been invaded, and zealous in support of their innovations. The fond¬ ness for the subtleties of Aristotelian logic and metaphysics became so general, that the orthodox clergy complained, that scholars spent their whole time in disputation.* Their complaints and their prohibitions were, however, alike ineffectual ; and it was at length found necessary, by degrees, and under certain restrictions, to favour the study of Aristotle. His dia¬ lectics, physics, and metaphysics, were by express statute received into the university of Paris ; but it was w’ith this limitation, j- that no one should be permitted to enter upon the study of them, who had not previously devoted six years to learning; a prudent precaution, by means of which the pro¬ fessors in the ancient schools secured to themselves a succession of scholars. It was further ordered, J in the year 12Sl,by a bull of Pope Gregory the Ninth, that only such books of Aristotle should be used in the schools, as had been examined and purged from errors; and that students in theology should not be ambitious of the reputation of philosophers, but should con¬ fine themselves to such subjects of disputation, as might be determined by the theological writings of the fathers. In several other countries, the Aristotelian philosophy was received with less opposition. In England the writings of the Stagirite were read with great avidity ; and in Germany and Italy, the Emperor Frederic the Second, a patron of letters, greatly encouraged the study of Aristotle, and other ancient writers, by employing learned men to^ translate their works into Latin ; but for want of a competent knowledge of the Greek language, or through a scarcity of copies of the Greek text, translations were chiefly made from the Arabic corrections. It was in this imperfect representation of the original that Aristotle was commonly read, till the time of the taking of Constantinople, when many copies of his works were brought into the West. Whence it is easy to perceive, that the philosophers of this period must have had no very perfect knowledge of the doctrines of this obscure and subtle writer, which, nevertheless, they acknowledged as of oracular authority. The truth is, that they received the Peripatetic philosophy through the medium of the Saracenic, and were in reality as much indebted to Averroes as to Aristotle. The name of Aristotle, however, from the end of the twelfth century, obtained universal dominion; and so far were his writings, after this time, from falling under the censure of councils and popes, that the Aristotelian and Saracenic philosophy became the main pillars of the ecclesiastical hierarchy. In the year 1366,§ cardinals were appointed by Pope Urban tlie Fifth to settle the manner in which the writings of Aristotle should be studied in the university of Paris; and in the year 14.52, Charles the Seventh ordered the works of Aristotle to be read and publicly explained in that university. Thus the union between the Peripatetic philosophy and the Christian religion was confirmed, and Aristotle became not only the interpreter, but even the judge, of St. Paul.|| During the period from the twelfth to the fourteenth century, though multitudes professed to philosophise, true philosophy and learning made little progress. Instead of uniting their endeavours to enlighten mankind, tlie Scholastics lost themselves in metaplij^sical darkness. Tiiey carried * Gualter contr. Hseres. apiid Laun. ji. 1S7. t Laun. de Fort. Arist. c, iv. + L. c. c. vi. § Laun. 1. c. p. 202. II Laun. c. ix. p. 210. Patric. Discuss. Perip. t. i. 1. xii. p. 162. 1. xiii. p. 613. Chap. 3. S. 2. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 493 on their disputes with such veiieinence and acrimony, that many ludicrous, and many bloody, frays happened among them. Nominalists, Realists, Verbalists, Formalists, Thomists, Scotists and Occamists, were at open war among each other. The whole world was disturbed with the idle contests of the Scholastic philosophy from the twelfth century to the Reformation j and so deeply did this philosophy take root, that even to this day it has not been entirely extirpated. The compilation of the canon law, in the twelfth century, by Gratian, in his Discordantiurn Canoniim Concordia, “ Harmony of Discordant Canons,” and the subsequent union of the canon law with that of theology and philosophy, must also be mentioned among the causes which prevented the revival of knowledge.* This compilation, made without judgment, under the authority of the Emperor Frederic the First, became a body of ecclesiastical jurisprudence, which the clergy were required to study and observe. This code was even made an authoritative guide in moral doc¬ trine and discipline, and prevented the study of ethics till the middle of the fifteenth century, when the morals of Aristotle were again permitted to be read. But the worst evil was, that they who had framed this unnatural union of canon law, scholastic philosophy and theology, finding it exceed¬ ingly conducive to their own emolument, resolutely set their faces against all innovations, and proscribed with their whole authority those learned men, who had the boldness to attempt further improvements in philosophy. Of this the history of the persecution of Reuchlin will, in the sequel, afford a memorable example.-]' SECTION II.-OF THE SCHOLASTICS. V The Scholastics, whose history we now proceed to relate in detail, seem to have borrowed their names from those professors, who, in the public schools of cathedrals and monasteries, taught philosophy and the liberal arts. In the colleges of Canons, which, in the times of Charlemagne and Louis the Pious, were erected near the episcopal churches or cathedrals, and in the abbacies of monasteries, it was customary to have preceptors, or Scholastic doctors, to whom the charge of the education of youth was com¬ mitted ; and great care was at first taken, by those who founded or sup¬ ported these schools, that able and learned men should be appointed to perform the offices of instruction, j; The name thus introduced, remained, when the care of the schools was no longer in the hands of Scholastic doctors. For when emperors, princes, and bishops, had, from a desire of banishing ignorance and barbarism, enriched this useful office with ample endowments, wealth produced indolence ; the labour of teaching was trans¬ ferred to those who would undertake it for the smallest salary ; and the Scholastic doctors themselves (for, that they might enjoy the profits of this establishment, they still retained the name) paid little attention to letters, I * Ziegler, de Orig. et Increm. Jur. Canon. f Vidend. J. Sarisb. Metalog. 1. ii. c. 7. 1. iv. c. 24, 25. Friend. Hist. Med. p. iii. p. 2. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 123. Bibl. Lat. Med. t, i. p. 29. t. v. p. 551. Jamesii Eclog. MSS. Ox. et Cantab. Liid. Vives de Cans. Corr. Art. I. v. Campanella de Gentilisino non retinendo, p. 19. Hottinger, Hist. Ecc. Sec. xii. Martene Anecd. t. iv. p. 163. Bulsei Hist. Ac. Par. t. iii. p. 24. N. Alex. Hist. Ec. t. vii. p. 75. Buddeus de Haeres. ex Phil. Arist. Obs. Hal. Lat. t. i. Obs. 15. Thomas de Exiist. Mundi Stoic. Diss. xiv. Petri de Vineis. 1. iii. E|). 69. I Conring. Ant. Ac. Supp. 39. Tribbechov. de Div. Scholast. c. i. p. 32. 494 OF THE SCHOLASTICS. Book VII . and only vied with each other in luxury and debauchery. A lively picture of the infamous lives of these Scholastics is drawn in Speculum Humance VitcB, “ Mirror of Human Life,” written by Roderic bishop of Zamora, in Spain, in which he complains,* “ that they were no longer learned themselves, nor able to teach others ; that they never visited the schools ; that they united, with the most contemptible ignorance, the most shameful depravity of manners ; and that, through fear lest their places should be filled up by men more learned than themselves, they gave no encourage¬ ment to erudition.” In the schools of several monasteries, this noble in¬ stitution was less abused ; and some of the Scholastics were employed in instructing, not only those young men who were devoted to a monastic life, but the sons of noblemen and others of the laity. And this was the chief means of preserving alive the embers of science and learning, in the dark period between the eighth and the twelfth century. From the schools of monasteries and cathedrals, at length, sprung public ichools and academies, in which the liberal arts and sacred learning were taught ; and tlie method of philosophising, which had prevailed in the monasteries, and among the ecclesiastics, was transferred to the professors of philosophy and literature in these public schools. What that method was, sufficiently appears from the particulars Mdiich have been already re¬ lated concerning the philosophy of the Middle Age. An opinion having commonly prevailed, that philosophy was only to be considered as a handmaid to theology, and to be pursued merely to furnish weapons for theological controversy, the dialectical branch of philosophy was chielly studied, first in the Institutes of Augustine, a book written in the manner of the Stoics, and afterwards in the writings of Aristotle. The professors of philosophy, or the Scholastics, perceiving that eminence in the dialectic art was the sure road to popularity and preferment, devoted their principal attention to this study; and the schools, now confided to men who placed their chief merit in the skill with which they handled the weapons of intel¬ lectual warfare, produced nothing but polemics. The spirit of disputation, transferred from the old seminaries of learning to every new establishment, was disseminated through Europe; and education was, every where, nothing else but a course of instruction in dialectics and in metaphysics. The general introduction of the writings of Aristotle into the schools established a taste for this study. The whole body of the clergy employed themselves in solving abstruse and subtle questions, which were always merely specu¬ lative, and often merely verbal. In this manner, the Aristotelian dialectics became by degrees intimately connected with theology, and on this account obtained the zealous patronage of those who presided in the church ; so that almost the whole Christian church became Scholastics.-j- Under all this appearance of philosophising, it must, however, be re¬ marked, that nothing of the true spirit of philosophy was to be found. The art of reasoning was employed, not in the free investigation of truth, but merely in supporting the doctrines of the Romish church, the canons of which denounced a perpetual anathema and excommunication upon all who should attempt to corrupt the faith ; and bound the clergy, in the form of a solemn oath, to defend the papal see, and the institutions of the holy fathers, against all opposition. J Hence philosophy became nothing more than an instrument in the hands of^the pontiff, to confirm and extend his spiritual dominion. Some opposition, indeed, the speculative philosophy of * L. ii. c. 17. f Tribbechov. de Div. Scbolasticis, c. iii. p. 96. Ib. Pra-f. Ilumanni, p. 20. X Decret. Dist. 2-3. Deer. Greg, de Jur. p. 287. Chap. 3. S. 2. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 495 the Scholastics met with, from that mystical system, derived from the en¬ thusiasm of the Alexandrian school, which Joannes Scotus Erigena, from the spurious books of Dionysius, introduced into the Christian church ; a system which professed to raise the mind from the barren pursuit of Scho¬ lastic controversy, to the pure and sublime contemplation of God and Divine things. But the only consequence of this opposition was, at first, to excite mutual jealousies and animosity between the Mystics and Scho¬ lastics, and afterwards to produce a coalition between them highly injurious to the church. Many disputes have arisen concerning the origin of the Scholastic phi¬ losophy, which may easily be settled by a careful comparison of the facts, which have been already related, concerning the state of philosophy in the Middle Age. The case was briefly this ; The high reputation which St. Augustine obtained in the Christian church, gave his treatise on dialectics universal authority, and led those I who were inclined to philosophise, implicitly to follow his method of apply¬ ing the subtleties of Stoic reasoning, and the mysteries of the Platonic doctrine, to the explanation of the sacred doctrines of Revelation. The dialectic art, thus introduced, was further encouraged by Latin versions of some of the writings of Aristotle, and of Porphyry’s Introduction to the Categories. The study of logical subtleties was pursued under these guides in the schools of the monasteries, particularly in Ireland, whence many scholars from England and Scotland carried this kind of philosophy into their own countries ; and from Britain it afterwards passed into France, and other parts of Europe. From this time, the ecclesiastics, who, during a long period of tumult and barbarism, kept the small remains of learning and philosophy in their own hands, made no other use of them than as pillars to support the hier¬ archy, or as weapons of defence against its adversaries. The whole history of the church, from the eighth to the eleventh century, proves that Scholastic men, that is, the professors of philosophy and theology in the monastic schools, studied and taught philosophy only for this purpose ; and there can be no doubt, that the violent ecclesiastical disputes of these times fostered that disposition towards subtle refinement in speculation, which at length brought the Scholastic philosophy to maturity. Towards the close of the eleventh century, this spirit so generally prevailed, that disputation upon theology sind philosophy became the chief occupation and amusement of the learned ; and, in process of time, various sects sprung up, in which questions purely logical were confounded with points of theology, and dialectics were applied to the explanation of the scriptures. This kind of philosophy was taught, not only in the monastic schools, but in public academies ; and Aristotle, at first imperfectly represented in Arabic and Latin versions, and afterwards brought into full view in his own original writings, obtained sovereign authority in the whole Christian world. Thus the Scholastic philosophy appears not to have been the invention of any one man, but to have risen up by almost imperceptible degrees from the fifth to the twelfth century, when it attained its maturity.* The Scholastics are commonly divided into three distinct ages ; the first, from Lanfranc, or Abelard, and his disciple Peter Lombard, to the middle of the thirteenth century, wdien Albert^flourished ; the second, from that * Budd. Isa^j. Hist. Theol. 1. ii. c. 1. sect. 7. Dupin. Metli. Stud. Theol. c. ii. p. 19, 21. Alsted. Encyclop. t. i. p. 105. Thomas, Orat. xii. p. 266. Heuinann. Praef. p. 13. J. Sarisbur. Metalog. 1. ii. c. 9. Thom. Hist. Sap. et Stult. p. iii. p. 226, 228. Maibil- lon. de Stud. Monast. p. ii. 496 OF THE SCHOLASTICS. Book VII. time to the year 1330; and the third, from the last period to the refor- } mation. After Lanfranc, Anselm, and llosceline, who have been already men- | tinned, in the first age of the Scholastics arose Willi am de Champeaux,* 1 appointed bishop of Catalaun in the year 1113, and afterwards archbishop i of Paris. He taught dialectics in the university of Paris with great ap- ( plause. He maintained the doctrine of the Realists, who held that all ^ individual things partake of the one essence of their species, and are only ;■ modified by accident. He had the appellation of the Venerable Doctor. ^ From the school of William de Champeaux arose 'Peter Abelard, born in Palais, in Bretagne, in the year 1079. He early applied himself, 1 with great success, to the study of metaphysics and logic, under Rosceline, who established the sect of the Nominalists, maintaining, in opposition to the Realists, that universals have no real existence out of the mind, and are to be referred wholly to words or names. From nature and habit Abelard f possessed a wonderful subtlety of thought, a most retentive memory, and uncommon facility and fluency of speech. After travelling through several countries to improve himself in the arts of disputation, he became a student of dialectics under William de Champeaux, in Paris. But he soon ventured to contradict the opinions of his master, and held disputations with him, in which, in the judgment of many of his fellow- students, he was frequently victorious. This circumstance, at length, awakened the jealousy of the preceptor, and inflamed the ambition of the pupil. The consequence was, that Abelard soon left William de Chani- peaux, and opened a school of his own, at Melun, in the vicinity of Paris, where the splendour of his superior talents in disputation attracted general admiration, and eclipsed the fame of Champeaux. The violent exertions which were necessary to support his rising repu¬ tation, and maintain his ground against his numerous enemies (for Cham¬ peaux had many followers) brought Abelard into a state of debility, which rendered it necessary that he should for a while retire from his labours. After an absence of two years, which he passed in his native Country, he found, upon his return, that his preceptor had taken the monastic habit among the regular canons, but still continued to teach rhetoric and logic in tlie schools of the monasteries. In hope of regaining his popularity, Abelard again visited his school, and renewed his controversy with Cham- peanx on the points then agitated between the Nominalists and Realists ; and he argued with such strength and subtlety, that the pupils of Cham¬ peaux came over in crowds to Abelard. Even the professor of the former school of Champeaux resigned his chair to the young philosopher. This created a violent opposition on the part of Champeaux, who had interest sufficient to obtain the appointment of a new professor : upon which Abe¬ lard retired for a while to Melun; but as soon as he heard that Champeaux had withdrawn into the country, he went to Paris and opened a school upon Mount St. Genevieve, where he easily vanquished his rival, the new professor of the cathedral school, who, through mortification, entered into a monastery. Champeaux now resumed the contest ; and it was continued with great violence, till the former was preferred to the see of Chalons, and the latter, probably through an envious desire of attaining equal honours with his antagonist, remqved to Laon, to study theology under * Abelard. Hist. Cal. suar. c. 2. Pagi ad Ann. 1121. Oiidin. de Sc. E. t. ii. p. OCk Saminarthan. t. ii. p. 504. Marlene Anecdot. t. v. p. 877. f Hist. Calamitatum suaruin, Par. 1610. 4to. cum. Annot. Du Chesne. Vit. Pet. Abelard, a Geryasio, Par. 1720. Bayle. , Chap. 3. S. 2. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 497 Anselm. But finding his lectures (as he himself says) like trees abounding with leaves, but barren of fruit, he soon left him, and began himself to lecture in theology, after the mannef of Anselm, by commenting upon some part of the sacred scriptures. To give the hearers of Anselm an unequi¬ vocal proof of his extensive learning and ready ability, he undertook to explain, on the shortest notice, any portion of the scriptures, and illustrate it by pertinent quotations from the fathers. The passage given him for this purpose was the beginning of the prophecy of Ezekiel, which he the next day explained, in a theological lecture, with so much success, that all his hearers expressed the highest admiration of his talents. Anselm, through jealousy, pretended that Abelard was too young a man to read theology, and obliged him to desist from his lectures. Abelard, upon this, returned to Paris, where his explanations of the scriptures soon raised his reputation to such a height, that he had crowded auditories, and obtained great profit from his lectures. In these philosophical and sacred labours, Abelard was interrupted by his celebrated amour with Heloise, the beautiful niece of an avaricious canon named Fulbert, who employed this young man, upon easy terms, to become her private preceptor. The particulars of the story are well known, and might not perhaps perfectly comport with the gravity of philosophical history. Suffice it to say, that Abelard’s fair pupil made a much more rapid progress in the lessons of love, than in those of philoso¬ phy ; and that when Fulbert discovered that his niece’s studies had taken a turn so contrary to his wishes, his indignation fell with such cruel severity upon the young preceptor, that in vexation and despair, rather than from devotion, he gave himself up to the monastic life in the abbey of St. Denys. Heloise, who had already retired into the convent of Argenteuil, gave the only proof that now remained of her unalienable attachment to Abelard, by taking the veil. Abelard, in consequence of the freedom with which he censured the monks of St. Denys, became so obnoxious to them that he was obliged to leave the monastery. He now' withdrew to the monastery of Theobard, count of Champagne, where he resumed his public lectures with a degree of popularity which rendered him an object of jealousy to other professors. Alberic and Lotulf, two preceptors in the school at Rheims, apprehensive for the reputation and success of their seminary, became inveterate enemies of Abelard, and took occasion, from a treatise which he wrote upon the Trinity, to charge him with heresy. The archbishop of Rheims listened to this accusation, and summoned a council at Soissons, in the year 1 120, which convicted him of heresy,* without knowledge enough of his system to understand wherein the heresy consisted. The persecution was carried on with unrelenting severity ; the book was ordered to be burned, and its author, after making his recantation by reciting the Athanasian creed, to retire to the cloister of St. Medard. He was soon, indeed, by the com¬ mand of the pope’s legate, restored to the convent of St. Denys ; but he here found himself still surrounded with enemies. Happening in private conversation to maintain that St. Denys, the founder of the monastery, was not Dionysius, the Areopagite, mentioned in scripture, but a Corinthian bishop, the abbot threatened to complain to the king of the indignity w|iich Abelard had cast upon St. Denys. Abelard perceived the storm which was gathering, and again fled into Champagne, where he was obliged to * Abelard illustrates the doctrine of the Trinity by comparing it to a syllogistic argu¬ ment, in which the major, the minor, and the conclusion, though three propositions, make one syllogism. OF THE SCHOLASTICS, Cook VII. 4 98 remain till the death of the abbot, which happened in the year 1122. His successor permitted Abelard to lead a monastic life wherever he pleased, and he retired to a pleasant retreat in the diocese of Troyes, near Nogent, where he built an oratory, Avhich he consecrated to the Paraclete. Here he soon found himself surrounded by pupils, and was again harassed by persecution. Norbart and Bernard, tAvo fanatic teachers, made grievous complaints of the heretical tenets of Abelard, and rendered his situation so uncomfortable and dangerous, that he had almost resolved to fly to some country Avhere Christianity Avas not professed, Avhen, through the interest of the duke of Bretagne, he was, in the forty-seventh year of his age, elected Superior of the Benedictine Monastery of Saint Hildas, in tlie diocese of Vannes. At first, this monastery seemed to promise him a tranquil retreat ; but the zeal with Avhich he rejirobated the disorders of the monks, raised against him such a violent spirit of opposition, that several attempts Avere made upon his life. The nuns of the convent of Argenteuil, over Avhich Heloise presided, being expelled by the abbot of St. Denys, Abelard presented her Avith his oratory of the Paraclete, and she retired thither Avith some of the sister¬ hood. Pope Innocent the Second appointed her abbess of this convent, in the year 1137. It is probable, that about this time Abelard returned to Paris, and resumed his former situation at Mount St. Genevieve, as preceptor of learning and philosophy; for John of Salisbury says,* that he attended the Palatian Peripatetic, (under which name he frequently speaks of Abelard,) Avho preached in Mount St. Genevieve, the second year after the death of Henry the Second, that is, in the year li37. This may account for the reneAved persecution which he suffered through the instigation of Bernard, Avho appeared as his accuser before the archbishop of Sens. In this trial, Avhich happened in 1140, several propositions from the Avritings of Abe¬ lard Avere adjudged heretical, and he Avas condemned unheard. The sentence was confirmed by the Pope, Avho ordered the books to be burned, and pronounced anathema upon the Avriter. Tlu’ough the solicitation of Peter Maurice, abbot of Clugni, Abelard was, however, absolved from the sentence, and permitted to pass his days in this monastery. Here he enjoyed great tranquillity, and consecrated his time to religion. On account of his infirmities, he was, in his last days, removed to the priory of St. Marcellus, a pleasant and healthful situation on the Saon, near Chalons, where to the last he applied with great assiduity to his studies, and seldom suffered a moment to pass, in which he Avasnot either praying, or reading, or Avriting, or dictating. Abelard died at the age of sixty- three, in the year 1142.'|- After his death his body Avas sent to Heloise, and interred in the convent of the Paraclete. Heloise survived him twenty-two years. Abelard, a man of ready talents, extensive erudition, and elegant taste, who rose superior to the prejudices of his age, affords, in the history of his life, an instructive example of the danger of neglecting the dictates of prudence in the pursuit of distinction, or pleasure. He wrote many philosophical treatises, Avhich have never been edited. His “ Christian Theology,” Epistles, and several other works, have been pub¬ lished in one volume. j: * Metalog'. 1. ii. c. 10. f Coiif. Berengar. Apol. pro Abel. J. Sarisber. Met. I. ii. passim. Pet. Ven. Ep. 1. iv. c. 24. Otto Prising. 1. i. c. 47. Pet. Cluniac. Ep. 1. iv. c. 24. Abel. Op. p. 337. Berrington’s Life of Abelard, 1789. J Paris, 1717. Cliap. 3. S. 2. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 499 From the school of Abelard, besides many other disciples, of whom he had great numbers, was Peter Lombard,* * * § a celebrated theologian, born in Lombardy, and educated at Paris. He was advanced to the episcopal see of Paris, in the year 1159. He wrote a theological system, wdiich he entitled Magister Sententiarum, “ The Master of Sentences,” in which, after the method of Augustine, he illustrated the doctrines of the church by sentences collected from the fathers, with select questions for disputation ; a work which obtained universal authority in the theolo¬ gical schools, and upon which innumerable commentaries were written. He followed the track marked out by his preceptor Abelard. He died in the year 1164. This age also produced Robert Pulleyn,-!- who, in the time of the civil wars then raging in England, withdrew into France, where he enjoyed the friendship of Bernard. On his return to England, he revived the study of the scriptures, and taught theology for five years in Oxford. Flis Sententiarum Lihri,^ “ Books of Sentences,” differ in some measure from the general character of the times ; preferring the same simple authority of reason and scripture to the testimony of the fathers, or the subtlety of metaphysics. He was admitted into the college of cardinals in the year 1144. Gilbert Porretan, § bishop of Poictiers, is memorable in the history of the Gallic church, for the introduction of new phrases and subtle dis¬ tinctions into theology, which brought upon him a suspicion of heresy in the doctrine of the Divine nature. Bernard, the great champion for the orthodox faith, who was better qualified for invective than argument, bitterly complained of Gilbert to the Pope, for asserting, that the Divine essence was not God himself ; that the properties of a person are not the person himself ; that the Divine nature was not incarnate and the like ; assertions which arose entirely from the subtlety of logical and metaphy¬ sical distinctions concerning the meaning of the terms, essence, person, and nature, and which afford a curious example of the cobw^eb-refinements which metaphysical philosophy at this time introduced into religion. Gilbert consented to acknowledge before the Pope, that in theology there is no distinction between nature and person, and that the Divine essence may not only be said to belong to God, but to be God ; and he was con¬ firmed in his ecclesiastical dignities. This happened in the year 1147. This most subtle philosopher died in the year 1154. In this first age of the Scholastics, another celebrated name is Peter Comestor, II dean of Troyes. He wrote a Breviary of the historical books of the Old and New Testaments, for the use of the schools, under the title of Historia ScJiolastica ; a work, in the judgment of Father Simon, of great use in biblical learning. One of the most learned and valuable men of this age was John of Salisbury,^ surnamed The Little. He visited Paris in the year 1137, and attended upon the lectures of Abelard and other masters, with such industry and success, that he acquired an uncommon share of knowledge both in philosophy and letters. At an early period of life, his poverty * Hen. Gandav. c. xxxi. App. p. 123, Trithem. de Scrip. Eccl. c. 377. p. 96. Anna!. Hirsaug. t. i. p. 435. Vine. Bellovac. Spec. Hist. 1. xxix. c. ]. Laun. de Fort. Arisf. p. 182. 192. t Cave. Hist. Lit. p. 582. J. Sarisb. Met. 1. ii. c. 10. J Paris, 1(151. fol. § Hen. Gandav. de S. E. c. 17. App. c. 7. p. 121. Trithem. dc S. E. c. 368. p. 94. Otto Prising, de Jestis Frid. 1. i. c. 46. 11 Henr. Andegav.c. 31. p. 123. Trithem. de S. E. c. 380. Ann. llirs. t. i. p. 435. ^ Bulmi Hist. Ac. Par, t. ii. p. 750. Fabr. Bib, L. M. t. iii. p. 380. K K 2 500 OF THE SCHOLASTICS. Book VII. obliged him to undertake the office of preceptor ; notwithstanding which, he made such good use of his leisure, that he acquired a competent knowledge of dialectics, physics, and morals, as well as an acquaintance with the Greek, and (what was at that time a rare accomplishment) with the Hebrew languages. He may justly be ranked among the first scholars of his age. After many years had elapsed, he resolved to revisit the companions of his early studies on Mount St. Genevieve, in order to confer with them on the topics on which they had formerly disputed. His account of this visit* affords a striking picture of the philosophical character of this age. “ I found them,” says he, “ the same men, and in the same place ; nor had they advanced a single step towards resolving our ancient questions, nor added a single proposition, however small, to their stock of knowledge. Whence I inferred, what indeed it was easy to collect, that dialectic studies, however useful they may be when connected with other branches of learning, are in themselves barren and useless.” Speaking in another place of the philosophers of his time, he complains, that they collected auditors solely for the ostentation of science, and designedly rendered their discourses obscure, that they might appear loaded with the mysteries of wisdom ; and that though all professed to follow Aristotle, they were so ignorant of his true doctrine, that in attempting to explain his meaning, they often advanced a Platonic notion, or some erroneous tenet equally distant from the true system of Aristotle and of Plato. From these obser¬ vations, and from many similar passages to be found in his writings, it appears, that John of Salisbury was aware of the trifling character both of the philosophy and the philosophers of his age ; owing, probably, to the uncommon share of good sense which he possessed, as well as to the unusual extent and variety of his learning. Throughout his writings there are evident traces of a fruitful genius, of sound understanding, of various erudition, and, with due allowance for the age in w’hich he lived, of correct taste. He was a strenuous advocate for Thomas Becket ; and, in the year 1163, became a companion of his exile. He died about the year 1 182. His writings leave no room to doubt, that if he had lived in a more fortunate period, he would have shone in the class of learned men. His Metalogicum, or apology for grammar, philology, and the Aristotelian logic, his Policraticum, and his Letters, are his most valuable works. Other Scholastics of some repute at this period are the following : f Alexander Hales, of the order of Minors, who belonged to a monastery in the county of Gloucester. He was educated in Paris, and became a famous preceptor in philosophical theology. He wrote a commentary upon the sentences of Peter Lombard, and another upon Aristotle’s Meta¬ physics. For his profound knowledge of philosophy and theology, he ob¬ tained the title of the Irrefragable Doctor. — Stephen Langton, who, in 1207, was consecrated archbishop of Canterbury. He is said to have been inferior to none of his contemporaries in the knowledge of the Aristotelian dialectics, or in the application of them to the doctrines of scrip¬ ture. The first division of the books of the Old and New Testaments into chapters is ascribed to him.J — Vincent, a monk of Beavais, who, under the patronage of the king of France, about the year 1244, w'rote a famous summary of knowledge, or Encyclopedia, under the title of Speculum doctrinale, historiale, naturale, et morale, “ A doctrinal, historical, natural, and moral Mirror,” which is chiefly valuable for quotations from authors * Metal. ). i. c. 2, 3. 1. ii. c. 17. 19. f Hen. Gandav. c. 4(5. j). 12(5. Tritliem. de S. E. c. 457, 8. p. 111. Oiidin. de S. E. 1. iii. p. 451. Fabr. Bib. Lat. Med. t. i. p. 170. Bayle. J Pits. p. .304. Chap. 3. S. 2. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 501 whose writings are now lost. — Alfred, who translated many of the physi¬ cal writings of Aristotle. — And Robert Greathead,* bishop of Lincoln,, whom Roger Bacon, for his learning and wisdom, ranked with Aristotle and Solomon; and whose name deserves particular honour, on account of the freedom with which he censured the avarice and tyranny of the court of Rome, in a letter to Pope Innocent the Fourth. He wrote a commen¬ tary upon the works of Dionysius the Areopagite, and many other pieces. The Second Age of the Scholastic philosophy, in which Aristotelian metaphysics, obscured by passing through the Arabian channel, were ap¬ plied with wonderful subtlety to the elucidation of Christian doctrine, began with Albert, and ended with Durand. Albert f was born at Lawingen, in Suabia, in the year 1193, and be¬ came a Dominican friar in 1221 : from this time he was an instructor of youth, first at Cologne, where he acquired great reputation, and afterwards at Paris. In the year 1260, he was appointed bishop of Ratisbon ; but, finding the labours of the episcopal office inconsistent with his love of re¬ tirement and study, after three years, he resigned this dignity, and returned to a monastic life. He remained in the monastery at Cologne till his death, which happened in the year 1 280, at the age of eighty-seven. In the subtle¬ ties of the times, and in the ingenious application of these to theology, Albert was excelled by none of his contemporaries ; but it is more to his credit to add, that the age produced few men e(^ually skilled in natural history, natural philosophy, and chemistry. He is said to have constructed a machine which sent forth distinct vocal sounds ; at which Thomas Aquinas was so much terrified, that he struck it with his stick, and broke it, to the great mortification of Albert, who had been thirty years in bringing this curious machine to perfection. In this age of profound ignorance with respect to the powers of nature and art, it is no wonder that a man who was capable of producing such a machine should commonly pass for a magician. J Albert is also said to have suddenly reproduced the ffowers of spring in the midst of winter, for the entertainment of the Emperor William, when he visited Cologne. What this ingenious philosopher really did, or how I far he was indebted to the arts of deception, in this and other wonderful performances, it is difficult to determine; one thing is very certain, that ; had he lived in a more enlightened age, he would neither have had the ; honour, nor the discredit, of being thought to have performed his curious j feats by the aid either of God or of evil spirits. Albert wrote many works ! in logic, ethics, metaphysics, theology, and astronomy : the books ascribed to him were published in twenty-one volumes in folio, at Lyons, in the ; year 1615. His treatises on speculative science are written in the abstract and subtle manner of the age ; those on natural subjects contain some ! gems, which would perhaps, even in the present age, repay the labour of i searching for them. His Commentaries on Aristotle are of little value, on account of his ignorance of the Greek language and the ancient philosophy. : His style is gothic and barbarous. Though ignorance and superstition gave Albert the surname of ' Great, he was not only rivalled, but far exceeded, in fame by his pupil Thomas Aquinas, commonly distinguished by the appellation of the i * Bulaeus, f. iii. p. 260. Godwin de Pricsul. .'\ng. p. 348. Blount. Cens. p. 408. t Vine. Justin, in Vit. Alb. Trithem. Ann. Hirs. t. i. p. 592. Cbron. Spanheim. i Ann. 1254. Lang. Chron. 1258. Bayle. + Naude Apol. Mag. Acc. c. 18. p. 370. Pascliius de Inv. c. vii. sect. 43. 502 OF THE SCHOLASTICS. Book VII. Angelical Doctor. Thomas Aquinas,* of the illustrious family of Aquino, in the Terra di Lavoro, in Italy, was born in the year 1224. At five years of age he was sent for education to Mount Cassino, whence, after he had acquired the elements of learning, he was removed to the university of Naples. Here his fondness for a retired and studious life induced him to enter himself, without the knowledge of his parents, among the Do¬ minicans, in the order of the Preaching Friars. His mother was much offended at this step, and took great pains to obtain an interview with him, in order, if possible, to disengage him from this society. The monks, who were loth to part with a youth of such distinction aud ability, that they might keep him from her sight, removed him from one place to another. But at last, as they were conducting him to Paris, her other sons seized him on his way, and conveyed him to her castle, where he was confined for two years. Still, however, he resisted the importunities and the threats of his mother; and persisting in hispurpose of devoting himself to a monastic life, he let himself down from a window, in the night, and by the help of sundry Dominican brethren, who were apprized of his design, he escaped to Naples. After changing his place of residence several times, he became a disciple of Albert, at Cologne. Under this eminent preceptor, though not favoured by nature with ready talents, he was enabled, by patient assiduity, to make great attainments. Among his fellow-students, liis silence and apparent dulness procured him the contemptuous appellation of the Dumb Ox. Albert however, who penetrated further into the mind of his pupil, said, “ This ox, if he begin to bellow, will fill the whole world with his roaring.”! At length, Thomas Aquinas, having made himself master of the dialectics, philosophy, and theology of the age, became an eminent teacher at Paris, where he was created doctor in divinity, in the year 1256. After a few years he returned to Italy, and spent the remainder of his days at Naples, where he continued his lectures in theology. A council being summoned at Lyons, by Gregory X. in the year 1272, for the purpose of uniting the Greek and Latin church, Thomas Aquinas was sent thither, to present to the fathers in council a book, which he had written by order of Pope Urban IV. to refute the errors of the Greek church. On his way, he was seized with a violent disorder, and died in the monastery of Fossa Nova, in Campania, in the year 1274. The whole Western world, after his decease, began to load the memory of Thomas Aquinas with honours. The Dominican fraternity removed his body to Thoulouse : Pope John XXII. canonized him; Pius V. gave him the title of the Fifth Doctor of the Church; the learned world honoured him with the appellation of The Universal and the An¬ gelic Doctor ; and the vulgar believed, that many miracles were wrought at his tomb, and said, that the soul of Augustine had passed into Thomas Aquinas, j Notwithstanding all the extravagantpraises and honours which have been heaped upon Thomas Aquinas, it is however certain, that his learning was almost wholly confined to Scholastic theology ; and that he was so little conversant with elegant and liberal studies, that he was not even able to read the Greek language. For all his knowledge of the Peripatetic * G. dc Thoco Vit. Aijuin. in Act. S. T. Hi. p. 655. I'abr. t. iii. p. 502. tluclin de S. E. t. iii. p. 259. Laun. de Fort. Ar. c. x. p. 213. Bulsei Hist. Ac. Par. p. 433. f R. Fiilgosiis apiul Horn. Hist. p. 1. iv. c. 4. J Ptolomseus Lucensis ap. Ouden. t. iii. p. 259. Sextus Senens. Bibl. S. 1. iv. Chap. 3. S. 2. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 503 philosophy, which he so liberally mixed with theology, he was indebted to the defective translations of Aristotle which were supplied by the Arabians, till he obtained, from some unknown hand, a more accurate version of his philosophical writings.* * * § Adopting the general ideas of the age, that theo¬ logy is best defended by the weapons of logic and metaphysics, he mixed the subtleties of Aristotle with the language of scripture and the Christian fathers ; and, after the manner of the Arabians, framed abstruse questions, without end, upon various topics of speculative theology. His most celebrated writings are, his Summa Theologies, “ Heads of Theology,” of which the second section, which treats of morals, may be read with ad¬ vantage ; his Commentaries upon the Analytics, Metaphj^sics, and Ethics of Aristotle, and upon his book De Interpretatione, Another Scholastic of great celebrity, in this age, was Bona venture,-]' of Tuscany, born in the year 1221. Being early devoted by his mother to a religious life, he entered into the Franciscan order, in the year 1243. He studied philosophy and theology at Paris, where he acquired so much distinction in Scholastic learning, that he was appointed to read public lectures, was admitted doctor, and soon after created head of his order. Pope Gregory X. having previously given him a seat among the cardinals, invited him to the general council at Lyons. In this assembly, Bonaven- ture greatly distinguished himself by his learning and erudition ; but du¬ ring the council he died suddenly, in the year 1274. His funeral was attended by the Pope ; the Latin Emperor Baldwin the Second, in person; the Emperor of the Greeks in his representatives, the Greek nobles; James King of Arragon ; the patriarchs of Constantinople and Antioch ; five hundred prelates, and many other persons of high rank, both ecclesiastics and laics. After his death, Bonaventure was distinguished by the high appellation of The Seraphic Doctor, and he was canonized by Pope I Sixtus the Fourth in 1482. ! Though Bonaventure was well acquainted with the Scholastic philosophy, he chiefly addicted himself to mystic theology, and the enthusiastic worship of the Virgin Mary. His writings are almost entirely theological.:]: His treatise, De Reductione Artium ad Theologiam.^ “On the Application of Learning to Theology,” affords a curious specimen of the manner in which the mystical divines transferred the Scholastic philosophy to theology. Human knowledge he divides into tliree branches, logical, physical, and moral. Each of these he considers as the effect of supernatural illumination, and as commilnicated to men through the medium of the holy scriptures. The whole doctrine of scripture he reduces to three heads ; that which respects the eternal generation and incarnation of Christ, the study of which is the peculiar province of the doctors of the church ; that which concerns the conduct of life, which is the subject of preaching; and that which relates to the union of the soul with God, which is peculiar to the monastic and contemplative life. Physical knowledge he applies to the doctrine of scripture emblematically. For example : the production of the idea of any sensible object from its archetype, is a type of the generation of the Logos; the right exercise of the senses typifies the virtuous conduct of life ; and the pleasure derived from the senses represents the * Trithein. c. 467. p. 117. Aventin. Ann. 1. vi. p. 566. Fabr. Bib. Gr. v. ii. p. 172. Oj). Edit. Rom. 1570. Veiiet. 1594. Antwerp, 1612. Paris, 1640. tom. xvii. I Hen. Gandav. c. 47. p. 126. Tritliem. c. 464. p. 112. Ann. Hirs. t. i. p. 615. Acta S. t. iii. p. 81 I. Anton. Spec. Hist. p. iii. tit. 24. c. 8. I Fabr. Bibl. Lat. Med. t. iv. p. 121. § T. i. Opuscula, Lugd. 1647. fol. t. vi. Op. Ed. Roin. 504 OF THE SCHOLASTICS. Book VII. union of the soul with God. In like manner, logical philosophy furnishes an emblem of the eternal generation and the incarnation of Christ : a word conceived in the mind resembling the eternal generation ; its expression in vocal sounds, the incarnation. Thus, the multiform wisdom of God, according to this mystical writer, lies concealed through all nature ; and all human knowledge may, by the help of allegory and analogy, be spi-. ritualised and transferred to theology. How wide a door this method of philosophising opens to every kind of absurdity, the reader will easily J perceive from this specimen. > J Of a very different and much higher character than Bonaventure, or ^ any other mere Scholastic, was that great man, Roger Bacon,* whose deep penetration into the mysteries of nature justly entitled him, in the ignorant age in which he lived, to the appellation of The Wonderful Doctor. He was born at Ilchester, in Somersetshire, in the year 1214. At Oxford, he studied grammar, rhetoric, and logic, under Richard Fisacre, and under Edmund Rich, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury ; after which, according to the custom of the times, he visited Paris, to attend^, upon the lectures of the celebrated professors of that university. But it may be easily collected from the particulars which are preserved concerning his early studies, that he w^as more indebted to his own genius than to any.lj academical instruction : for he read history, learned the Oriental and Western languages, and studied jurisprudence and medicine; subjects little attended to at this period. The knowledge which he could not obtain from living preceptors, he dug, with indefatigable industry, out of the mines of Grecian and Arabian learning. After having been admitted to the degree of doctor, Roger Bacon returned to England; and in the year 1240, that he might prosecute his studies without interruption, devoted' himself to the monastic life in the order of St. Francis. He employed his time, not in the idle controversies of the age, but in useful researches into| the properties of natural bodies. By the help of mathematical learning and experiment, he acquired a degree of knowledge in physics, Avhich astonished his ignoi'ant contemporaries, and brought upon him the charge of practising magical arts. His writings discover an acquaintance with the laws of me¬ chanics, statics, and optics, with the chemical properties of bodies, and other subjects of natural philosophy, which could only have been the result of a judicious and indefatigable exertion of wonderful powers. He was .J certainly acquainted with the composition of gunpowder long before it is commonly said to have been invented by Barthold Schwartz, j- He speaks of a kind of unextinguishable fire prepared by art, which must have been a species of phosphorus. He was master of many other curious processes in chemistry ; and would, doubtless, have produced still greater discoveries in this branch of science, had he not been drawn aside from the path of true science by the philosophical ignis fatuus, which led the philosophers of this time to attempt the transmutation of inferior metals into gold. He describes concave and convex lenses, and knew how to use the latter for telescopic and microscopic purposes. His mathematical and astronomical knowledge appeared in the discovery, which he made of the error which occasioned the Gregorian reformation in the calendar, and in his attempt to square the circle. Nor was this great man less distinguished by his knowledge of theology, and his skill in the Hebrew and Greek languages. • Wooft, Ant. Ox. p..l36. Leland, c. 236. Cave, Hist. Lit. p. 648. Oudin. t. iii. p. 190. f Morhoff. Polyh. t. ii. 1. ii. c. 38. sect. 3. Bulasi. Hist. Ac. Cent. iv. 55. Bayle Borricli, de Orig. Chem. p. 123. Chap. 3. S. 2. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 505 as appears from his epistle^to Clement IV. in praise of the sacred scrip¬ tures.* ^ The astonishing powers and performances of Roger Bacon, at the same time that they excited universal admiration, kindled a spirit of envy and jealousy among the monks of his fraternity, who industriously circulated a report that he held converse with evil spirits. This rumour, at length, reached the ears of the Pope ; and he was obliged, in order to exculpate himself from the charge of necromancy, to send, in the year 1266, his philosophical writings and instruments to Rome, that it might appear to his holiness by what means he had been able to accomplish such wonders. The storm which was gathering around him was thus for a while dispersed ; but in the year 1278, whilst he was in France, the same charge was renewed by Jerom de Eseul, the head of the order of Minors, who forbade his fraternity to read the works, and obtained from Pope Nicholas IV. an order that the author should be imprisoned. During his confinement. Bacon wrote a treatise “ On the Means of avoiding the Infirmities of Old Age,” which he addressed to the Pope. Through the intercession of some of his countrymen, he was at length released from his confinement, and permitted to return to England. He passed the last days of his life at Oxford, and died in the year 1294', at the age of seventy-eight, leaving behind him many valuable writings, and an immortal reputation as, beyond all comparison, the greatest man of his time. Several of his pieces were burnt in the Franciscan library, during the tumults at the reformation. Among those which remain, are some which respect metaphysical and moral subjects; particularly the following: “On the Four Universal Causes of all Human Ignorance “ On Perfect Wisdom “ Of Moral Philosophy “ On Divine Wisdom “ Of Being and Essence “ Of the true Character, and the Flinderances of Wisdom,” &c. whence it appears that Bacon, even upon these subjects, went far beyond his con¬ temporaries in inquiries directed towards the improvement of the mind. After Friar Bacon it may seem of little consequence to mention, among the philosophers of this age, jEgidius de CoLUMNA,-f' a Roman monk of the Augustine order, who was preceptor to the sons of Philip HI. of France, and who taught philosophy and theology in the university of Paris, with so much reputation, that he was honoured with the appellation of The most Profound Doctor. After being advanced to the arch¬ bishopric of Berri, he died, in the year 1316, leaving behind, upon his monument, the character of lux in lucent reducens dubia, the luminary that brought dark things to light. Nevertheless, it appears from those more faithful memorials, his writings, that he treated the abstruse questions of the Aristotelian and Scholastic philosophy with such profound obscurity, that it is impossible to read his works without suspecting that he did not himself always understand his own meaning. In the subtleties of Scholastic philosophy no one acquired a more dis¬ tinguished name than John Duns ScoTus.j; The place of his birth is uncertain; but it is most probable that he was born at Dunstan, near Alnwick, in Northumberland. He was educated at Merton Hall, in * Ejus Epist. de Secret. Art. et Nat. Oper. Ed. Par. 154'2. Basil. 1593. Hamb. 1018. Hody de Bibl. Text, origin, p. 419. t Corn. Curtins Elog. Vir. Illust. p. 61. Sanimarlhan. in Gall. Christ, t. i. p. 179. Bulaei Hist. t. iii. p. 671. + Trithem. 1. c. c. 416. p. 136. Leland. c. 315. Bal. Scr. Ang. Cent. iv. c. 82. Pits, p. 390. Mackenzie de Vit. Scot. Scr. t. i. p. 215. Vit. Oper. Piocein. I'abr. Bib. Lat. Jled. t. iii. p. 509. 506 OF THE SCHOLASTICS. Book VII. Oxford ; and was admitted to the highest honours in the university of Paris, in the year 1304. At first, he was a follower of Thomas Aquinas ; but differing from his master on the question concerning the efficacy of Divine grace, he formed a distinct sect, and this separation produced the denominations of the Thomists and Scotists, which still subsist in some of the Roman Catholic schools. Some ascribe to him the introduction of the question concerning the immaculate conception of the Vii’gin Mary. In the year 1308, Duns Scotus was sent, by the head of the fraternity of Minors, of whicli he was a member, to teach theology at Cologne; and he was received there with the greatest pomp, and with the highest ex¬ pectations ; but was soon cut off by a sudden death. The exact time of his death, as well as of his birth, is unknown. On account of his acute¬ ness in disputation, he was called The most Subtle Doctor; but his ingenuity was wholly employed in embarrassing with new fictions of abstraction, and with other Scholastic chimeras, subjects already suffi¬ ciently perplexed. His works are published in twelve volumes.* To these more celebrated names, belonging to the second period of the Scholastic age, we must add those of Simon of TouRNAY,j' who excelled in chemistry and natural philosophy, and was accused by the monks of his fraternity of heresy and impiety; Peter D’AFONO,j; who was chiefly famous for his pretended skill in the arts of astrology ; Robert de Sor- BONNE, who about the middle of the thirteenth century founded the theo¬ logical college of the Sorbonne in Paris ; Francis de Mayro,§ a French monk, wholly lost in abstractions, who wrote De Formalitatihus, “ On Formalities;”- De primo Prbicipio, “ On the First Principle;” De Uni- vocatione entis, *“ On Identity and a work entitled Conflatile, or Various Questions concerning Distinctions, Relations, and Expressions ; Arnaud DE ViLLE Neuf,|| who was devoted to the mysteries of astrology, and practised medicine with great reputation, whose books were reprobated by the inquisition ; and Peter, the Dane,** celebrated for his skill in astronomical calculations. In the third age of the Scholastic period, which commences with Durand, at the beginning of the fourteenth century, and continues to the end of the fifteenth, the Scholastic philosophy increased in the number of teachers and learners, in the affectation of subtleties, and in the multiplicity of in¬ tricate and trifling disputes, but by no means in the celebrity of its pro¬ fessors. Duns Scotus, and other preceptors of the same cast, having filled the schools with vain subtleties, and established a mode of philoso- phising, in which important truth and good sense were lost in unprofitable disputes concerning entities, haecceities, formalities, relations, and other abstractions, the edge of genius was gradually blunted, the] way to know¬ ledge was choked up by thorns and briars, and the very name of philosophy became to the young student an object of terror. There are not wanting, however, in this period, philosophers of sufficient distinction to merit par¬ ticular notice. Of these the first is William Durand, j-f of Clermont; a preaching monk, who, for his attainments in philosophical and theological studies * Lugdun. 1639. fol. + Hen. Gandav. de S. E. c. 24. J Trithem. I. c. c. 556. Fabr. Bib. Lat. Med. t. v. p. 715. Acta Pbil. v. iii. p. 374. Naud. Apol. Mag. c. 14. p. 271. § Wharton. App. to Cave, p. 11. . II Friend. Hist. Med. j). iii. j). 19. Trithem. c. 523. ** Ed. Lugd. 1520. Borrich. de Orig. Chctn. p. 128. Ba.s. 1585. IST. Anton. Bib. Hist. Vet. t. ii. )). 74. ft Trithem. c. 567. p. 137. .Anton. Sum. Hist. tit. 23. c. 11. sect. 2. t. iii. p. 681. Laiin. dc Caussa Durandi. Par, 1638. 8vo. Fabric. 1. c. t. iii. p. 204. OF THE SCHOLASTICS. 507 Chap. 3. S. 2. I was admitted to the degree of Doctor of Divinitj", in the university of * Paris, in the year 1313, and was afterwards made bishop of Meaux, by Pope John XXII. He pursued his way through the thorny paths of Scholastic disputation with such indefatigable perseverance, that he |; merited the title of the Most Resolute Doctor. He was at first a f! follower of Thomas Aquinas, but afterwards became a convert to the ^ : Scotists, and defended their cause with great acuteness and zeal ; which gave so much offence to the Thomists, that one of them, after his death (which happened in the year 1332) honoured him with this epitaph: Durus Durandus jacet hie sub marmore duro, An sit salvandus ego nescio, nec quoque euro. As the author of another Scholastic sect, must be mentioned William Occam,* an Englishman, born in the county of Surrey. He was a pupil of the most subtle doctor Duns Scotus, and was little inferior to his master in subtlety. The schools of the Scotists had, till this time, followed the 1 popular opinion of the Realists ; but Occam, probably from an ambition of becoming the head of a separate body, revived the opinions of the Nomi- i : nalists, and formed a sect under the name of Occamists, which vehemently ! opposed the Scotists, upon the abstract questions concerning universals, I which had been formerly introduced by Rosceline. Whatever be thought of the ingenuity, or of the success, of Occam in this dispute, he deserves ' I praise for the courage with which he opposed the tyranny of the papal over the civil power, in a book which he wrote De Potestate Ecclesiastica et Seciilare,^ “ On the Ecclesiastic and Secular Power.” The boldness with i • which he withstood the encroachments of the Roman see, and censured the corruption of the monks, brought upon him the censure of the pontiff, i and obliged him to retire into France till the year 1328 ; when, under the I protection of the emperor, he again maintained the independency of the civil with respect to the ecclesiastical power. And though his opposition ! to the see of Rome brought upon him a sentence of excommunication, he I continued to live in security in the emperor’s court, where he died, in the i year 1347. He wrote a Commentary upon the Predicables of Porphyry, and the Categories of Aristotle, and many treatises J in Scholastic theology } and ecclesiastical law ; which, if they be admired for their ingenuity, must i at the same time be censured for their extreme subtlety and obscurity. I He obtained the appellation of The Invincible Doctor. I One of the most singular geniuses of the fourteenth century was Ricii- I ARD OF Swinshead, an Englishman, of the monastery of Swinshead, in Lincolnshire ; who devoted himself chiefly to mathematical studies, in ! which he acquired great renown at the university of Oxford. Little is I recorded of this mathematician ; probably because few have read his I works, which chiefly consist of profound and subtle applications of alge- j braic calculations to physics and metaphysics. He wrote a treatise “ Of I Astronomical Calculations and another entitled “ The Calculator,”§ t which is so exceedingly scarce, that it is neither mentioned by any of the i writers of the literary history of this period, nor even by that eminent I mathematician, Wallis, in his History of Algebra. He was certainly a j great master of algebraic operations; but injudiciously applied them to I subjects which do not admit of this method of investigation, particularly I I * Leland. c. 326. l?al. Cent. v. c. 18. Pits. p. 457. i t Apud Goldasti Monarchia, t. i. p. 13. % Fabric. I. c. t. iii. p. 466. I § Kd. Venet. 1520. Leibn. Ep. ad. Wallis in Op. t. iii. p. 678. Scaliger. Excrcit. 340. p. 1068. 508 OF THE scholastics. Book VII. to questions in Scholastic philosophy. Probably, some valuable mathe¬ matical knovvledge might be gathered up from his Calculator, by a reader who should be capable of extracting the pure gold from the heterogeneous mass in which it lies concealed. Among other disciples of Scotus was Walter Burley,* * * § preceptor to Edward the Third. He wrote many treatises in logic, metaphysics, phy¬ sics, morals, and policy, with such clearness, that he justly obtained the appellation of the Perspicuous Doctor. In a treatise De Vita et Mo~ ribus PhilosopJiorum,-\ “ On the Life and Manners of Philosophers,” he runs over the history of philosophy, in three hundred and thirty-one chapters, from Thales to Seneca ; but for want of a more perfect ac¬ quaintance with the Greek language, and with ancient philosophy, the work is of little value. The fifteenth century produced, among other Scholastics, John Herman Wessel,|; born at Groningen, in 1409, and educated in the monastery at Zevole. He not only studied the Greek language, by the help of the Dominican friars, who about this time passed over to the West from Con¬ stantinople, but obtained, from certain learned Jews, a knowledge of the Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Arabic tongues. Having been early instructed in the Scholastic disputes, and having acquired by his industry an uncommon share of biblical learning, he taught philosophy and philology with great applause at Groningen. But his chief claim to distinction in the history of philosophy arises from the penetration which, in the midst of the Scho¬ lastic frenzy of his age, enabled him to discover the futility of the controversies which agitated the schools of the Thomists, Scotists, and Occainists. To a young man who consulted him concerning the best method of prosecuting his studies, he said, “ You, young man, will live to see the day, when the doctrines of Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, and other modern disputants of the same stamp will be exploded by all true Christian divines, and when the Irrefragable Doctors themselves will be little regarded a prediction which discovers so much good sense and liberality, that Wessel ought to be immortalized under the appellation of the Wise Doctor. He died at Groningen in 1489, about the era of the Revival of Letters. § * Voss, de Hist. Lat. 1. ii. p. 515. Leland. c. 378. Pits. p. 435. Fabr. 1. c. t. i. p. 839. + Act. Phil. v. iii. p. 283. X Suffr. Petri de Scr. Fris. dec. viii, p. 46. Adami Vit. Phil, p, 21. Goez. Diss. Lub. 1719. § Vidend. Lambert. Danaeus Proleg. Sentent. Genev. 1580. Binder, de Tbeol. Scbol. Tub. J624. Himmelius de Tbeol. Scbol. Thomas, Hist. Sap. et Stult. t. iii. p. 225. Barthold. Niemeir. Orat. de Scholast. Helmst. 1675. Tribbechovius de D. Scholast. •Jen. 1719. MorhofF. Polyh. t. ii. 1. i. c. 13. Roderici Specul. Hum, Vitae. Rapin, Reflexions sur la Philosophie, Op. t. ii. 340. Oudin. de S. E. t. ii. p. 936. Launois de Scbol. cel. c. 45. Gandavenses, c. 30. Bulaei Hist. Univ. Par. Ann 1101, 1111, 1116. Fabric. Bib. Lat. Med. t. i. p. 737. t. v. p. 689. 753. 801. t. iii. p. 345. 499. 540. Pezii Anecdot. t. iii. p. ii. p. 627. Martene Anecd. t. v, p. 1156. Par. 1717. Labbei, Cavei, Pagi Annal. De Visch. Bibl. Script. Ord. Cisterc. Leyser Hist. Poet. Med. jEvi, j). 765. Elswich.de Fatis Arist. in Schol. Prot. Bayle. VV^adding. Bibl. Ord. Men. Waraeus de Script. Hiberniae. Chap. 3. S.,3. THE nature and character, &c. 509 SECTION III.— OF THE NATURE AND CHARACTER OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. Having related the history of the Scholastics, who flourished from the eleventh to the beginning of the sixteenth century, it remains that we delineate the features of the Scholastic philosophy, that the reader may be enabled to form an accurate idea of its nature and constitution. This inquiry is the more necessary, as the history of religion is so intimately interwoven with that of philosophy, during this period, that the former cannot be understood without a knowledge of the latter. We have already seen, in general, whence this philosophy sprung, and what causes concurred to promote its establishment and extension. It has been shown, that from the study of the Stoic and Peripatetic philosophy, blended with theological speculations, arose a vast and confused mass of opinions and questions, which were for ages canvassed in subtle, but vain and fruitless disputations ; and that this polemic spirit was greatly en¬ couraged by the example of the Aiabians, and by the high repute and general circulation of their writings, particularly those of Averroes; till, in proce.ss of time, the evil rose to so great a height, that sober reason was lost in subtlety, and the simple doctrine of religion buried in the re¬ finement of false philosophy.* To follow the Scholastics in detail, through the mazes of their subtle speculations, would be to lose the reader in a labyrinth of words. We must refer those who wish for this kind of entertainment to the writings of Albert, Thomas Aquinas, Scotus, and Occam : where they will soon dis¬ cover, that these wonderful doctors amused themselves and their followers by raising up phantoms of abstraction in the field of truth, the pursuit of which would be as fruitless a labour, as that of tracing elves and fairies in their midnight gambols. A brief review of their method of philosophising is all that is practicable, and all that the intelligent reader will desire, in this part of our work. The leading character of the Scholastic philosophy was, that it employed itself in an ostentatious display of ingenuity, in which axioms assumed without examination, distinctions without any real diflerenoe, and terms without any precise meaning, were made use of as weapons of assault and defence, in controversies upon abstruse questions, which, after endless skirmishes, it was impossible to bring to any issue, and which, notwith¬ standing all the violence of the contest, it was of no importance to deter¬ mine. The Scholastic logic is not to be confounded with the genuine art of reasoning, from which it differs as much as dross from pure gold. These disputants made use of dialectics, not to assist the human understanding in discovering truth conducive to the happiness of man, but to secure to themselves the honours of conquest in the field of controversy. John of Salisbury complains, f that the scholars of his time consumed, not ten or twenty years, but their whole lives, in these disputes ; and that when, through old age, they became incapable of any other amusement or plea¬ sure, these dialectic questions still dwelt upon their tongues, and dialectic books still remained in their hands. It is scarcely to be conceived with what ardour, approaching even to * Conf. Thomas de Caus. Inept. Schol. Praefat. 82. p. 544. Hist. Sap. p. iii. p. 22G. Tribbechov. de D. Scholast. cum Pra;f. Hermann!. f Metalog. 1. ii. c. 10. p. 805. Coni'. Lud. Vives de Corrupt. Art. 1. iii. p. 112. 510 OF THE NATURE AND CHARACTER Book VII. madness, the first geniuses of the age applied to this kind or study. Losing themselves in a wood of abstract conceptions and subtle distinctions, the further they proceeded the greater was the darkness and confusion, till at length, what was commonly called philosophy no longer deserved the name. Ludovicus Vives, one of the most intelligent writers of the dx- teenth century, speaking of the Scholastic philosophy, says,* “ From the writings of Aristotle they have selected, not the most useful, but the most intricate and unprofitable parts ; not his Books of Natural History, or his Problems, but his Physics, and those treatises w’hich most resemble theirs in subtlety and obscurity ; for example, his Books upon the First Philo¬ sophy, upon Fleaven, and upon Generation. For, as to the treatise on Meteors, they are so entirely unacquainted with the subject, that it seems to have been admitted among the Scholastic books rather by accident than design. The truth is, that these philosophers are less acquainted with nature than husbandmen or mechanics ; and so much offended are they with that Nature which they do not understand, that they have framed for themselves another nature, which God never framed, consisting of for¬ malities, hsecceities, realities, relations, Platonic ideas, and other subtleties, which they honour with the name of the metaphysical world ; and if any man has a turn of mind averse to the study of real nature, but adapted to the pursuit of these visionary fictions, they say, he is possessed of a sub¬ lime genius.” The topics, upon which these philosophers spent the whole force of their ingenuity, were of a kind at once the most difficult and abstruse, and the most trifling and useless. Intention and remission, proportion and degree, infinity, formality, quiddity, individuality and other abstract ideas, furnished innumerable questions to exercise their subtlety. Not contented with con¬ sidering properties and relations as they subsist, and are perceived, in natural objects, they separated, in their conceptions, the former from the latter, and by this artifice transferred them into universal notions. Then forgetting that these notions are merely the offspring of the reasoning mind, they considered them as real entities, and made use of them as sub¬ stantial principles in explaining the nature of things. This they did, not only in metaphysics but in physics, in which these imaginary entities con¬ fused and obscured all their reasonings. If these creatures of abstraction be brought back to their natural connexion with real objects, and Avith the terms which express them, it will appear, that they had nothing more than an imaginary existence, and the whole contest concerning them will vanish into a mere war of Avords. Whence some judgment may be formed concerning the value of this most profound, angelic, and seraphic phi¬ losophy. The opinion of Vives upon this subject merits attention, -f- “ Some maintain, that studies of this kind are useful to prepare the Avay for other kinds of learning, by sharpening the ingenuity of the student ; and that those who understand these subtle questions, Avill the more easily acquire a knowledge of less difficult subjects : but neither of these assertions is true. One reason why questions of this kind are thought ingenious is, that they are not understood ; for it is not uncommon for men to admire Avhat they do not comprehend, and to think that most profound, which they are not able to fathom. In the opinion of many, however, these enigmatical subtleties are only to be ranked among the trifling amuse¬ ments of children ; being, in truth, not the produce of an understanding L. c. 1. V. p. ICC. 1 L. c. 1. iii. p. 129. Chap. 3. S. 3. OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. 511 exercised and improved by erudition, but springing up In an unoccupied mind, from an ignorance of better things, like useless weeds in an unculti¬ vated soil.” To the same purpose Lord Bacon, with his usual strength of judgment, says;* “ As many natural bodies, whilst they are still entire, are corrupted, and putrefy, so the solid knowledge of things often degene¬ rates into subtle, vain, and silly speculations, which, although they may not seem altogether destitute of ingenuity, are insipid and useless. This kind of unsound learning, which preys upon itself, has often appeared, particularly among the Scholastics, who having much leisure, quick parts, and little reading ; being in mind as closely confined to the writings of a few authors, and especially of their dictator Aristotle, as they are in body to the cells of their monasteries; and being, moreover, in a great measure, ignorant of the history both of nature and of the world ; out of very flimsy materials, but with the most rapid and violent motion of the shuttle of thought, they have woven those laborious webs which are preserved in their writings. The truth is, that the human mind, when it is employed upon external objects, is directed in its operations by the nature of the materials upon which its faculties are exercised ; but if, like the spidei’, it draws its materials from within itself, it produces cobwebs of learning, wonderful indeed from the fineness of the threads, and the delicacy of the workmanship, but of no real value or use.”j' The general prevalence of this taste for subtle speculations, among the Scholastics, is certainly not to be accounted for, chiefly from the want of more important objects to occupy the leisure of monastic life, and to fur¬ nish occasions of generous and useful emulation among those who devoted their days to study. But the particular direction which this idle humour took was owing to the universal authority which, after Augustine, Aris¬ totle, in the manner already explained, by degrees acquired in the Christian schools. The reverence, almost religious, which the Scholastics paid to the Stagirite, naturally led them to follow implicitly his method of philo¬ sophising, and to embrace his opinions, as far as they were able to discover them. “ There are,” says Vives, ;}; “ both philosophers and divines, who not only say that Aristotle reached the utmost boundaries of science, but that his syllogistic method of reasoning is the most direct and certain path to knowledge ; a presumption which has led us to receive, upon the authority of Aristotle, many tenets as fully knowm and established, which are by no means such ; for why should we fatigue ourselves with further inquiry, when it is agreed that nothing can be discovered beyond what may be found in his writings. Hence has sprung up in the mind of men an incredible degree of indolence; so that every one thinks it safest and most pleasant to see with another’s eyes, and believe with another’s faith, and to examine nothing for himself.” There cannot be a clearer proof of the ex¬ travagant height to which this’ApttrroreXo/xav/a, rage for Aristotle, was car¬ ried, than the fact complained of by Melancthon, § that in sacred assem¬ blies the ethics of Aristotle were read to the people instead of the Gospel. Notwithstanding all the homage which was paid to the name of Aristotle, it is certain that the Scholastics were very imperfectly acquainted with the true sense of his writings : for not to insist at present upon the diffi¬ culties which unavoidably attend the study of his works, arising from the abstract nature of the subjects upon which he treats, from the studied ambiguity with which he frequently writes, from the extreme conciseness * De Aug'. Sclent, t. i. Op. I. i. c. 9. t Conf. Lang. Chron. Ciz. t. i. p. 305. Pistor. p. 836. Erasmi Encom. yorise. J L. c. 1. V. p. 161. § Apol. A. C. p. 62. 512 OF THE NATURE AND CHARACTER Book VII. of his style, and from his obscure and defective report of the opinions of preceding philosophers, it must be recollected that these philosophers engaged in the study of Aristotle without a previous acquaintance with history, or with the Greek philosophj^, and even without the knowledge of the Greek language, and saw the doetrines of their master through the obscure medium of very imperfect translations. Hence they never under¬ stood his whole system in connexion, and often created monstrous forms, at which the Stagirite himself would have been terrified. The Scholastic philosophy, thus introduced, and supported by the authority of Aristotle, derived its complete establishment from the firm alliance into which it entered with theology, and the honours and emolu¬ ments which were, in consequence of this allianee, bestowed upon those w'ho excelled in this kind of learning. Dialeetics having been found an useful instrument in establishing the prevailing theological system, emi¬ nence in this art became the sure road to ecclesiastical preferment. Almost all the great men, who have been mentioned in the preceding chapter, rose to distinction through their knowledge of subtle questions in rneta- physies, and through their adroitness in wielding the weapons of logic. Excellence in the Scholastie art of trifling was not only sufficient to pro¬ cure the high titles of Most Profound, Subtle, Resolute, Wonderful, Angelic, or Seraphic Doctor ; but to create professors, abbots, bishops, cardinals, and even pontiffs. What wonder, that the Scholastic philo¬ sophy universally prevailed ? The effeets of its prevalence were of the most serious nature. Besides the extravagant waste of time which these disputes occasioned, they intro¬ duced an absurd kind of vanity, which persuaded these sublime doctors to believe that they had arrived at the summit of wisdom, both human and divine, and gave occasion to violent contests, which often terminated in something worse than a mere war of words. Theology, already sufficiently clouded and corrupted by the speculations and disputes of former ages, by admitting into its service Scholastic philosophy, involved itself in new obseurity ; so that at length, instead of the plain and simple doctrine of religion, little else was to be found in the writings of theologians, but vague notions and verbal distinctions. As an example of the mischief which arose to theology from this alliance, we may mention the doctrine of transubstantiation, which first sprung up at this period, and concerning which the most violent disputes arose between Berengar and his heretical partisans on the one side, and Lanfranc and his orthodox brethren on the other, till at length this absurd dogma passed into an article of faith. Another evil which arose from the Scholastie philosophy was, that instead of attempting to distinguish the real differences of things, and to deduce clear conclusions from certain principles, in order to enlarge the boundaries of human knowledge, it employed all the powers of ingenuity, and all the arts of sophistry, to obseure the prineiples of science, to mix truth Muth fallacy, and to open the door to universal sceptieism. By the help of confused notions, unmeaning distinctions, barbarous terms, and a sophistical method of reasoning, men were prepared to advance and defend the most frivolous and absurd positions ; both theological and philosophical disputations degenerated into a mere trial of skill ; and the honest inquirer after truth was left without any eertain guide. The consequences were, that tenets destructive of all religion were often publicly maintained in the schools ; a corrupt system of moral philosophy, which left open many avenues to dishonesty and debauchery, was taught ; and great depravity of manners prevailed. Chap. 3. S. 3. OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. 513 Tliis corruption of opinions and manners was accompanied with bar¬ barism of language. Little attention was now paid to the study of grammar, or rhetoric ; a vast mass of terms, wholly unknown in the Augustine age, was introduced into the Latin tongue, to express the abstract notions of dialectics and metaphysics ; and a verbose, puerile, and inelegant mode of writing generally prevailed. John of Salisbury, who took much pains to revive an attention to literature, complained,* that in his time, those who professed to be acquainted with all arts, both liberal and mechanic, and to teach them in a short time, neglected the study of grammar ; whence they were ignorant of the first art, without which it is in vain that any one attempt to become master of the rest. Even the best waiters of this period were not wholly free from literary barbarism. -f- After this general view of the nature, causes, and effects of the Scholastic philosophy,^; the reader may perceive, that it would be a most irksome and unprofitable labour to attend these subtle doctors through all the winding paths, in which they wandered from the straight road of simple truth and common sense. The immense variety of their questions, the incompre¬ hensible subtlety of their distinctions, and the uncertainty and obscurity or their mode of reasoning, render it an impracticable task to give a clear and connected view of the doctrines of the Scholastic philosophy. Or if it were possible to pour the light of order upon this chaos, the result would be nothing more than the repetition of Aristotle’s dialectics and meta¬ physics, clothed in barbarous terms and phrases, and encumbered with a vast addition of puerile trifles, and visionary fictions, which it would be an unpardonable abuse of the reader’s patience to retail. A few words con¬ cerning the manner in which the Scholastics taught logic and metaphysics, physics, politics, and morals, and concerning their sects, shall conclude this part of our work. Although logic and metaphysics were the peculiar province of the Scholastics, their labours in these branches of learning were of little use. Their logic § was rather the art of sophistry than that of reasoning; for it was applied to subjects which they did not understand, and employed upon principles which are not ascertained. Their whole business being dis¬ putation, they sought out for such thorny questions as were likely to afford them sufficient exercise for their ingenuity. Their whole care was to con¬ duct themselves in the contest by the rules of art, and their whole ambition to obtain the victory. For want of clear principles, and accurate defini¬ tions, their metaphysical system was a chaos of abstract notions and obscure terms. They professed, indeed, to follow the metaphysics of Aristotle, but for want of understanding the ancient doctrines of physics and mathe¬ matics, or even the language of Aristotle, they frequently substitute the fictions of their own imaginations in the room of the Aristotelian prin¬ ciples. Of this the manner in which they handled the subject of first matter affords a clear example. The Stagirite, in his metaphysics, had called matter, that of which, considered in itself, neither quantity nor quality can be predicated, and in which being terminates. In this definition Aristotle had a reference to the ancient doctrine, that bodies are composed of cor¬ puscles ; and, by mental abstraction, separated from these that which is the * Metal. 1. i. c. 24. t Imd. Viv. 1. c. 1. ji. p. 78. X Conf. Laun. de Fort. Aris. Act. Phil. v. iii. p. 921. Matt. Paris, ad Ann. 1201. § Lud. Viv. 1. c. I. iii. p. 111. 128. 1. v. p. 177. L L 514- OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. Book VII. first formal cause of their existence, and called it first matter. But the Scholastics, being ignorant of the ancient notion of body, and confounding the purely metaphysical conception of matter Avith an extended subject endued with form and quantity, fell into trifling disputes, and devised innu¬ merable subtleties, by which the original obscurity of the doctrine of Aristotle concerning the first matter was greatly increased. The first matter, according to the followers of Thomas Aquinas, was simple power Avithout actual energy. Others, who perceived that this was a mere phan¬ tom of the imagination, defended the real existence of matter, though they confessed themselves ignorant of its nature ; whilst others, concluding that the attributes ascribed to matter could belong only to God, contended that God Avas the first matter. Nor did these subtle reasoners trifle less on the subject of Divine and spiritual natures. Bonaventure, in his Com¬ pendium of Theology, treats of angels, their substance, orders, offices, language, and the like, as if he himself had been an inhabitant of the an¬ gelic world. In natural philosophy, instead of attending to the real properties of bodies, and investigating the laws of nature by experiment and observation, they reasoned Avith subtlety upon vague and obscure principles, and always confounded physics with metaphysics. Many reasonings of this kind may be met with in those parts of the Avritings of Thomas Aquinas, Avhere he treats of the principles of nature, of the nature of matter, of the occult operations of nature, and the like.* Among other profound observations, he derives the occult operations of nature from the forms of things, Avhich exist in their respective bodies, and supposes the formal principles of such bodies to be celestial bodies, which, by their accession or recession, cause the production or corruption of the inferior body. Whence he concludes, that there is in these occult forms a capacity of being restored to higher principles, namely, celestial bodies, or to poAvers still higher than these; that is, to separate intellectual substances, which in their respective opera¬ tions leave traces of themselve.s. If the reader Avill apply the mysterious operations of these occult forms to the explanation of magnetic attractions, he Avill soon perceive hoAv much the science of physics is indebted to this angelic doctor. Bonaventure, j- and others, laboured in this field with equal success. Roger Bacon, indeed Albert and a few more, in their inquiries into nature, left the clouds of metaphysics, and descended into the humble vale of experience; but the Avorld Avas unprepared to receive the information they were able to communicate, and imputed their opera¬ tions to the poAver of magic. Boniface, the patron of ignorance and bar¬ barism, summoned Polydore Virgil, bishop of Salisbury, to the court of inquisition, for maintaining the existence of antipodes ; for this profound theologian wisely concluded, that such a race of men Avould be a neAV Avorld for Avhich Christ had not died.j; Upon the subject of ethics, we find among the Scholastics surprising proofs of ignorance and weakness. Till the tAvelfth century, the only books of morals Avhich obtained any authority Avere that Avretched compi¬ lation, the of Pope Gregory, and some other injudicious collections of sentences from the scriptures and the Avritings of the fathers. When the Ethics of Aristotle Avere introduced, and moral doctrine began to be considered as a part of philosophy, Ave indeed find the Scholastics treating concerning virtues and vices, but always in the dialectic method ; substi- * Opusc. p. 213. f Opusc. t. ii. p. 728. eti. Lugd. Conf. Viv. 1. v. p. 176. + Aventin. Ann. 1. iii. Welser. Ann. Boic. 1. v. Bayle, Art. Virg. Chap. 3. S. 3. OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. 515 tuting useless questions concerning cases which are never like!}" to happen in real life, in the room of practical inquiries : Quid sit pulchrum, quid turpe, quid utile, quid non.(a) If they discoursed upon these topics, they either implicitly followed the definition and aiTangement of Aristotle, or injudiciously combined with his moral doctrine the precepts of piety and sanctity which the church had prescribed. The correction and improvement of ethics was indeed at¬ tempted by John Scotus Erigena, and other followers of the supposed Dionysius ; but these enthusiasts having abandoned the humble path of common sense to soar into the regions of mysticism, the remedy proved I scarcely less mischievous than the disease to which it was applied ; and the simple doctrine of pure morality, taught by Christ and his apostles, which had hitherto been debased by superstition, was now' lost in the extrava¬ gances of enthusiasm. The spirit of disputation which so eminently distinguished the Scholastics, gave birth to many sects, which contended against each other with bitter animosity. The disciples of Albert, called Albertists, who mixed the doc- I trines of religion with the tenets of the Aristotelian philosophy, were vehemently opposed by Peter Lombard and his followers. The dissen- I sions between Thomas Aquinas and John Duns Scotus laid the foundatio of the sects of the Thomists and Scotists, who disputed with great w'armth on the doctrines of grace and free-will, and other theological topics. From the school of Duns Scotus arose Occam, the inventor of new subtleties, ? wdio became the father of the sect of Occamists : but, among all the sects I of the Scholastics, the most memorable, on account of the extent, the i violence, and the duration of their contests, are those of the Nominalists t and Realists. To understand the ground of the dispute which gave rise to these sects, it will be necessary to recollect the different tenets of the ancient schools of Plato, Aristotle, and Zeno, concerning ideas, or the universal forms of things. Ideas, according to Plato, are not the universal notions or con¬ ceptions of the mind, arising from the contemplation of external objects, but intelligible natures, having a certain and stable existence, whose origin and seat is the Divine mind, and which are the immediate objects of con¬ templation to the human understanding. Universal essences of this kind, : external to matter, Aristotle thought to be the mere fictions of the imagina- ' tion of Plato, or rather of Pythagoras ; but, not daring to deny the existence ^ of essential forms, he affirmed that ideas, or forms, were eternally united to matter, and that from this union of matter and form arose existing bodies. Zeno and the Stoic school acknowledged primary principles of material things, but denied their essentiality, and ridiculed those who asserted the substantial existence of ideas or universals, as distinguished from the con¬ ceptions of the mind, and the words by which they are expressed. This subtle question was pursued by the Eclectic philosophers, who endeavoured to reconcile the Acadamic, Peripatetic, and Stoic notions concerning it by supposing, that ideas have a real essentiality, but only in the Divine understanding, where they subsist as models, by means of which, in framing individual bodies, essential characters of things are impressed upon matter, as by one seal similar impressions are made upon innumerable portions of wax ; and that these ideas may be contemplated by the human mind, and may be expressed by universal terms. Others left it undetermined whether (a) What fair or base, wliat good or ill, to man ; And what his wisest, safest, happiest plan. L L 2 516 OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. Book VII. f tlie universals thus contemplated have a real ph3"sical existence. Porphyry, i; in his introduction to the Aristotelian logic, says,* * * § “ Concerning and . species, whether they have a real essence, or are barely conceptions of the v mind; and if they subsist, whether corporeally or incorporeally, whether • spiritually or only in the objects of sense, I give no opinion, because the ; subject is abstruse, and requires a larger discussion.” This point, which Porphyry left undetermined, was resumed in the schools ; and the opinion of Aristotle, that universals subsist not prior to individual bodies, nor after them, but within them, and are the forms eternally united to matter, which 1 make bodies to be such as they are, universally prevailed ; till, in the eleventh » century, Rosceline, before mentioned, adopted the Stoic opinion, that X universals have no real existence either before or in individuals, but are « mere names and words by which the kinds of individuals are expressed : a ® tenet which was afterwards propagated by Abelard, and produced the sect of the Nominalists. j- This new opinion gave great offence to the philosophers and divines of the eleventh century, perhaps, chiefly because Rosceline, by applying it'to the doctrine of the trinity, brought upon himself a suspicion of heres^^ Many young persons, however, strenuously adhered to the side of the Nominalists; and the sect, through the ingenuity and ability of Abelard and others, obtained many followers.!: Some of these, to avoid censure, changed their ground so far as to maintain, that universals consist in notions and conceptions of the mind, formed by abstraction, whence they were called Conceptualists. The Realists, too, were of different opinions; some leaning towards the doctrine of Plato, and others towards that of Aristotle. In the twelfth century, the controversy still continued ; but the doctrine of the Realists found such able supporters in Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, that it almost became triumphant. But Occam, in the fourteenth century, revived the dying cause of the Nominalists, and gave it such a degree of credit, that after his time it was zealously maintained by Suisset,' Buridan, Marsilius ab Inghen, Wessel, and many others. The sect of the Nominalists, enjoying the countenance and favour of Louis the Eleventh, almost universally flourished in Germany; whilst that of the Realists, be¬ ing patronized by Pope John XXIII,, was prevalent in Italy and other countries ; till at length the Pope’s faction became predominant, and harassed the Nominalists with severe persecutions. Louis XL, king of France, published an edict which, in the year 1474, silenced and banished the Nominalists; ordered their books to be fastened up in the libraries with iron chains, that they might not be read by students; and requiredjji the academic youth to renounce their doctrines. Upon this the leadei’s offl the sect fled into Germany and England, where, at the beginning of theB reformation, they met with a strong I’einforcement in Luther, Melanct'honjW and others.§ fl Nothing could exceed the violence with which these disputes were con-J| ducted. Vives, who himself saw these contests, says,|| “ that when theM * Sect. 2. p. 2. Eel. Jul. Pacii. W f Otto Prising, de Gest. Frid. 1. i. c. 42. J. Sarisb. Met. 1. ii. c. 17. p. 814. Aventin. V Ann. Bor. 1. vi. p. 396. I Du Cbesne Scr. Hist. Fr. t. iv. p. C.32. Hist. Grit. Phil. t. iii. p. 906. Abelard, Hist. Cal. c. 3. § Plessis d’Argcn. Collect, t. i. p. 202. 255. 302. Bulaei Hist. Ac. Par. t. v. p. 678. 739. 747. Baluz. Misc. t. iv. p. 531. Naud. Add. Hist. Ludov. xi. p. 203. Laundis Hist. Gymn. Navarr, t. iv. p. 201. II L. c. 1. i. Conf. Erasin. Praef. Enchir. Gamer, Vit. Melancth. p. 213. Wood. Ant. Oxon. ad Ann. 1343. Patric. Disc. Perip. t. i. c. 13. Chap. 1. OF THE REVIVAL OF PHILOSOPHY. 517- ^ contending parties had exhausted their stock of verbal abuse, they often came to blows ; and it was not uncommon, in these quarrels about uni- versals, to see the combatants engaging, not only with their fists, but with clubs and swords, so tliat many have been wounded, and some killed.” Such were the blessed fruits of Scholastic philosophy ! We cannot more • properly take leave of this period of our history, than in the words of ■ Martial : Turpe est difficiles habere nugas, Et stultus labor est iiieptiaruin. (a) * BOOK VIII. OF THE REVIVAL OF PEIILOSOPHY. CHAPTER I. I OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE REVIVAL OF LETTERS UPON PHILOSOPHY. I I I 1 Having at length, not without difficulty, cleared our way through the I thorns and briars of the Middle Age, we are now arrived at a more I open and pleasant country, where we shall see learning and philosophy 1 recovering their ancient honours. This great effect was not produced in- II stantaneously ; but, as the twilight precedes the rising sun, so the dawning ■ of literature prepared the way for the revival of science ; till, at length, i genius was awakened, rational inquiry was resumed, and the night of the I Scholastic age was succeeded by a bright day of learning and true phi- ii I losophy. I In the thirteenth century, a singular but fanciful attempt was made to i introduce a new method of philosophising by Raymond Lully,!" long M famous for an invention whieh is ealled his Great Art. Lully was born t‘ in the island of Majorca, in the year 1234. After passing his younger ' days in pleasure, he was on a sudden induced, by a disappointment in love, ' to give himself up to retirement and devotion. In his retreat he boasted of visions and revelations. Forming a romantic design of converting the i Mahometans to the Christian faith, about the year 1287, he visited Pope ! ! Honorius the Fourth, and the ecclesiastics in Rome, and endeavoured to prevail upon them to assist him in his enterprise, and for this purpose to institute schools for teaching the Oriental languages. Finding his proposal, however, treated with contempt, he carried it to the courts of Paris, Genoa, ' and other states; but met with no better success. At last he determined (a) ’Tis a folly to sweat o’er a difficult trifle, And for silly devices invention to rifle. * Vidend. Hottingcr, Hist. Ecc. Sec. xiii. Leyser. Hist. Poet. Med. .'Evi. Marnix. ' Apiar. Rom. Ecc. p. i. c. 10. Flacii Carm. dc Corrupt. Eccl. Statu. Maihillon de ; Stud. Monast. p. ii. c. 7. Dupin Meth. Stud. 1. iv. Salabert. Pliil. Nomin. vind. Par. 1 1651, 8". .Ars Rationis ad Mentem Nomin. Ox. 1673, 12°. Maibillon Analcct. t. iv. p. 369. I t Bovilli Vit. Lullii. Danat. Hist. Balear. 518 OF THE REVIVAL OF PHILOSOPHY. Book VIII. to attempt the execution of his project, with no other resources than those which his own ingenuity and zeal supplied; and undertook a journey into Asia and Africa, where he visited the principal cities, in hope of making converts. After many disappointments and hazards, he returned home ; but the ardour of his enthusiasm remained unabated, and he renewed his application to several European princes. Finding no one, however, who was inclined to favour his design, he entered into the fraternity of Fran¬ ciscan monks ; and, inflamed with an invincible thirst after the glory of ! martyrdom, he went a second time into Africa, whence he had before been ; permitted to depart only upon condition that he would never return thither. ; This proved a most unfortunate adventure ; for upon his being again found in this country, he was thrown into prison, where he suffered great torture, j and whence he barely escaped with life, through the interest of certain Genoese traders, who took him on board their ship to convey him home. On his passage, when he was just within sight of his native country, he died, in the year 1315. He had the appellation of The Most En¬ lightened Doctor. Wonderful things are related of Lully’s chemical and medical skill;* but he is chiefly celebrated for an invention, by which he pretended to en¬ able any one mechanically to invent arguments and illustrations upon any subject, and thus to reach the summit of science at a small expense of time and labour. This Great Art professes to furnish a general instrument for assisting invention in the study of every kind of science. For this pur¬ pose certain general terms, which are common to all the sciences, but prin¬ cipally those of logic, metaphysics, ethics, and theology, are collected and arranged ; not however according to any natural division, but merely ac¬ cording to the caprice of the inventor. An alphabetical table of such terms was provided ; and subjects and predicates, taken from these, were respectively inscribed, in angular spaces, upon circular papers. The es¬ sences, qualities, affections, and relations of things being thus mechanically brought together, the circular papers of subjects were fixed in a frame, and those of predicates were so placed upon them as to move freely, and in their revolutions to produce various combinations of subjects and predicates ; whence would arise definitions, axioms, and propositions, var jing infinitely^ according to the different application of general terms, to particular sub¬ jects. Such is the general idea of Lully’s mechanical logic ; the parti¬ culars of which it would be wholly uninteresting to detail, since it is very evident, that the invention is perfectly futile : supposing that knowledge of the nature of things, which nevertheless it professes to teach; deriving its rules, not from reason, but from the arbitrary play of the imagination ; and furnishing certain repositories of universal notions, without providing any criterion for distinguishing truth from falsehood, or any method of discovering the real properties of things. The great Lullian art, though spoken of by certain writers of this period in the highest terms of panegyric, may therefore safely be pronounced an unprofitable and ridiculous in¬ vention, wholly unworthy of notice, except as a specimen of the artifice- with which men, who have more ingenuity than honesty, frequently im¬ pose upon vulgar weakness and credulity. -j- To the fanciful and enthusiastic Lully the philosophical world has few * Uorrich de Orig. Cliem. p. 12y. Fabr. Bi.b, Lat. Med. t. iv. p. 861. N. Anton. Bib. Hisp. Vet. t. ii. p, 84. Blount. Cens. p. 420. -f- Morhoff. I'olyb. t. i. c. 5. p. 352. Ve’,-ulani. Aug. Scient. 1. vi. c. 2. Alsted. Clavis Artis Lidl. Arg. 1608. Ars Magna, Ed. Argent. 1598. 8vo. cum Comment. AgripptB. Brunon. Lampad. Combin. p. 68S. Leibnitz de Arte Combinat. p. 33. Chap 1. OF THE REVIVAL OF PHILOSOPHY. 519 obligations. But other more cultivated and liberal spirits arose about this period, who rendered essential service to mankind, by reviving a taste for learning and science. In the meritorious design of banishing barbarism, and reviving a taste for polite literature, the Italian poet, Dante Allighieri,* appears to I have led the wajL He was born at Florence, in the year 1265. In his youth he not only applied himself to the study of poetry, and other branches of elegant learning ; but, considering the period in which he lived, I acquired a correct acquaintance with philosophy. According to his biographers, he was inferior to none of his age as a philosopher and a poet ; in genius he w'as sublime, in language brilliant, and in reasoning ' accurate and profound. He studied pliysics and mathematics at Paris, I and wrote a philosophical piece, entitled, Quoist'io de Nalura duormn Ele- mentorum Aqute et Terr]>. Cave, p. 97. S •f Allat. 1. c. p. 7C0. T. Smith, Misc. p. 4. llenaudot. Diss. de Vit. et Op. Geimadii. Fahr. Bib. Gr. v. x. p. 343. ' '* Chap. 2. OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE, &e. 525 contest ; but tlie dispute produced no better effect than that of exposing the contending parties to ridicule ; and, therefore, only deserves to be men¬ tioned, as an example of the power of prejudice to pervert the judgment, and indame the passions, of men.* CHAPTER II. ' OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE REFORMATION OF RELIGION UPON THE STATE OF PHILOSOPHY. If, at this period, philosophy was much indebted to the revival of letters, it was not less benefited by the reformation of religion. For, no sooner did the friends of truth and virtue apply themselves to the correc¬ tion of religious errors, and endeavour to free mankind from the yoke of ecclesiastical domination, to which the whole Western world had for many ages tamely submitted, than philosophy, which had been loaded with the same chains with religion, began to lift up her head, and to breathe a freer ' air. Determined no longer to yield implicit obedience to human authority, but to exercise their own understandings, and follow their own judgments, these bold reformers prosecuted religious and philosophical inquiries with an independent spirit, which soon led them to discover the futility and absurdity of the Scholastic method of philosophising, and enabled them at the same time, in a great measure, to correct the errors of philosophy, and to reform the corruptions of religion. The study of ancient languages being now revived, and the arts of elo¬ quence and criticism having now resumed their ancient station, the reformers were soon convinced, that Ignorance and barbarism had been among the principal causes of the corruption of doctrine and discipline in the church. Hence, whilst these honest and zealous friends of truth ardently longed for the reformation of religion, they were earnestly desirous to see philosophy restored to its former purity ; and their bold attempts to subdue religious error and prejudice indirectly contributed to the correc¬ tion of philosophy, and the advancement of learning.j- So extensively and powerful was the operation of this reforming spirit, that it diffused its influence beyond the reformers themselves, to those who I still chose to remain within the verge of the Romish church. Many of I these secretly approved of the design in which the reformers were engaged ; ! but, either because they were dissatisfied with the manner in which it was * Diss. Boivin. Mem. de I’Acad. des Inscrip, t. ii. p. 775. Heumann, Act. Phil. v. ii. i! p. 537. ; Vidend. Paul. Jov. Elo^. Wharton ad Cave. Ondin de Scrip. Eccl. Fabric. Bibl. I Gr. Fabric. Bib. Lat. Med. Reusner in Iconibus Lit. Clar. Vir. Gundling, Hist, i Erud. Wadding. Ann. Ord. Men. Soleri Acta S, t. v. Dupin, Nouv. Bibl. des Auct. j Eccl. t. xi. Borricb. de Grig, et Prog. Chemiae. Nich. Anton. Bibl. Hisp. Blount, Cens. 1 cel. Auct. Bzovii Annal. Als. Horn. Hist. Phil. 1. vi. Niger de Script. Florent. [ I’occiantius de Script. Flor. Niceron. Memoires. Papadopoli Hist. Gymn, Patav. I Trithemii Cat. S. E. Annal. Hirsaug. Teissier Eloges. Ghilini Theat. Vir. Erud. i Morhoff. Polyhistor. Huet. de Claris Interpret. Adami. Vit. Phil. Mirmus in Auct. I Bayle. f Seckendorf. Hist. Lutheran. 1. i. sect. 09. Ep, ad Reuchlin. p. 13. .526 ON THE INFLUENCE OF THE Book VIII. conducted, or because they were afraid to encounter the hazards which attended the undertaking, contented themselves with admiring the courage of the reformers, and lending them concealed and indirect assistance. Perceiving that the Scholastic method of philosophising had been the chief cause of the ‘evils which had arisen in the church, these men, several of whom were eminently distinguished for genius and learning, judiciously endeavoured to correct religion, by first correcting philosophy. Some inveighed seriously against the prevailing corruptions of science and learn- in, and painted, in strong colours, the distorted features of the Scholastic philosophy, and the mischiefs which it had produced in the learned world. Others, calling in the aid of wit and satire, held up its deformities to public ridicule. These attacks upon the established institutions and practices of the schools, raised a violent ferment among those who were interested in their support, and brought upon the heads of their opponents a load of calumny, reproach, and persecution. But this violence served no other purpose, than to expose the weakness of the cause of the assailants, and to bring Seholastic philosophy into general contempt. The interests of learning and religion were so much indebted to these castigators of the Scholastics, that it would be injustice to their memory, not to give the principal of them a place in this work.* The learning and ability of that great man, Erasmus f of Rotterdam, and the services which he rendered to learning and religion, are well known. But his serious labours having been chiefly of the philological kind : he appears as a philosopher in no other light than as a keen observer and humorous censor of false philosophy, in his incomparable treatise in¬ tituled “ The Praise of Folly,” and in other parts of his MTitings. His penetrating genius, extensive reading, and elegant taste, gave him great weight among his contemporaries, and added much efficacy to his useful labours. The severe sarcasms which he cast upon the Scholastics, created him enemies, and subjected him to hardships ; but he never ceased to chastise folly, and to approve himself a true friend to solid learning and sound philosophy. Erasmus was born in the year 1467, and died in 1536. His numerous works were published in ten volumes folio, at Leyden, 1706. The footsteps of Erasmus were closely followed by Ludovicus ViVES,j; a native of Valentia, in Spain, who, though well-trained in all the subtleties of the Scholastic philosophy at Paris, had the good sense to discover its futility, and diligently applied himself to more useful studies. At Louvain, he undertook the office of a preceptor, and exerted himself with great ability and success in correcting barbarism, chastising the corruptors of learning, and reviving a taste for true science and elegant letters. Eras¬ mus, with whom he lived upon the footing of intimate friendship, speaking of Vives when he was only twenty-six years of age, says § that there was no part of philosophy in which he did not excel ; and that he had made such proficiency in learning, and in the arts of speaking and writing, that he scarcely knew his equal. He wrote a commentary upon Augustine’s treatise De Civitate Dei, which discovers an extensive aequaintance with ancient philosophy. Henry VIIl. of England, to whom he dedicated this work, was so pleased with it, that he invited the author to his court, and made him preceptor to his daughter Mary. Though he discharged his * Conf. Adam. Vit. Phil. p. 336. Thaun. an Ann. 1547. Teissier Eloges, t. i. p. 7. Blount, Cens. p. 595. Erasmi Encom, Moriae. Epistolae Obscurorum Virorum. t Adami Vit. p. 98. Le Clcrc. Bibl. t. vii. p. 215. Bayle. Jortin’s Life of Erasmus. t Blount, 1. c. p. 519. Teissier Elog. t. i. 266. Nic. Anton. Bib. Hisp. N. t. i. p. 109. Colomes. Hisp. Orient, p. 223. § Ep. xix. 101. Chap. 2. REFORMATION UPON PHILOSOPHY. 527 office with great fidelity ; yet, in consequence of his opposition to the king’s divorce, he fell under his displeasure ; and it was not without difficulty that he escaped to Bruges, where he devoted the remainder of his days to study, lie died in the year 1537, or according to Thuanas, in 1541. With Eras¬ mus and Buddaeus, he formed a triumvirate of literature, which did honour to the age. He wrote De Prima Philosophia, “ On the First Philosophy De Explanatione Essentiamm, “ On the Explanation of Essences De Censura Vcri, “On the Test of Truth De Initiis, Sectis, et Laudihus Philosophice, “ On the Origin, Sects, and Praises of Philosophy and De Corruptis Artihus et Tradendis Disciplinis,* “ On the Corruption of Science, and on Education.” These writings, of which the two last are the most valuable, discover great strength of judgment, an extensive know¬ ledge of philosophy, much enlargement of conception, uncommon sagacity in detecting the errors of ancient and modern philosophers, particularly of Aristotle and his followers ; and, in fine, a mind capable of attempting things beyond the standard of the age in which he lived. To all this he added great perspicuity and elegance of style, not unworthy of the friend of Erasmus. Morhoff f calls the writings of Vives, Golden Remains, which are worthy to be carefully perused by all learned men. A third scourge of Scholastic barbarism was James Faber, or Le Fevre,J a native of Picardy. He was educated at Paris; but not con¬ tented with thelearning he acquired there, hetravelledthrough various parts of the world to converse with the learned. On his return to France, he declared open war against the Scholastic philosophy, and attempted to in¬ troduce the genuine Aristotelian philosophy, and to disseminate a taste for mathematical learning. Besides theological works, he wrote commentaries upon the dialectics, physics, politics, economics of Aristotle. One of his contemporaries, speaking of these commentaries, says,§ “ Faber has ren¬ dered the Peripatetic doctrine so clear, that we have no longer any occa¬ sion for Ammonius, Simplicius, or Philoponus.” Another says,|| “Faber was the first among the French, as Cicero among the Romans, who united philosophy and eloquence.” The boldness with which he opposed the corruption of philosophy brought upon him a suspicion of heresy, and the persecution of the doctors of the Sorbonne ; but he found a secure asylum in the court of Margaret, Queen of Navarre, where he is said to have lived to the age of a hundred years. About the same time arose Marius Nizolius,^ of Brussels, a severe castigator of barbarism. He was an enthusiastic admirer of the purity and eloquence of the style of Tully; and to promote a ta.ste for correct and elegant literature, he wrote Ids Thesaurus Ciceronianus, “ Ciceronian Treasury.” By a natural association, he extended his attachment to Cicero from his language to his philosophy ; and maintained a strenuous contest in favour of Cicero with several learned men. In the course of the dispute he wrote a treatise De veris Princijnis et vera Ratione Philosophandi,** “ On the true Principles and Method of Philosophising,” in which he vehemently censured the followers of the Stagirite, and particularly the Scholastics, chiefly for the corruption they had introduced into the Latin language. But the most direct and successful attack upon the Scholastic philosophy * Ed. Lugd. 1551, 8vo. f Polyhist. t. i. 1. ii. c. 2. sect. 34. X Jovius. c. 121. Bayle. Art. Le Fevre. Blount, p. 521. § Rhenan Ep. ad Reuchlin, p. 52. 11 Wimpheling, c. 15. p. 236. ^ Morhoff. t. i. 1. i. c. 25. sect. 26. ** Ed. 1553. Leibn. 1670. Ep. Leibn. t. ii. p. 63. 528 OF THE INFLUENCE OF THE Book VIIl. was made by the reformers. Perceiving that the human understanding was clouded, and the freedom of inquiry restrained, by the forms of the schools, and that nothing contributed so much to perpetuate superstition and error in the church, as false philosophy, these great and able men concluded, that the disease admitted of no palliative ; that, in order to produce any great and lasting effect, it was not sufficient barely to lop off the heads of the tares which had sprung up in the church, but that it was become necessary to tear them up by the roots. They therefore, with a degree of magnanimity which entitles them to immortal honour, made a bold and open attack at once upon the corruption of philosophy and theo¬ logy ; laying open the numerous evils which the Scholastic mode of philoso¬ phising had introduced into religion ; showing by what puerile arts, and with how much injury to truth, both natural and Divine, it had maintained its authority; and exhorting young men to leave such faithless guides, and give themselves up wholly to the direction of Beason and Revelation. The leader in tins arduous and meritorious undertaking was the great reformer Martin Luther,* born at Eislaben, in Saxony, in the year 1483. He was early initiated in the Peripatetic philosophy, but soon opened his eyes to discover its defects. During his residence at Wittern- burg, in the year 1516, he wrote to Jodocus, a zealous Aristotelian, who had been his preceptor in the university at Erford, stating his doubts both respecting the doctrines of Aristotle and of Porphyry. Jodocus was so much offended with the freedom of his remarks, that, upon his next visit to Erford, he refused to see him. Luther, far from being intimidated by this mark of displeasure, afterwards wrote him a second letter, in which he boldly gave it as his opinion, that it would be impossible to reform the church, without entirely abolishing the canons and decretals, and with them, the Scholastic theology, philosophy, and logic, and instituting others in their stead, j- In the early part of his life, Luther had studied the writings of Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and others, and in the dispute concerning universals, attached himself to the party of the Nominalists ; but maturer age and reflection instructed him to treat the whole controversy, and in¬ deed all the subtleties of the Scholastics, with contempt. This was probably in part owing to his early acquaintance with the ancients, but chiefly to that peculiar strength and ardour of mind, which led him easily to discover the weakness and absurdity of the prevailing modes of reasoning and judging upon theological and philosophical subjects, and to observe, with regret and indignation, the fatal effects of corrupt philosophy united with ecclesiastical tyranny. He saw much reason to consider the Scholastic philosophy as the foundation of the principal errors which had been in¬ troduced into theology, and the chief support of that oppressive dominion which the see of Rome exercised over the consciences of men : and he regarded the logical and metaphysical parts of Aristotle as the immediate grounds of those disputes, which had given rise to the factions of the Thomists, Scotists, Occamists, and others. He therefore rejected both the Scholastic and Aristotelian philosophy, as not only irreconcilable with the Christian system, but the cause of endless controversies in the Christian church. In various parts of his writings he expresses great contempt for Aristotle and his followers. He asserts, that the study of Aristotle was vvholly useless, not only in theology and sacred learning, but in natural * Melancthon. Vit. Lulli. ap. Op. L. recus. cum Ann. Heumann, Getting. 1741. 4to. Seckendorf. Hist. Lutheran, p. lOk 121. Fabric. Centifol. Luth. p. i. p. 3C7. t Lutheri F.pist. i. 10. I I Chap. 2. REFORMATION UPON PHILOSOPHY. 529 philosophy.* “What doth it contribute,” says he, “ towards the knowledge I of things, to be perpetually trifling and cavilling, in language conceived and prescribed by Aristotle, concerning matter, form, motion, and time.” And again : -j- “ I am persuaded that neither Thomas, nor all the Thomists ! together, ever understood a single chapter of Aristotle.” On some occa¬ sions, perhaps, the heat of controversy might lead Luther to make use of language too contemptuous and indignant, in speaking of Aristotle and his writings. His indignation, however, was chiefly directed against that false philosophy which had been built upon his doctrine, ill understood ; and his great object was to free the world from the yoke of authority in philosophy and religion. It is sufficiently manifest from the life and writings of i Luther, that he was no enemy to sound philosophy. Melancthon, though he differed in judgment, on many topics, from Luther, and though he so far espoused the doctrine of Aristotle as to ■ attempt the revival of the pure Peripatetic philosophy in the schools (on f which account we shall afterwards give him a place among the Peripatetics of this period) nevertheless perfectly agreed with the Father of the Refor- ! mation in his judgment concerning the nature and effects of the Scholastic philosophy. In his writings, we find him frequently complaining of the mischiefs which these subtle speculations had occasioned : J “ Ever since this method of philosophising has been introduced, ancient learning has been despised, mathematics deserted, and sacred studies more negligently cultivated. Among the variety of opinions which prevail in the different ' Scholastic factions, you will scarcely find one that is consistent with itself. Truth is every where confounded with error, aud every doctor is more concerned to gather crowds by his noisy disputations, than to discover and establish sound philosophy. In the mean time, dissensions every where arise; enmities are cherished; rancour supplies the place of that candid i spirit which ought ever to accompany learning ; and the ancient union between the Muses and Graces is dissolved.” Many other followers of Luther and friends of the Reformation, opposed the Scholastic mode of ' philosophising, and exerted themselves to introduce a spirit of liberal inquiry. The cultivation of polite learning, which had revived in Italy, and was now spread still further, promoted the same good design. Though few of i those who engaged in critical studies addicted themselves to any particular i: sect of philosophy, they served the cause of science, as well as of litera- li : ture, by editing and interpreting the philosophical writings of the ancients. 1 , In the sixteenth century, James SAr)OLET,§ a great admirer of Ciceronian 1 i eloquence, wrote an elegant treatise De Laudibus Philosophice, “ On the Praises of Philosophy : ” Hieronymus Fracastorius \\ studied nature, ! i and was well acquainted with mathematics and astronomy : Camerarius^ i' I edited, with valuable notes, many ancient Greek authors ; and among the ^ rest, Archytas Pe Decern Prcedicamentis, “ On the Ten Predicaments,” Nicomaehus De Theologia Arithmetical “ On Arithmetical Theology,” and Aristotle’s Ethics : Grynacus,** whose translations from Plato, Aris¬ totle, and Plutarch, ranked him among the learned men of his age ; and of whom Erasmus speaks, j”{- as a man who with an accurate knowledge of * Declarationes ad Hiedelbergenses apud Werensdorf. Diss. de Progressu emendatae ’ i per Lutli. Relig. p. 20. f T. i. Ep. 45. J De Stud, corrigend. t. i. p. 489. Conf. Orat. adv. Rhadin. t. iii. p. .38. ' § Blount, p. 573. Teisser, t. i. 29. || Thuan. ap. Adam. Vit. Med. p. 77. ^ Eabric. Bib. Gr. v. xiii. p. 493. Adami, p. 118. I f L. XX vi. Ep. 39^ M M 530 OF THE REMAINS OF Book VIII. the Grecian and Latin tongues, and an extensive acquaintance with phi¬ losophical and mathematical science, united an uncommon share of modesty. Through the aid of such men as these, with which the age abounded, philosophy, as well as literature, revived. In this manner, and from these causes, it happened, that the reformation of religion was accompanied with the correction and enlargement of phi¬ losophy ; so that from that time to the present, the study of science, in all its branches, has been cultivated with great industry and success, and it may be truly asserted, that since the commencement of the sixteenth century, more has been done towards the advancement of knowledge, than was done in all the preceding ages of the world.* % CHAPTER III. OF THE REVIVAL OF THE ANCIENT SECTARIAN PHILOSOPHY. SECTION I.— OF THE REMAINS OF THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. With what assiduity the Scholastic philosophy was opposed, with what clearness its futility and pernicious tendency were laid open, from the time of the revival of letters to the completion of the Reformation, in the six¬ teenth century, we have already seen ; and how successful these attempts were, with men of sound understandings and honest minds, who preferred truth to every other consideration, the whole history of the revival and improvement of philosophy will show : but, since nothing in human affairs is brought to perfection at once, it is not surprising that some pre¬ dilection for Scholastic subtleties still remained. In the midst of the general spirit of reformation and improvement which distinguished this period, there were not wanting men, who, from their zealous attachment to ancient systems, and the ecclesiastical hierarchy, judged it inexpedient to dismiss an ally, to which they had been so much indebted. In order therefore to retain this Palladium of the church of Rome, the advocates for established forms pleaded, that the evils so violently complained of, had originated, not from the Scholastic method of philosophising, but from the abuse of it ; and that nothing more was necessary to render this philo¬ sophy a useful auxiliary to religion, than to chastise its subtleties, and moderate the spirit of vain curiosity and idle disputation, which had pre¬ vailed in the schools. Under this futile pretence, the friends of the Romish hierarchy retained in their hands an instrument, which had been found so useful in establishing and perpetuating the reign of ignorance and superstition. Hence, whilst a better method of philosophising was * Vidend. Diss. de Relig. Erasmi. Hamb. 1717. Warton ad Cave. Chassansei Catal. Clor. Mnndi. 1. x. p. 204. Beyschlagius Syll. ii. opusc. p. 263. Rexinger. et Edzard. Diss. de Lutberi Ref. Hamb. 1717. Wucberer. de Increm. Phys. a Reform. Temp. Jen. 1717. Lehman, de Utilitate Moral! Discip. Ref. ib. Stock!! de bon. L!t. renov. post Ref. ib. Elsw!cb de Fort. Ar!st. in Ac. Prof. Halbauer. Diss. de Luth. polit. Lit. VVerensdorf de Prog, emend. Rel. Crenius tie Sing. Script. Struvii Bibl. Phil. Chap. 3. S. 1. THE SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY. 531 every where else adopted, the Scholastic philosophy, somewhat corrected by the introduction of Aristotle’s logic and metaphysics, was still studied and professed in the colleges and monasteries belonging to the church of Rome. Even into these schools indeed some rays of light penetrated. A few men of superior genius, and a more liberal spirit, even this unfavour¬ able soil produced, who saw the weakness of the pleas upon which the Scholastic philosophy was retained, and who ventured, though with little success, to recommend salutary innovations. Toletus,* of Cordova, a Jesuit, who flourished about the middle of the sixteenth century, and is celebrated for his learning and the perspicuity of his writings, philosophised after the genuine manner of the Peripatetic school. Ricciolus,-!- an Italian Jesuit, who in the seventeenth century, taught at Bologna and at Parma, studied with great success the sciences of mathematics and astronomy. Caramuel de Lobkowitz,^ a native of Madrid, born in 1606, obtained a great name for the extent and variety of his learning, and for a surprising fertility of genius. He pretended to introduce wonderful improvements into every branch of science ; but the luxuriancy of his imagination obstructed the growth of the substantial fruits of sound judgment, and his voluminous writings, notwithstanding all their originality, were soon forgotten. Honoratus Faber, § born in 1626, and professor of mathematics and philosophy at Lyons, wrote upon philosophy, logic, and physics. He implicitly followed neither the Scho¬ lastics nor the Aristotelians; but borrowed Jight from modern philoso¬ phers, particularly the Cartesians. His innovations, however, brought him under a strong suspicion of heresy, and produced little effect. The generality of the Romish clergy still retained so much of the Scholastic spirit, that instead of promoting, they only retarded, the pro¬ gress of true philosophy. It would therefore be a tedious and fruitless task to detail their history. Their writings chiefly consist of systems of philosophy, summaries of logic, theses upon Scholastic topics, and com¬ mentaries upon the works of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. The bigotted attachment to ancient systems, which has prevailed in the Romish church with respect to religion, has always extended itself to philosophy, and has given a permanent establishment to the Scholastic method of philosophising, which all the wisdom of modern times has not been able to overturn. It is, however, a happy omen of the entire exorcism of the demons which have so long haunted the schools, that in many universities a better and more extensive plan of instruction has been adopted, which has in a great measure precluded the idle dreams of dialectic subtlety. In an age in which a rational plan of philosophising was generally followed ; in which vague conceptions, unmeaning terms, and uncertain principles were commonly exploded ; in which the accurate method of mathematical reasoning was applied with success to other sciences ; in which experimental philosophy was every where studied and encouraged ; and in which the correct use of language was an object of attention, it could not but happen that the empty shadow of abstraction would be thrown out of the philosophical world, to make room for more substantial and profitable studies. |1 * Pinacotliic. i. p. 136. + Bibl. Soc. Jes. p. 416. J N. Anton. B. Misp. n. t. i. § Bibl. Soc. Jes. p. 350. II Vidend. Melchior. Camus. L. Theol. 1. viii. ix. Praef. ad Maibillon. de Stud. Mo- nast. Le Cerf. Bibl. des Auteurs de la Cong, de S. Maiir. N. Anton. Bibl. Hisp. N. Jac. Echard. de Sc. Domin. Wadding. Annal. Ord. Min. Carol, dc Visit. Bibl. Scrip. Ord. Cisterc. F. Rothfislier. Ep. ad Cardin. Lettres Provinciales de Monialte. Vavasor Op. p. 240. ^ mm2 532 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VII. SECTION IL— OF THE REVIVAL OF THE GENUINE ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY. Although, at the beginning of the sixteenth century, the Scholastic philosophy began to fall into general contempt, Aristotle still retained, in a great degree, his authority. It required more enlargement of thought than the age afforded to discard at once a system of philosophy, which had been received with almost universal approbation, and been supported by the united labours of the learned for so many centuries ; nor was it merely the power of prescription which established the dominion of Aristotle, several other causes concurred to produce this effect. The partisans of the Platonic system, who, under the patronage of the Medicean family, for a long time maintained their ground against the Aris¬ totelians, declining with the fortunes of their patrons, the advocates for the Peripatetic philosophy proportionally increased, and, after a violent struggle, established a victory. It greatly contributed towards this issue, that men began at this time to extend their inquiries beyond the region of metaphysics and theology, into the subjects of natural history and phi¬ losophy. Finding little assistance in their researches into nature in the writings of Plato, they had recourse to thp Stagirite, who was at this time universally allowed to be the best guide in the study of physics : and, though in his treatises upon this branch of science they met with much obscurity, and many difficulties, the persuasion that they were a rich mine of knowledge, which would amply repay the labour bestowed upon it, in¬ duced them to spare no pains to come at his true meaning. Among the followers of the Church of Rome, the Peripatetic philosophy continued to be zealously maintained, on account of the assistance which its dialectics afforded them in the defence of the established system ; and because many of the doctrines of this system coincided with those of the school of Aristotle. The deference which had long been paid to the decisions of Aristotle (even whilst his works were only read in very imperfect translations,) in¬ duced the first restorers of learning to make his writings a principal object of their attention ; and to rest much of their reputation, as editors, trans¬ lators, and commentators, upon the manner in which they, executed this part of their office ; and the brevity and obscurity of Aristotle’s style, his frequent reference to preceding writers, and the injuries which his works had sustained from time, and from the ignorance, negligence, or dis¬ honesty of transcribers, furnished those who were desirous of distinguishing themselves as philologists, wdth an ample field for the display of learning and ingenuity. The first race of critics upon Aristotle, after the revival of letters and the invention of printing, employed themselves in verbal rather than in philosophical criticism ; and took more pains to fix the true reading, and explain the grammatical construction of their author, than to investigate or illustrate his philosophical tenets. But it was soon found that a knowledge of philosophy, as well as an attention to the rules of criticism, was necessary in writing notes upon Aristotle ; and the second race of commentators, from Pomponatius to the middle of the seventeenth century, were chiefly employed in ascertaining and restoring the true Aris¬ totelian philosophy. Even among the reformers, though Luther w'as a professed enemy to Aristotle, his philosophy had many admirers. Melancthon, as we shall Chap. 3. S. 2. ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY. 533 afterwards see, approved of and encouraged the stud}' of his dialectics and metaphysics, as a useful exercise of the understanding, and only objected to the misapplication of them in theological questions. It is to be re¬ gretted that a man of such superior abilities, and in every other respect of so independent a spirit, should addict himself to any sect, and choose rather to be an interpreter of Aristotle, than to follow the course of his own ideas, and philosophise for himself. The consequence was, that Aristotle, who, in the zeal of Reformation, had been driven out of the church, was again suffered to steal in ; and that, after the thorns which Scholastic philosophy and subtlety had planted were extirpated, the ground was again encumbered with barren weeds. This was the only reason why, among Protestants, (to whom the authority of Aristotle could be of little use, and who ought to have exercised the same freedom of thinking in phi¬ losophy as in religion,) the doctrine of Aristotle prevailed even till the time of Bacon, Grotius, and Des Cartes. It would be an endless undertaking to enumerate all the learned men, who, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, attached themselves to the Aristotelian system. We shall select a few of the more celebrated names. Among the Roman Catholics, Nicholas Leonicus Thom^us,* a Venetian, born in the year 1457, seems to have been among the first who attempted to restore the genuine Aristotelian philosophy. His preceptor in Grecian learning, and other branches of literature, was Demetrius Chalcondylas, of Florence. He derived his knowledge both of the Platonic and Aristotelian philosophy from their purest fountains ; and preferring the latter, opened a Peripatetic school in Padua, and wrote commentaries upon Aristotle’s physics. Erasmus'j' speaks of him as an excellent philo¬ sopher, a profound scholar, and a good man. He died in the year 1521. At this period flourished Pomponatius, J of Mantua, who was born in the year 1462, and died in 1525. He taught the doctrines of Aristotle and Averroes in the schools of Padua and Bologna. Though much ad¬ dicted to superstition and fanactism, and a zealous advocate for judicial astrology, as appears from his hooV. De Incantationibus, “On Enchant¬ ments,” he had an understanding capable of penetrating into the depths of the Peripatetic system, in the study of which he chiefly followed the com¬ mentaries of Aphrodisaeus. His writings, though barbarous and inelegant in style, discover great acuteness and subtlety of thought. He publicly taught the natural mortality of the soul, and maintained that the whole proof of a future existence depends upon Revelation. His doctrine upon this subject became so popular, that Pope Leo X. thought it necessary to issue a bull to suppress it. His book De Immortalitate Animce, “ On the Immortality of the Soul,” was publicly burnt at Venice; and it was only through the interest of Cardinal Bembo, that the author escaped the flames. He also wrote a treatise “ On Fate and Free-will.” Notwith¬ standing all his pretended reverence for the doctrines of the church, there can be little doubt that Pomponatius had more respect for the authority of Aristotle, than for that of Jesus Christ. § Pomponatius had many followers of great celebrity : among whom were, Simon Porta, || a Neapolitan, who wrote a treatise upon the Peripatetic system, De rerum Naturalium Principiis, “ On the Principles of Nature * Jovius, 1. c, c. 91. Fabr. Bib. L. M. t. iv. p. 788. Patricii Disq. Perip. 1. iii. p. 149. Bayle. t In Ciceroniano. J Jovius, 1. c. c. 71. Niceron. Meinoires, t. xxv. Bayle. J. Olearius cle Pomponatio. Jenae, 1709. § Reimann. Hist. Ath. s. iii. c. 4. sect. 8.^ 11 Tbuan. 1. xiii. p. 276. Teisser. Eloj. t i. p. 197. 534 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book Vlll. and another, De Anima et Mente Humana^ “ Oft the Human Soul and Mind,” in whieh he followed the doctrine of his master ; Julius Cassar ScALiGER,* a celebrated philologist ; andLAZARUs Bonamicus,-!- who rivalled Erasmus in elegant Latinity. Vanini the Atheist, who wrote two treatises De Natura, Regina Deaque Mortaliuni, “ On Nature, the Queen and Goddess of Mortats;”and Amphitheatrum,‘‘‘‘T\\e. Amphitheatre,” is said by some to have been his pupil ; but this is impossible, for Porn- ponatius died in the year 1525, and" Vanini was not born till the year 1586. Pomponatius found an able opponent in Augustine Niphus,J a native of Calabria, who like many other learned men of his age, practised medi¬ cine, at the same time that he taught philosophy. He wrote his treatise, De Immortalitate Animce, “ On the Immortality of the Soul,” by order of Pope Leo X. ; in which he undertook to prove that this doctrine is not contrary to the principles of the Aristotelian philosophy. Niphus, like many other learned men of this period, affected in his writings a gross kind of wit, which was not very consistent either with the dignity of philo¬ sophy, or with purity of morals : an unquestionable proof of great corrup¬ tion of principle, as well as depravity of taste. Majoragius, of Milan ; Sepulveda, of Cordova; Peter Victor, of Florence; Zabarella, of Padua ; Strozza, of Florence; with many others, whose names are preserved in the literary histories of these times, are chiefly known as commentators upon Aristotle. § CjESALpinus, 1| an Italian, born in the year 1509, was an eminent physician, who made a con¬ siderable progress in the discovery of the circulation of the blood, after¬ wards completed by Harvey. He wrote Questiones Peripateticce,^ “ Pe¬ ripatetic Questions.” He adopted opinions similar to those which W'ere afterwards held by Spinoza. C^sar Cremoninus,** of Modena, born in the year 1550, was a zealous follower of Aristotle, and privately main¬ tained opinions contrary to the Christian faith. Among the Protestants, especially in Germany, philosophy was at this period diligently studied ; and in their public schools we find many learned men, who, as far as their superior reverence for Jesus Christ would permit, were followers of Aristotle. At the commencement of the Reformation, indeed, both the Scholastic philosophy, and the dogmas of Aristotle, were rejected with great indignation, particularly, as we have seen, by Martin Luther: but afterwards, when men of the soundest judgment and best erudition perceived the value of philosophy as a guard against fanaticism, much pains was taken to promote learning, and encourage a love of science, j-j- The first place in this class of reformers is unquestionably due to Philip MELANCTHONjj: j; who was born atBretten,in Upper Saxony, in the year 1497. At twelve years of age he was sent to Heidelberg, where he soon distinguished himself by his excellent abilities, sweetness of temper, and urbanity of manners, and obtained the confidence and friendship of many learned men. Before he was fourteen years old, he studied the Greek language with such attention that he wrote rudiments of that language, which were afterwards published. From Heidelberg he was removed to * Epist. 90. f Teisser. p. 126. J Niceron. Mem. t. xviii. Bayle. § Coiif. Teis'er. N. Anton. Imp. Mus. Hist. Iluet. cle ilaf. huerp. Bayle. Euritlir. Pinacoih. II Vit. Select. Uratisl. 1711. Ep. Richter, p. 23. ^ Ed. Franckf. 1597. **■ Imp. Mus. p. 173. Cra.ss. Elog. t. ii. p. 124. Bayle. ft Elswich de Fort. Arist. in Acad. Protest. Laun. de Fort. Arist. Flacius Clav. Script, p. i. n Vit, Mel. a Caineraiio, Win&hemio, Adamo. Seckendorf. Hist. Luth, Chap. 3. S. 2. ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY. 535 Tubingen, where he attended upon various branches of science, and ac¬ quired a large store of erudition. Having early formed a taste for per¬ spicuity and correctness in writing, and being convinced that every literary and scientific pursuit is valuable, only in proportion as it admits of some useful application, he was much dissatisfied with the subtle and unin¬ teresting speculations which still occupied the schools, and frequently amused himself with exposing them to ridicule. He spent the greater part of his time in the study of the ancients and the holy scriptures. At seventeen years of age, in the year 1513, he received the degree of master of philosophy, and immediately undertook the office of preceptor. His first instructions were confined to the Latin tongue, which he was even at that time well qualified to teach. He was then requested to give lec¬ tures upon oratory, which he did by commencing upon Cicero and Livy as the best models. In the Scholastic controversy between the Realists and Nominalists, in which he ranked among the latter, he distinguished himself by his mildness and moderation, no less than by the strength and clearness with which he maintained his opinions. From Tubingen, Melancthon was removed by the favour of Frederic, Elector of Saxony, in the year 1518, to a new college established by that prince at Wittenburg, in which he was appointed professor of the Greek language. Through the zeal of Martin Luther, the Reformation had at this time made a considerable progress ; but the clouds of barbarism were not yet dispersed from the philosophical and literary world. This was a matter of infinite regret to Luther, whose' active mind was impatient to dissipate the darkness which surrounded it. He therefore gladly embraced the opportunity, which the residence of Melancthon in Wittenburg gave him, of entering into friendship with a man so well inclined to second his views, and so able to assist him in accomplishing his designs. Literature, philosophy, and theology soon experienced the happy effects of this alli¬ ance. The profound learning, sound judgment, and cultivated taste of Melancthon enabled him to correct many errors and abuses which had crept into the public schools. The honest zeal and the independent spirit of Martin Luther supported him in the prosecution of his great under¬ taking, the Reformation of the church. Both adopted the same leading views; both were inspired with the same love of truth, the same integrity, and the same desire of rescuing mankind from the dominion of ignorance and bigotry. Yet their natural tempers were different; the one having perhaps too much gentleness of disposition, whilst the other possessed a degree of ardour which required some restraint. The best effects were therefore to be expected from the strict friendship, Avhich, at this time, took place between Luther and Melancthon ; and the subsequent history of this period corresponds to this expectation. Philosophy, however, was chiefly indebted to Melancthon. The deep interest which he took in the reformation of religion, did not prevent his attention to the improvement of literature and science. In order to excite a spirit of emulation in the public schools, and suggest hints of improve¬ ment, he frequently delivered public discourses on the best method of pro¬ secuting the study of philosophy, which abounded with good sense and sound learning. With the same design he wrote, for the use of students, compendiums of Dialectics, Ethics, and Physics, and a treatise “ On the Soul,” the design of which was,* to free the schools from the nugatory subtleties and idle labours of tiie Scholastics, and to confine the attention Ep. I. i. p. 330. 536 OF THE HEVIVAL OF THE Book VIII. of young men to useful studies. He industriously ransacked the writings of the ancients, to collect from them, in every branch of learning, what¬ ever was most deserving of attention. Mathematical studies he held in high estimation, as appears from his Declamation* De Mathematicis Disciplinis, “ On Mathematical Learning,” which will very well repay the trouble of perusal. In philosophy he followed Aristotle as, in his judgment, the most scientific and methodical guide, but always in due subordination to Revelation, and only so far as was likely to answer some valuable purpose. “ I would have no one,” says he, “ trifle in philoso¬ phising, lest he should at length even lose sight of common sense ; rather let him be careful both in the study of physics and morals to select the best things from the best sources. If the particular cast of Melancthon’s mind be considered, it will not be thought surprising, that in philosophy he preferred a moderate attach¬ ment to a particular sect, to any bold attempt at perfect innovation. Though he possessed a sound understanding and amiable temper, he wanted that strength and hardiness of spirit, which might have enabled him to have done in philosophy, what Luther did in religion. He there¬ fore chose rather to correct the established mode of philosophising, than to introduce a method entirely new. If it be a just occasion of regret, that in consequence of the natural gentleness, and perhaps timidity, of his temper, he proceeded no further, it ought not to be forgotten, that while religion was much indebted to his cool and temperate, but honest, exertions, philosophy was not without obligation to him, for the pains which he took to correct its eccentricities, and to adorn it with the graces of eloquence. After a life, in which temperance had enabled him to maintain a long struggle with infirmity, and in which integrity, moderation, candour, and meekness, had given him a just title to the character of a Christian phi¬ losopher, Melancthon died, in the year 1560, leaving behind him a name immortalised by learning and piety. • Melancthon made use of the extensive influence, which his high reputa¬ tion, and the favour of the reigning Elector of Saxony, gave him in the German schools, in which he was considered as a kind of common pre¬ ceptor, to unite the study of the Aristotelian philosophy with that of ancient learning in general. And he was much assisted in the execution of this design, by the labours of many learned Protestants of the Germanic schools from Italy and Great Britain, who brought with them an attach¬ ment to the Peripatetic system ; and wherever they were appointed public preceptors, made that system the basis of their philosophical instructions. From Wittenburg, Tubingen, Leipsic, and other seminaries conducted after the manner which was introduced by Melancthon, many learned men arose, who, becoming themselves preceptors, adopted the same plan of instruction, which from Melancthon was called the Philipic Method; and thus disseminated the Peripatetic doctrine, till at length it was almost every where taught in the German Protestant schools, under the sanction of civil and ecclesiastical authority. J At Leipsic, Simon Simon, of Lucca, left his native country to join the reformers at Geneva.§ Here, after having, through the injudicious zeal of Beza and other Genevan divines, fallen under ecclesiastical censure, and suffered imprisonment for holding antitrinitarian tenets, he was admitted to the professorship of philosophy. He for some time enjoyed the patron- * Op. t. iii, p. 239. f De Stud. Corrig. t. i. Dec), p. 506. I Melanc. Declam. t. i. p. 334. 353. 506, t. ii. p. 360. 370. t. iii. p. 371. Mayer, de . nimia Lenitate Phil. Melanc. § Bayle. Chap. 3. S. 2. ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY. 537 age and confidence of Augustus, Elector of Saxony; but his colleagues, through bigotry or envy, soon found means to bring against him new accusations of heresy, and obliged him to resign his station. He withdrew to Poland, where he practised physic, and lived several years, under the protection of the reigning prince. Besides several medical works, he wrote a treatise De Sensuum Instrumentis, “ On the Instruments of the Senses;” and another De vera Nohilitate, “ On True Nobility ;” and Commentaries upon Aristotle de Memoria, and upon his books To Nichomachus. In the academy of Tubingen, flourished Jacobus Schegkius,* and in that of Altdorf, Philip ScHERBius.-f- Both acquired great reputation as preceptors of the pure doctrine of Aristotle, and both defended the Peripatetic philosophy against the followers of Ramus. Contemporary with Scherbins, and of the same school, was Nicholas Taurellus,J who, though he, for the most part, followed Aristotle in logic, physics, and metaphysics, corrected his doctrines with great freedom, and ventured to reject them wherever he judged them to be contrary to reason and Revelation. His professed maxim was, in matters of philosophy, to submit implicitly to the authority of no master. His freedom subjected him to much obloquy. Ernestus Sonerus,§ a native of Nuremberg, and a pupil of Scherbius, taught medicine and the Aristotelian philosophy at Altdorf. He travelled with tw'o young men of noble rank through Italy, Franee, Holland, and Great Britain, and formed an extensive acquaintance with men of learning. After his return home, he became a popular preceptor in physics and medicine, in which he chiefly followed Aristotle and Galen. He was a zealous and able advocate for the doctrines of Socinus, which had at this time many defenders in Poland and Lithuania. Besides his Socinian tracts, a treatise against the eternity of future punishment, and other theological works, (which are exceedingly scarce,) he wrote, in philosophy, a paraphrase on Aristotle de Interpretaiione, and Disputationes Philosophicce, “ Philo¬ sophical Disputations.” He was born in 1572, and died in 1612. Besides these, there were many other celebrated Germanie philosophers of this period, w hom, for the sake of brevity, we omit. We must not, however, pass over without notice the eminent scholar Hermannus Con- RiNGius,|| one of the most illustrious ornaments of the Germanic schools. He was born at Embden, in the year 1606, and was educated at Leyden, where he made himself acquainted with the whole circle of sciences, but chiefly applied to the study of theology and medicine. His eminent attain¬ ments soon procured him distinction in the schools, and he was appointed professor, first of natural philosophy, and afterwards of medicine, in the university of Brunswick. Turning his attention to the study of history and policy, he became so famous in these branches of knowledge as to attract the attention of princes. Christina, Queen of Sweden, who was a general patroness of learned men, invited Conringius to her court, and upon his arrival received him with the highest marks of respect. The offer of a liberal appointment could not, however, induce him to relinquish the academic life ; and after a short time he returned to Juliers. But his uncommon talents for deciding intricate questions on policy were not long suffered to lie dormant. The Elector Palatine, the Elector of Mentz, the * Adami Vit. Medic. German, p. 200. •[• Baier. Vit. Medic. Altdorf. p. 15. + Adami Vit. Med. p. 403. Bayle. Baier. 1. c. ]). 10. Feuerlin. Apol. jiro Taurello. § Kichter Vit. Son. Nuremb. lOH. Zehner, Hist. Crypto-Socin. .Ailtdorf. sect. 17. Baier. p. 26. II Corberi Vit. Conring. Prsef. Synt. Ep. Conring. 538 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VIII. Duke of Brunswick, the Emperor of Germany, and Louis XIV. of France, all consulted this great man, and conferred upon him honours and rewards : and, if universal learning, sound judgment, and indefatigable application can entitle a man to respect, Conringius merited all the distinction he obtained. The great extent of his abilities and learning appears from the number and variety of his literary productions. His polemic writings prove him to have been deeply read in theology. His medical knowledge appears from his “ Introduction to the Medical Art,” and his “ Comparison of the Medical Practice of the ancient Egyptians and the modern Para- celsians.” d'he numerous treatises which he has left on the Germanic Institution, and other subjects of policy and law, evince the depth and accuracy of his juridical learning. His book, De Hermetica Medicina, “ On Hermetic Medicine,” and his Antiquitates Academicce, “ Academic Antiquities,” discover a correct acquaintance with the history of philosophy. It is to be regretted, that this great man was never able vdiolly to dis¬ engage himself from the prepossession in favour of the Aristotelian philosophy, which he imbibed in his youth. Although he had the good sense to correct the more barren parts of his philosophy, and was not ignorant that his system was in some particulars defective, he still looked up to the Stagirite as the best guide in the pursuit of truth. It was owing to his partiality for ancient philosophy, particularly for that of Aristotle, that Conringius was a violent opponent of the Cartesian system. The term of his life, which was industriously occupied in study, was seventy-six years. His works are published entire in six volumes folio.* To the list of the learned men of this period, who favoured the Peripa¬ tetic doctrine, we shall add Christianus DRiERUs,j- a native of Stetin, in Pomerania, the author of a treatise entitled Philosophia prima, “ The First Philosophy,” and of several dissertations, which cast much light upon the history and genius of the Peripatetic philosophy : MelchiorZeidler,^; of the same place, the author of “ An Introduction to Aristotle,” and “A Dissertation on the various Methods of Reasoning made use of by the Ancients:” and Jacobus Thomasius,§ of Leipsic, who wrote several metaphysical treatises, but is chiefly memorable as the preceptor of the illustrious Leibnitz. The preceding particulars respecting the more eminent adherents to the Peripatetic system, from the revival of letters to the eighteenth century, compared with the view, given in a former part of this work, of the Aristo¬ telian philosophy, may enable the reader to form a judgment concerning the manner in which this philosophy was taught and professed, after it had been in some measure freed from the quibbles and subtleties of the Scho¬ lastics. A few general remarks on modern Peripatetic philoso[)hy shall therefore close this section. Whatever praise may be due to those learned men who endeavoured to restore the dogmas of the Stagirite to their puritj^ it is to be lamented that they retained so much reverence for his authority, as to think it necessary to follow him as their guide. That this was the prevailing opinion of the learned in Italj"; France, Germany, and England, from the restoration of learning to the end of the seventeenth century, appears from the whole history of philosophy during this period. Though they had seen the deformed aspect which philosophy had for several ages * Eci. Briuisuifj. 17o0. Vit. ap. Op. Helmst. 1689. t Heimaiin. Hist. Lit. Germ. p. iv. p. 33. § Hagen. JMem. Phil. Kenov. p. 273. Chap. 3. S. 2. ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY. 539 borne, thej^ imputed this rather to the infelicity of the times, than to any defect in the nature of the Sectarian philosophy; and concluded, that if they could restore this philosophy to its original purity, they should accomplish every thing that could be wished. Wholly unaccustomed to steer their course without a pilot, they distrusted their ability to direct themselves, and thought it safer, as well as more modest, to commit them¬ selves to the direction of so celebrated a guide as Aristotle. Entering upon the study of science with so strong a prej udice in favour of their preceptor, few thought of examining his doctrines, fewer doubted of their truth, and still fewer ventured to forsake them. Learned men were, almost univer¬ sally, more solicitous to know what Aristotle taught than to discover what reason dictates. Hence, instead of becoming philosophers they became mere interpreters of Aristotle ; their labour was employed, not in investigating truth, but in endeavouring to remove the difficulties and obscurities which hung upon the doctrines and writings of their instructor. The causes which, even after the revival of learning, perpetuated this blind respect for the name and authority of Aristotle, will be easily dis¬ covered by any one who attentively observes the circumstances of the times. The prejudice in favour of antiquity had now taken deep root ; and it was universally believed, that the ancient Greeians had attained the summit of science, and that nothing could be added to the stores of wisdom which they had transmitted to posterity. Among the Greek philosophers Aristotle w’as almost universally allowed the first place, for depth of erudition, solidity of judgment, and accuracy of reasoning. Hisempirehad now been so long established, that even those who gave the preference to Plato were afraid wholly to reject the Stagirite, and were willing that these two princes of philosophy should possess united authority. Nor could it possibly be otherwise, so long as the name of Aristotle was held forth to young persons as an object of reverence, by parents, preceptors, and heads of colleges, and his writings continued to be zealously recom¬ mended by the general body of the learned. The authority of Aristotle was further confirmed, by the intimate alliance which had, long before this time, been formed between the dogmas of the Peripatetic philosophy aud the religious creed of the church. From the metaphysical parts of this philosophy several tenets had been blended with the Christian system, and the whole course of sacred instruction had been formed upon the model of Aristotle’s dialectics ; w hence this philosophy was now so interwoven with the ecclesiastical establishment, that to attempt a separation would be to hazard the whole fabric on which its benefits, powers, honours, and emoluments depended. To these may be added a third cause, imme¬ diately arising from the revival of letters. This happy event was, as we have seen, chiefly owing to the arrival of learned Greeks in Italy, at the time of the dissolution of the Eastern empire. By means of their in¬ struction and example, a general taste for ancient learning was introduced, and the Greek writers of every class were read and admired. Among the rest, the philosophers, who were held up by the Grecians as oracles of wisdom, were eagerly studied ; particularly Plato, on account of the sup¬ posed Divine origin of his theological doctrine ; and Aristotle, on account of his strict method of reasoning, and the scientific accuracy of his writings. The general prepossession in favour of the Aristotelian system, w'hich I'rom these and other causes prevailed for several centuries after the revival of letters, was attended with much inconvenience and mischief. The reformers of philosophy, observing that the Scholastics, in order to 540 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VIII. harmonise the Aristotelian system with the doctrines of Christianity, had represented the Stagirite under fictitious colours, determined to embrace his real tenets as they are found in his writings. Whence they imbibed opinions from the Peripatetic philosophy wholly inconsistent with the prin¬ ciples of true religion ; such as, for example, that God, the first mover, wholly intent upon the contemplation of his own intellect, disregards the affairs of the world ; that the Intelligence, which presides over the lower sphere, is the Universal Soul of the world, of which all men partake; and consequently, that the soul of man has no distinct existence, and will no longer subsist as such, than whilst the body continues to live. These, and other similar tenets, were commonly embraced by the modern Peri¬ patetics, especially in Italy, who thought that they paid sufficient respect to religion, if they pretended, as Christians, to embrace a different creed, though they were not able to reconcile it with the dogmas which they were taught by reason and philosophy. In this manner, Pomponatius, Caesal- pinus, Cremoninus, and others, cast the thin veil of religious profession over real infidelity. This mischief proceeded to such an extreme, that the minds of the multitude, both ecclesiastics and laity, were at this time deeply tinctured with atheism; and this fatal relaxation of principle pro¬ duced an uncommon depravity of manners. A regard to the providence and authority of God, and the fear of future punishment, having almost wholly lost their influence upon the minds of those who still called them¬ selves, not only philosophers, but Christians, sobriety and decency were abandoned in their conversation, and the grossest impiety and obscenity disgraced their writings. This swelling torrent of profaneness, the fathers of the Lateran council in vain endeavoured to stem, by a bull which, in the year 1510, was issued against the Aristotelian corruptions. The Peripatetics ridiculed this idle fulmination ; for they were not ignorant, that the Pontiff himself, Leo X. and the Cardinal, Peter Bembo, by whom the bull was issued, lay under a strong suspicion of being themselves infidels. Subsequent ecclesiastical decrees lopped off some of the branches of this spreading impiety, but no one saw the necessity, or had the courage to root up the tree. Tfie public guardians of religion were, or seemed to be, ignorant that the errors of the Aristotelian philosophy lay at the foundation of this corruption. Themselves infected with the disease which they undertook to cure, if the Christian faith was professed in words, they thought it of little conse¬ quence what tenets were in reality believed. In order to throw dust into the eyes of the people, the ecclesiastics professed to yield such implicit submission to the authority of the church, as to embrace its decrees, though they were wholly irreconcilable with the invincible reasonings of the Peripatetic schools. Under this mask they did not scruple publicly to defend any kind of impiety, only adding this caution, that they proposed positions of this kind merely in the way of speculation, and though they might be true according to Aristotle, they were false according to the decisions of the church, to which they humbly submitted, though they were not able to discover the reasons upon which they were founded. Such pitiful evasions, though they might suffice to secure the credit of the church among an ignorant populace, proved highly injurious to good morals, by encouraging fraud and hypocrisy. The motto of Cremoninus seems to have expressed the general sense of the Peripatetic clergy of this period, Intus ut lihet, foris ut moris est : “ Abroad, with the people; at home, as you please.” The Stagirite having, for many centuries, possessed authority in the PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY. 541 t Chap. 3. S. 3. (schools little inferior to that of Jesus Christ in the church, and his dogmas being intimately interwoven with those of religion, it was thought I' exceedingly hazardous to whisper any thing to the discredit of his philo¬ sophy. The learned Berigard, who was sensible of many errors in tliis system, declares,* “ that in lecturing upon Aristotle he did not think (i himself at liberty to give his own opinion, lest he should be thought to i treat his master with contempt, f and to trample upon the ashes of the ( ancients.” This reverence for Aristotle was still supported in popish D universities, by statutes which required the professors to promise upon f. oath, that in their public lectures on philosophy they would follow no t other guide. It is easy to perceive, that, if freedom of speech, even at the very fountain head of instruction, was thus restricted, there could be J little scope for freedom of enquiry, and little probability of the advance- i; ment of knowledge. , Among Protestants, the errors and corruptions of the Peripatetic philo- f! sophy met with opposition; but it was attended with little success. Luther, ! whose independent spirit rose superior to all human authority in matters of opinion, and who was fully sensible of the mischiefs which an injudicious * respect for philosophy had introduced into religion, was for the entire re- p jection of Aristotle. But the general prejudice in favour of the Stagirite retained such firm possession of the mind of Melancthon, that he judged it the wiser and safer way to adhere to his system, except in those par- I ticulars in which it directly militated against Revelation ; and thought, that I the best service he could render to the learned world, was to give a per¬ spicuous explanation of the Peripatetic philosophy. His Philippics, which, I as we have seen, were founded upon Peripatetic principles, obtained an r extensive and lasting authority in the schools ; and when this ceased, the ' preceptors of philosophy returned to their ancient guide, and Scholactic barbarism was in some measure revived. The freedom of inquiry, which at this time prevailed among Protestants, would not, it is true, suffer the defects and erorsof the ancient philosophy to remain unnoticed. Several eminent men even ventured to inveigh against Aristotle himself, as the author of many pernicious errors ; but still, his system, for the most part, retained its authority; and even those who forsook this master, thought it necessary to make choice of some other ancient guide ; so that, after all, : the question was, what Aristotle, Plato, or Pythagoras had taught, rather ' than what was truth, j: SECTION III. OF THE REVIVAL OF THE PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY, MIXED WITH THE PYTHAGOREAN AND CABBALISTIC. The doctrines of the later Platonists having been revived, as we have already related, by the Greek exiles in Italy, their further spread is chiefly to be imputed to the aversion, which many good men entertained against the Peripatetic philosophy, on account of the shameful impieties to which * Praef. Circul. Pisan. I Ne in magistrum despuere, et apolactizare, ut ait Plautus, velle videar. I Vidend. Adami Vit. Theol. Reimann. Hist. Lit. Germ. p. iv. v. Apitii. Vit. Prof. Phil. Altdorf. Zeltner. Vit. Theol. Altdorf. Matthesii Vit. Luther, Budd. Isag. 1. i. c. 4. Philosophia Altdorfina, Norimb. 1614. Crenii Animadv. Phil. p. 13. Mayer Diss. de nimia Lenitate, 1707. Arnold. Hist. Eccl. p. ii. 1. xvi. c. 10. Vogtii Catal. Lib. rar. p. 539. 562, &c. Sandii Bibl. Antitrinit. Boeder. Bibl. Crit. c. 40. Morhoff. Polyhist. t. ii. 1. i. Bayle. 542 OF THE REVLVAL OF THE Book VIII. it had given birth. Perceiving that they could not commit themselves to the direction of Aristotle without hazarding their religious principles, and not having strength of mind sufficient to form a system of opinions for themselves, they adopted the philosophy of Plato, in the corrupted state in which it had been transmitted through the Alexandrian and Christian schools, to modern times. This philosophy was the more readily embraced, because it was believed, that the mysteries of Pythagoras, than which none appeared to approach nearer to those of true religion, had been long since united with the wisdom of Plato. Men hoped to find in this school much Divine instruction; and they were confirmed in this expectation by the persuasion, that its doctrines had been, immediately or remotely, derived from Divine Revelation. And, as one error naturally produces another, these learned men united with this system the secret or Cabbalistic philo¬ sophy of the Jews, which, for want of a thorough examination, they con¬ ceived to have been tlie pure doctrine of the ancient Hebrews. Hence a new compound of tenets arose, sufficiently mysterious and paradoxical, •which was received by this class of philosophers as the sum of ancient wisdom. After Pletho, viho as we have related, made use of the Jewish Cabbala as a key to unlock the Pythagorean mysteries, flourished John Reuchlin,* a native of Pforzheim, in Suabia, born in the year 1455. In his youth, when he was a student at Paris, and afterwards when he was a preceptor of languages, first at Basil, and afterwards at Orleans, he was a follower of Aristotle. But upon a tour through Italy, which he made with Eberhard, Count of Wirtemberg, he became acquainted with Ficinus, Politian, Picus, and other Platonists, Avho resided at Florence, and em¬ braced their opinions. At Rome, a friend who was offended with the harsh¬ ness of the German name Reuchlin, prevailed upon him to exchange it, after the common practice of the age, into Capnio, a Greek name of the same signification ; whence he was chiefly known among foreigners by that name. Capnio, at Vienna, during an embassy to the Emperor Frederic III. upon which he was sent by Count Eberhard, and afterwards at Rome while he was upon an embassy to the Pope from the Elector Palatine, prosecuted the study of the Hebrew language under the direction of certain learned Jews, chiefly that he might ha,ve access to the Jewish Cabbalistic writings, whence he hoped to cast new light upon the Pythagorean and Platonic doctrines. His knowledge of the Hebrew language unfortunately brought him into great trouble and hazard. A certain Jewish convert, John Pfefferkorn, of Cologne, to show his zeal for Christianity, advised the Guardians of the Christian faith to burn all the Jewish books, except the bible, as full of blasphemy against Christ; and, through the influence of the monks and theologians of Cologne, ob¬ tained from the emperor an edict for this purpose. Pfefferkorn himself was employed to collect them, and they were brought to Frankfort, to be publicly committed to the flames. The Jews, who justly considered this proceeding as a grievous persecution, earnestly entreated the emperor to suspend the execution of the order, till the books had passed under the examination of the learned. The emperor consented ; and Capnio, who was universally acknowledged to excel in this kind of learning, was appointed by the Elector of Mentz, under the authority of the emperor, to pass a judgment upon these writings. Capnio, though he had not the liberality, * Melancthon Vit. Heiicli. Declam. t. ill. p. 280. Reucbl. Dedic. libr. de Accentibus. Mail Vit. Reach. Fr. 1687. 8vo. Reuch. Rpist. Ed. Tigur. 1558. 8vo. Trithcm. c. 920. Chap. 3. S. 3. PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY. 543 or more probably the courage, to oppose the whole projeet, as a violation of an important natural right, and as a disgrace to Christianity, had, never¬ theless, too much good sense to adopt, in its full extent, the wretched policy of the authors and promoters of this design. He therefore gave it as his opinion, that no other books should be destroyed, but those which were found to be written expressly against Jesus Christ, lest, with the Jewish books on liberal arts and sciences, their language itself, so important to the church, should perish. This opinion was approved by the emperor, and the books were by his authority restored to the Jews. Pfefferkorn and his supporters were exceedingly enraged against Capnio, and pursued him with invectives and accusations even to the court of Rome. . His high reputation in the learned world, however, protected him; and bigotry met with a most mortifying defeat in his honourable acquittal. The spleen of the ecclesiastics against Capnio was still further increased by a comedy abounding with keen satire, which this writer, whose genius was not inferior to his learning, produced; the chief design of which was to expose the ignorance of the monks. It was at first only circulated in manuscript, but afterwards found its way into the press.* * * § In the latter part of his life, the adversaries of Capnio had too much reason to exult over him; for notwithstanding all his learning and celebrity, he was scarcely able, by teaching the Greek and Hebrew languages (which he did in several different schools) to preserve himself from absolute want. He spent his last days at Trebingen, where he died in the year 1522. His faculties, which were naturally vigorous, were cultivated with great industry. His mind was richly stored with various erudition, and his character was eminently distinguished by probity and urbanity.-i- Whilst Ficinus was reviving the Platonic philosophy in Italy, and Faber the Aristotelian in France, Capnio professed and taught a mystical system, compounded of Platonic, Pythagoric, and Cabbalistic doctrines. He wrote several profound treatises on philosophy, of which the principal are these; De Verbo Mirifico, “On the Wonderful World,” and De Arte Cabhalis- tica, “On the Cabbalistic Art.” On the whole, Reuchlin, or Capnio, is certainly to be ranked in the class of Mystics, and deserves more praise for his assiduous and successful attempts towards the revival of learning, than for any service which he rendered to science. His Epistles are full of valuable information concerning the literary history of this period. A similar track was pursued by George Venet,J an obscure and enthusiastic writer, who mixed sundry Peripatetic notions with the Pla¬ tonic and Cabbalistic systems. He was of opinion that Pythagoras and Plato, Orpheus and Zoroaster, Job and Solomon, St. John and St. Paul, Origen and Dionysius, all derived their wisdom from one common source, the Divine Logos, His chief works are, Harmonia Mundi, “ The Har¬ mony of the World;” and Problemata in Scripturam sacram, “Problems upon the Sacred Scriptures.” The Mystic System of Cabbalistic Platonism was supported with great ability, and not without a vast display of erudition, by Henry Cornelius Agrippa,§ a man of wonderful genius, whose life was distinguished by much vicissitude of fortune. Agrippawas born at Nettesheym, near Cologne, in the year 1486. Whilst young, he was employed for seven years in the service of the emperor Maximilian, first as his secretary, and after\vards * Pforzheim, 1507. I Op. Reuchlin, ed. Hag. 1519. Tigur. 1558. X Wadding. Scr. Ord. Min. p. 119. Wharton, App. Cave, p. 151. Olear. de S. E. p. 259. Sext. Senens Bib. S. p. 287. Index Exp. Hisp. p. 406. 421. § Adnmi Vit. Med p. 16. Niceron. t. xix. xx. Amcenit. Liter, t. ii. p. 553. Bayle. 544 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VIIT. in a military capacity : notwithstanding which, he found leisure to learn several languages, and to gain an extensive knowledge of science. He very early engaged in the study and practice of medicine, and formed a romantic expectation of recommending himself to the patronage of princes, by pretending to an intimate acquaintance with the secrets of nature, and particularly to the power of converting inferior metals into gold. Full of this wild project, he visited Spain, France, and several other countries, every where passing himself upon the world as a wonderful master of occult arts, that is, acting the part of an impostor. His pretensions obtained such a degree of credit, that at twenty-three years of age he obtained a professorship at Dole, in Burgundy, where he read lectures on the mys¬ tical work of Reuchlin, De Verbo Mirijico. But the novelty and boldness of his doctrine, at the same time that it brought him many hearers, subjected him to severe persecutions from the monks ; so that he found it necessary to leave Dole, and pass over into England. After a short stay in London, he returned, in compliance with the entreaties of his friends, to Cologne, and began to read lectures ; but his restless spirit, which would not suffer him to remain long in the same place, soon carried him into Italy. Here he resumed for a while the military character in the emperor’s army, and at the same time taught the mystical philosophy at Pavia, not without pretensions to Divine inspiration. From some cause, of which we are not informed, he lost his property, and lived for a while in great poverty, till in 1518, his friends procured for him a civil office in the city of Mentz. But his unrestrained freedom of speech, and the severity with which he still continued his attacks upon monkish superstition, soon created him enemies in this city, and obliged him to return to Cologne ; whence, after a short interval of time, he removed to Geneva, then to Friberg, where he practised physic, and afterwards to Lyons. In this city he was appointed physician to the mother of Francis L, and obtained great influence with her by means of his pretended skill in astrology ; but upon her departure from Lyons he was dismissed from his office, and it was with great difficulty that he obtained his stipulated salary. Agrippa next removed to Antwerp, and put himself under the patronage of Margaret of Austria, who appointed him historiographer to the Empe¬ ror Charles V. But his restless and cynical humour would not suffer him to enjoy the tranquillity, which this situation might have afforded him. He continued to satirise men of every description, particularly ecclesiastics ; and he wrote a treatise “On the Vanity of the Sciences,” and another “On Occult Philosophy which brought upon him the displeasure of the clerical body, and alienated the affections of the emperor, so that he was dismissed from his office, was reduced to poverty, and at Brussels, in the year 1531, was thrown into prison for debt. Regaining his liberty through the interposition of his friends, he visited the archbishop of Cologne, to whom he had dedicated his treatise on the Occult “Philosophy,” and repub¬ lished the work with numerous corrections and additions. This, together with his “Apology for himself to the Senate of Cologne,” which was full of spleen and invective, rekindled such a general spirit of hostility against him, that he found it necessary once more to withdraw into France. When he arrived at Lyons, he was imprisoned for some satirical papers which he had formerly written against the king’s mother; and it was not without much importunity, that his friends obtained his release from this contine- ment. He spent his last days with a friend at Grenoble, where he died in the year 1 535. Chap. 3. S. 3. PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY. 545 From the wliole history of Asfripjia it appears, that he was a mao of eccentric genius and restless spirit. In the midst of such numerous changes of situation and fortune, it is surprising that he was able to ac¬ quire such extensive erudition, and to leave behind him so many proofs of literary industry. There can be no doubt that he possessed a vigorous understanding, which rose superior to vulgar superstitions, and which prompted him to maintain a constant warfare with priestcraft. Though he did not choose to offend those princes to whom he looked up for patronage, by deserting the church of Rome, he saw with great satis¬ faction the bold attack made upon its corruptions by Martin Luther ; and he himself, like Erasmus, P'aber, and others, perpetually hai'assed the monks by satirical writings.* His cynical severity, and above all the disposition which he discovered to make his fortune by practising upon vulgar credulity, must not pass without censure. His occult philo'Sophy is rather a sketch of the Alexandrian mixed with the Cabbalistic theology, than a treatise on magic. It explains the harmony of nature, and the con¬ nexion of the elementary, celestial, and intellectual worlds, on the principles of the emanative system. His treatise “ On the Vanity of the Sciences,” is not so much intended to traduce science itself, as to ridicule the follies of the learned, and expose the numerous absurdities of the established modes of education.'!' Very different was the method of restoring the'Platoaic philosophy which was pursued by Franciscus Patricius,^ born at Clissa, in Illyricum, in the year 1529. In the schools of Italy he professed to unite the doctrines of Aristotle and Plato, but in reality undermined the authority of the former. He wholly deserted the obscurity of the Jewish Cabbala, and in teaching philosophy closely followed the ancient Greek writers. He was appointed by Pope Clement VIII. a preceptor in philosophy at Rome ; after which he more openly discovered his aversion to the Aristotelian system, and advised the Pope to prohibit the teaching of this philosophy in the schools, and to introduce the doctrine of Plato, as more consonant to the Christian faith. His Discussiones Peripateticce, “ Peripatetic Disquisitions,” a learned, perspicuous, and elegant work, fully explains the reason on which his disapprobation of the Peripatetic philosophy was founded. Patricias also wrote several historical tracts which have been much admired. In the seventeenth century. Platonism found many advocates in Great Britain, owing, in a great measure, to the desire which many learned and able divines at this time entertained of refuting the tenets of Hobbes, whose doctrine will be afterwards noticed. For, although they were aware that the writings of Plato afforded little information on subjects of natural philoso- phjq in which physical experiment now began to take the place of metaphy¬ sical speculations, they thought that in theology and morals he had written sublimely, and not without some rays of Divine illumination; and hence con¬ cluded, that they could not more effectually oppose the Hobbesian impieties, than by reviving an attention to the doctrine of Plato, both in his own works, and in those of his followers. A numerous band of learned advocates for religion at this time ranged themselves under the banners Plato of among whom the most celebrated are Gale, Cud worth, and Moie.§ * Fabr. Hist. Bib. suse, t. vi. p. 270. Ed. LugJun. sine ann. + Naud. Apol. p. 285. Webster de Magia. X Erytlir. Pinacoih. i. p. 203. Bayle. Teisser. Elog. t. iv. p. 218. Latin, de Fort. Arist. c. 14. ]). 281. MorhofF. t. ii. 1. ii. p. i. c. 14. sect. 1. § Burnet’s Hist, of his own Times, v. ii. p. 187. Parker on ihe Plaionic Pliilosopby, Oxon. 16C4. N N 546 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VIII. Theophilus Gale,* a non-conforraist of the Presbyterian sect, born in 1628, a w-riter of great erudition, was induced to become a zealous advocate for Platonism through a violent antipathy to the Cartesian system, which he thought unfriendly to morals, and contradictory to the doctrine of Revelation. He undertook to trace back philosophy to its origin, and maintained that there was a wonderful agreement between the ancient Barbaric philosophy and the Jewish and Christian theology. He brought every philosophical tenet to the test of the scriptures ; and thought that it would not be a difficult undertaking, to separate from the Pagan philosophy those doctrines which originated in Divine Revelation, and had been trans¬ mitted by tradition from the Hebrews to the Gentiles. Having persuaded himself that these doctrines had passed in a direct line, and without mate¬ rial corruption, from the Hebrew fountain to Plato, he recommended his philosophical writings as, next to the scriptures, the most valuable remains of ancient wisdom. The chief point which he labours to maintain" in his treatise “On Philosophy,”-)- is, that Plato received his knowledge of theo¬ logy from the Hebrews, and that the doctrine on this subject taught by him and his followers, for the most part, agrees with that of the holy scrip¬ tures. This opinion he implicitly adopts from the ancient fathers, whose authority, with respect to this matter, we have had frequent occasion to call in question. His account of other philosophers is given, without much appearance of accurate discrimination, chiefly from Laertius. He divides the Aristotelian philosophy into pure and impure, and supposes, gratuitously enough, that the former passed from Moses to the Stagirite through the channel of Plato’s instruction. His favourite notion frequently occurs in his other learned work, “ The Court of the Gentiles. The Platonic philosophy was, with greater accuracy and sounder judg¬ ment, applied to the refutation of impiety by Ralph Cudworth,§ the learned author of a valuable work, entitled “The True Intellectual System of the Universe.” He was born in the year 1617, at Aller, in Somerset¬ shire, and educated at Cambridge, in Emanuel college, where he took the degree of master of arts in 1639: he was afterwards chosen master of Clare Hall, and regius professor of Hebrew. In 1654, having taken the degree of doctor of divinity, he was chosen master of Christ’s college. Cudworth, for thirty years, discharged with great ability and fidelity the office of Hebrew professor in Cambridge; and continued his residence in that university till his death, which happened in the year 1688. The design of his “Intellectual System” is to refute the principles of atheism. In this important undertaking, he very successfully employed a vast fund of erudition : but his partiality for the Platonic philosophy, in judging of which, after the example of his contemporaries, he paid too much respect to the writings of the modern Alexandrian Platonists, led him into frequent mistakes. In physics he adopted the Atomic system ; but abandoning Demo¬ critus and Epicurus as the first patrons of impiety, he added to the doctrine of Atoms that of a certain middle substance between matter and spirit, to which he gave the appellation of Plastic Nature, which he supposed to be the immediate instrument of the Divine operation. This hypothesis gave rise to a famous controversy between Bayle and Le Clerc. The “Intellectual Sys¬ tem” was first published in 1678, and, in the year 1713, was translated into Latin by Mosheim, with many learned and judicious notes. But no one defended the Platonic doctrine, combined with the Pytha¬ gorean and Cabbalistic, with greater learning and subtlety than Cudworth’s ♦ Act. Phil. V. iii. p. 793. f Ed. Lond. 1676, 8vo. 1 Lend. 1672. Mosheim. Praef. et Annot. ad Syst. Int. Chap. 3. S. 3. PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY. 547 friend and colleague, Henry More,* born in 1614, and educated in Christ’s college, Cambridge. After having laid a good foundation of clas¬ sical learning at Eton, he diligently applied, at the university, to the study of philosophy. He early made himself perfect master of the doctrines of Aristotle and the Scholastics ; but he met with so little satisfaction in their respective systems, that he determined to search for better guides ; and he persuaded himself that he should find them among the Platonists. Wholly occupied with the desire of attaining that purity of mind and Divine illu¬ mination which might raise him to a union with God, he devoted his life to the sublime speculation of mystical philosophy, and to the study of the scriptures. He spent his days in the university of Cambridge ; where, after having long enjoyed the highest academical honours, in the year 1687, he died, leaving behind him a name highly celebrated among theologians and philosophers. His principal w'ritings are, “ The Mystery of Iniquity “ A Key to the Revelations Enchiridion Ethicum^ “ A Manual of Ethics;” Enchiridion Metaphysicum, “A Manual of Metaphysics “An Apology for Des Cartes,” and “ A Collection of Philosophical Treatises, chiefly on the Jewish Cabbala.” More was strongly under the bias of the opinion so common among his contemporaries, that the wisdom of the Hebrews had been transmitted to Pythagoras, and from him to Plato ; and consequently, that the true prin¬ ciples of Divine philosophy were to be found in the writings of the Plato¬ nists. At the same time, he was persuaded that the ancient Cabbalistic philosophy sprung from the same fountain ; and therefore endeavoured to lay open the mystery of this philosophy, by showing its agreement with the doctrines of Pythagoras and Plato, and pointing out the corruptions which had been introduced by the modern Cabbalists. The Cartesian system, which sprung up at this time, was embraced by More, as on the whole consonant to his ideas of nature ; and he took much pains to prove that it was not inconsistent with the Cabbalistic doctrine. His penetrating understanding, however, discovered defects in this new system, which he endeavoured to supply. In short, the writings of this great man, though not without a deep tincture of mysticism, are eminently distinguished by profound erudition, an inventive genius, and a liberal spirit. A clear judgment may, after what has been said, be without much diffi¬ culty formed, concerning this new race of Platonists. The peculiar re¬ spect which they paid to the doctrines of Plato and Pythagoras, as in some sort of Divine original, rested upon suppositions which have never been established. The story of Pythagoras’s journey into the East is extremely uncertain ; and it is highly improbable that he should ever have conversed with Hebrew prophets. Of his school, which had failed at a very early period, little W'as known. The whole notion of the Divine original of Plato’s theology is built upon such slight evidence, that it may, without hesitation, be pronounced visionary. The Cabbalistic tenets, upon which these philosophers laid so much stress, were not, as they supposed, the pure doctrines of the Hebrews, but mystical fictions derived from Egyptian and Oriental sources. The tenets of the Platonic and of the Cabbalistic systems differed essentially from the sacred truths which are taught in the Hebrew scriptures. It is not to be conceived, that the fanciful doctrine of emanation, which lies at the foundation of both these systems, could have been derived by tradition from Divine Revelation. Yet, so much were these learned men blinded by prejudice in favour of an liypothesis, that • Prsf. Op. Phil. Lend. 1676. Conf. Knorri Cabb. denud. t. i. p. ii. p. 14. N N 2 54S OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VIII. they could see nothing but a perfect harmony between Platonism and Christianity, and mistook the dreams of the Alexandrian philosophers, and Jewish Cabbalistics, for the pure doctrine of religion. To this we must add, that they suffered themselves, in some instances, to be deceived by impostors ; and with a degree of credulity not wholly to be excused, ad¬ mitted spurious writings as genuine ; such for example, as the remains of Zoroaster, Hermes, and Orpheus. From these and other causes they were led into so many misconceptions and errors, that caution should be exer¬ cised in acceding to their judgment concerning either Platonic or Christian doctrines.* SECTION IV.— OF THE REVIVAL OF THE DOCTRINE OF PARMENIDES. Those circumstances attending the Aristotelian philosophy, which con¬ tributed towards the revival of the Grecian sects, led in a single instance to the restoration of the physical doctrine of Parmenides. Aristotle having obscured the subject of natural philosophy, by involving it in metaphysical subtlety, Telesius attempted to raise a new edifice of physics, on the foun¬ dation of principles, which Parmenides had long before taught in Greece. Bernard Telesius, j- a Neapolitan, born in the year 1508, received the first part of his education at Milan, where he acquired a perfect know¬ ledge of the Latin and Greek languages. After passing two years at Rome, where he made great proficiency in polite learning, he removed to Padua, and applied with indefatigable assiduity to the study of mathematics and philosophy. He very judiciously employed mathematical learning in ex¬ plaining and establishing the laws of physics, and was particularly successful in investigating truths before unknown in the doctrine of optics. Accus¬ tomed to mathematical accuracy, he grew dissatisfied with the conjectural explanation of natural appearances given by Aristotle, and expressed great surprise, that this philosopher should have been, for so many ages, followed in his numerous errors by so many learned men, by whole nations, and almost by the whole human I’ace. He pursued his researches with great ingenuity as well as freedom, and wrote two books “ On Nature,” in which he attempted to overturn the physical doctrine of the Peripatetic school, and to explain the phenomena of the material v'orld upon new principles. When this treatise was first published at Rome, it obtained great and unex¬ pected applause; anil Telesius was prevailed upon, by the importunity of his friends at Naples, to open a school of philosophy in that city. The Telesian school soon became famous, not only for the number of its pupils, but for the abilities of its professors, who distinguished themselves by their bold opposition to the doctrines of Aristotle, and by the judicious manner in which they distributed their labours, in order to enlarge the boundaries of natural knowledge. The founder of the school was highly esteemed by all who were desirous of studying nature rather than dialectics ; and he was patronised by several great men, particularly by Ferdinand, Duke of * Videiul. Wierus de Praestifr. Daemon. 1. ii. c. 5. Natalis Comes Mytliol. 1. iii. c. 17. Naud. Apol. Mag. Accus. p. 285. Reimann. Hist. Lit. Germ. p. iii. p. J68. Gimma Idea Della Storia Letterata d’ltalia, t. ii. c. 39. Biuld. Introd. in Hist. Ph. Heb. Mor- hoft. Polyh. t. ii. p. 186. Stoll. Introd. in Hist. Lit. p. ii. c. I. Reimann. in Cat. Crit. t. i. p. 980. t Toppii Bibl. Neap. p. 344. Pantapolog. Calab. Neap, 1715. Imp. Mus. p. 70. Comnen. Papadopol. Hist. Gymn. Patav. p. ii. c. 32. Letter, de Vit. Telcsii, Lips. 1733. Teisser. Elog. t. iii. p. 449. CJiap. 3. S. 4. DOCTRINE OF PARMENIDES. 549 Nuceri. But his popularity soon awakened the jealousy and envy of the monks, who loaded him and his school with calumny, for no other offence than that he ventured to call in question the authority of Aristotle. The vexations which he suffered from this quarter brought on a bilious disorder, which, in 1588, terminated in his death. Although, during the life of Telesius, his innovations were patiently borne, both in Rome and Naples, after his death his writings were pro¬ scribed in the Index Expurgatorius of the holy inquisition : notvvith- standing which, his philosophy continued to have many admirers, and his works were republished at Venice, in the year 1590, by his friend Antonius Persius, who also wrote a compendium of his philosophy in the vernacular tongue. Besides his principal work, De Natura Rerum, “On the Nature of Things,” he wrote on the Air, the Sea, Comets, the Milky Way, the Rainbow, Colours, Respiration, Sleep, and other subjects. Lord Bacon has given a brief explanation of the philosophy of Telesius.* The physical system, which Telesius attempted to substitute in the room of the subtleties and fictions of the Stagirite, was founded upon the Par- menidean doctrine, that the first principles in nature, by means of which all natural phenomena are produced, are cold and heat. The sum of his the¬ ory is this: matter, which is in itself incapable of action, and admits neither of increase nor diminution, is acted upon by two contrary incorporeal j)rin- ciples, heat and cold. From the perpetual opposition of these, arises the several forms in nature ; the prevalence of cold in the lower regions pro¬ ducing the earth and terrestrial bodies; and that of heat in the superior, the heavens and celestial bodies. All the changes of natural bodies are owing to tliis conflict; and according to the degree in which each principle prevails, are the different degrees of density, resistance, opacity, moisture, dryness, &c. which are found in different substances. In the heavens, heat has its fixed residence, without any opposition from the contrary principle; and within the earth, and in the abyss of tlie sea, cold remains undisturbed, heat not being able to penetrate thither. At the borders of each of these regions, that contest between the opposite principles begins, which is car¬ ried on through all the intermediate space. All animal and vegetable life is ■from God.-|- This system, which Telesius evidently borrow'cd from Parmenides, whose doctrine is particularly described in Plutarch’s treatise De Prirno Frigido, “ On the Principle of Cold,” was exceedingly ingenious ; but it is, after all, nothing more than a baseless fabric, raised upon a fanciful conversion of mere attributes and properties into substantial principles. For, as Lord Racon well observes, Telesius,nolessthan Platoor Aristotle, places abstract notions at the foundation of his system, and produces his world of real beings from nonentities. We readily admit that this philosopher was a lover of truth, and a friend to science ; but we think him chiefly com¬ mendable for the boldness of his attack upon the principles of Aristotle, in which he succeeded much better than in his attempt to raise a new struc¬ ture of natural philosophy ; for, in changing the attributes of matter into incorporeal principles, he left his doctrine exposed to the same objection, which he himself had brought against that of Aristotle. It was probably owingto this cause, that the Telesian systemdid notlong survive itsauthor.j: * De Principiis Pannenidis et Telesii. t Teles, de Natura rerum juxta propria Principia. Neap. 158G. INIorlioff. Polybist. t. ii. 1. ii. p. i. c. 13. J Vidend. Bacon’s Hist, of Winds, Praef. and on the Fable of Cupid, v. iii. p. 238. Giinma Idea Hist. Lit. Ital. t. ii. c. 38. Campanell. Philos. Sensibus deinonst. Sorell. de Perfect. Homin. p. iii. p. 413. Arnold Diss. de Novitate Pbilosophandi. sect. 11. 550 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VIII. SECTION V.— OF THE REVIVAL OF THE IONIC PHILOSOPHY. The Ionic philosophy, notwithstanding the celebrity of its first professors, soon failed in the Grecian schools, and never afterwards recovered its an¬ cient reputation and authority. This was owing to the suspicion of impiety under which it lay in Athens, to the early growth of new branches from the Socratic stock, and to the rise and spread of the Eleatic and Epicurean philosophy. In later times, the universal prevalence of the Platonic and Aristotelian systems prevented every idea of reviving the physiology of the Ionic school, till, in the seventeenth century, an attempt was made for this purpose by Berigard, but in so circumspect and covert a manner, that this philosopher was commonly ranked among the followers of Aristotle, and even supposed to be deeply tinctured with the impiety of his system. Claud Berigard* was born at Molena, in Spain, in the year 1592, and studied first at Aix, then at Paris, and afterwards at Pisa. In this latter school he was, through the favour of the Duke of Tuscany, ap¬ pointed professor of mathematics and botany. The fame of his learning, which was spread through Italy, induced the republic of Venice, in the year 1640, to appoint him, with a liberal stipend, professor of philosophy in Padua. He was afterwards raised to the dignity of first professor, and received a large augmentation of his salary. He remained in this situation till his death, Avhich happened about the year 1668, and was esteemed one of the most eminent of the Italian philosophers. He published in 1632, under a fictitious name, a work entitled Dnhitationes in Dialogos Galilcei de Terra Immobilitate,-\ “ Doubts on the Dialogues of Galileo in Defence of the Immobility of the Earth;” but his principal work is his Circuli Pisani, “ Pisan Circles,” in which he relates the disputations which were held at Pisa on the physical writings of Aristotle, and gives his own senti¬ ments upon them. Berigard, during his education at Paris, where the defects of the Peri¬ patetic system were now freely examined, had been led to compare the doctrines of the Stagirite with those of other philosophers, both ancient and modern, and had perceived the folly of that implicit obedience which had been so long paid to his authority. Plence, he became a determined oppo¬ nent of his philosophy, not indeed openly, for he could not have done this without great hazard, but in the indirect and concealed method of dialogue. Adopting the Ionic system, as it was first instituted by Thales, and after¬ wards improved by Anaxagoras, he framed a disputation between the Aris¬ totelians and Ionics, in which he made Aristieus refute the reasoning of Charilaus, and support the doctrine of the Ionic school, by an appeal to experience, as well as by many ingenious arguments. This acute rcasoner saw indeed, and confessed, that both the Peripatetic and the Ionic systems were materially defective, and in many particulars erroneous, and was on this account much inclined to philosophical scepticism. But he endea¬ voured to prove that the followers of Thales approached nearer to truth than those of Aristotle ; the dangerous tendency of whose tenets, in several particulars, he clearly exposed. Among the doctrines of the Stagirite, tliose which he chiefly reprobated were these : that the world is eternal ; » Bayle. Niceron. Mem. I. xxxi. p. 123. Praef. Circ. Pis. Epist. Welschii ad Bosium apuj Ep. Reines. et Bos. p. 4/0. f Ed. Amst. 1649. Chap, 3. S. 6. STOIC PHILOSOPHY. 551 that the residence of the first mover is confined to the outer sphere of the universe : that neither the world, nor any being, can properly be said to have been created ; and that there is one soul common to the whole human species. In opposition to these opinions, which he rejected as capital errors whence many others must arise, Berigard maintained the Ionic doctrine of the eternity of the primary particles of matter; of a forming and presiding mind, by whose agency these particles were collected into distinct bodies ; and of the combination and dispersion of these, as constituting the forma¬ tion and dissolution of all things. In short, Berigard seems to have pre¬ pared the way for the revival of the Atomic system of Epicurus, which was soon after this time restored and defended by Gassendi.* SECTION VI.— OF THE REVIVAL OF THE STOIC PHILOSOPHY. As the poverty of the Peripatetic physics occasioned the revival of the Par- menidean and Ionic sects, so the barrenness of the Ethical doctrine taught in the school of Aristotle prompted the design of renewing the Stoic philosophy. Finding little satisfaction in Aristotle’s moral precepts, which extended no further than to the conduct of civil life, and disgusted with the thorny disputations of the Scholastics, Lipsius, a name celebrated among the critics of the sixteenth century, determined to pass over into a field of philosophy, in which he hoped to exercise his faculties with greater advantage. Justus Lipsius f was born near Brussels, in the year 1547, and re¬ ceived the first rudiments of learning under his uncle, Martin Lipsius, a learned friend of Erasmus, who was engaged with him in editing several ecclesiastical writings. At twelve years of age, Lipsius was sent to the Jesuit’s college at Cologne, where he prosecuted his literary and philosophi¬ cal studies. Among the ancients, he learned the precepts of morality from Epictetus and Seneca, and the maxims of civil prudence from Tacitus. From Cologne he removed to Louvain, where he studied civil la\r, and at nineteen wrote his Varice Lectiones, “ Various Readings,” which laid the foundation of his literary fame. Travelling into Italy, he obtained the patronage of the Cardinal Antonins Perenettus, and was appointed his secretary. This situation aflforded him leisure and opportunity for prose¬ cuting his philological studies, and gave him access to many learned men, and to the Vatican and other public libraries. After two years, he returned to Louvain, enriched with new stores of learning, but by no means im¬ proved in his manners ; for at Rome he acquired a fondness for pleasure, which led him, for a time, into many excesses. The public disturbances induced him, about the twenty-fifth year of his age, to leave his native country, and visit Vienna, where he became acquainted with Busbequius and other learned men. On his return, he suffered himself to be detained at Jena, in Thuringia, where he accepted the professorship of eloquence, and became a disciple of Luther. This latter circumstance obliged him, after a year’s residence, to leave Jena ; and he removed to Cologne, where * Vidend. > orlioff. Polyh. t. ii. p. 1.54. Laun. de Fortuna Arist. in Acad. Par. c. 15. Seb. Basson. Pr£ef. Nat. Phil. Ed. Genev. Sorell. de Perfect; Horn. p. iii. p. 484. Reiinann. Hist. Ath. s. iii. c. 5. Villeniandy Scept. debell. p. 11. t Lips. Vit. a Mirajo. Antw. 1608. Adatnl Vit. Phil. p. 465. Euryth. Pinacoth. iii. c. 1. Bayle. Teisser. Elog. t. iv. p. 524. Blount, p. 810. Patiii Lettres, t. ii. Lett. 204. 552 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book Vlll. he married a widow, whose ill-temper occasioned him much uneasiness. At Cologne, where he remained onl_y a few months, he wrote his Antiques Lectio7ies, “ Ancient Readings.” He now determined to return to his native place, and devote himself wholly to study ; but the civil commo¬ tions of the country obliged him to remove first to Louvain, and afterwards to Leyden, where he spent thirteen years in literary labours. Here, though nominally a convert to the Reformation, he publicly maintained the princi¬ ples of persecution, and wrote a treatise “ On Politics,”in which he inveighed against toleration, and maintained, that one religion only should be pro¬ fessed in one state, and that those who opposed that religion ought to be pursued with fire and sword ; it being better that one member should be destroyed, than that the whole body should perish. This doctrine so favourable to the cruel persecution at this time exercised by the Spaniards against the Protestants, excited a just indignation against Lipsius, in a state which owed its existence to a brave and successful assertion of the rights of conscience. The resentment which on this account fell upon him from various quarters, created him so much vexation, that upon republishing his works, he subjoined a note to one of his most offensive passages, in which he says, Verba nata m turhas ! periissent ilia, et calamus,, cum hcec scripsi ! “ Mischievous words ! Oh ! that they had perished with the pen that wrote them !”* It does not appear, however, that Lipsius ever abandoned his intolerant principles ; for after a short time he left Leyden ; and, through the solicitation of the Jesuits, or, as some say, through the importunity of his wife, he returned into the bosom of the Roman church. He spent the remainder of his life at Louvain, and tarnished his literary reputation by writing several books which were tinctured with the weakest credulity and superstition, particularly his Laudes Divoe Virginis Halensis, “ Praise of the Holy Virgin of Hall,” in which he celebrates the miracles of that famous image. After giving these and other unequivocal proofs of anility, Lipsius died in the year 1606. It appears both from the life and writings of Lipsius, that he had more learning than either genius or judgment. His ambition disturbed the tenor of his life with various vicissitudes; and he had a degree of fickleness in re¬ ligious principles, Avhich carried him at one time to the verge of scepticism, and at another time into the borders of enthusiasm. His writings, which are numerous, chiefly turn upon subjects of antiquity and criticism. In his early pieces he imitated, with tolerable success, the style of Cicero ; but afterwards chose rather to adopt the concise and pointed manner of Seneca and Tacitus. For this corruption of taste he was severely censured by Scioppius and Henry Stephens; but his example was followed by several contemporary writers. On this innovation Huet justly remarks,-!- that although the abrupt and antithetical style may obtain the applauses of un¬ skilful youth, or an illiterate multitude, it cannot be pleasing to ears which have been long inured to genuine Ciceronian eloquence. Captivated with the appearance of superior wisdom and virtue which he observed in the ancient school of Zeno, Lipsius sought for consolation from the precepts of the Stoic philosophy, and attempted to reconcile its doctrines with those of Christianity. But he was imposed upon by the vaunting language of this school concerning fate and Providence ; and ex¬ plains its tenets in a manner which cannot be reconciled with the history and general system of Stoicism. In order to revive an attention to the doctrines of this ancient sect, he wrote two treatises, Manuductio ad * Politic. 1. iv. c. 3. Not. f De clar. Interp. p. 2b2. Chap. 3. S. 7. EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY. 5.53 Philosophicarn Stoica7H, “An Introduction to the Stoic Philosophy and Dissertationes de Physiologia Sioica, “Dissertations on Stoic Physiology to which he intended to have added a treatise on the moral doctrine of the Stoics, but was prevented by death. His edition of Seneca is enriched with many valuable notes; but he was too much biased by his partiality for Stoicism to perceive the feeble and unsound parts of the system, and gave too easy credit to the arrogant claims of this school, to be a judicious and useful interpreter of its doctrine. Besides the philosophical works already mentioned, he wrote a treatise De Constantia, “On Constancy,” and Politicorum Lihri Sex, “A Treatise on Politics, in six books.” This latter work, though highly censurable for its intolerant spirit, is of some value as a compilation of the sentiments of the ancients on the subject of policy. A few learned men followed the footsteps of Lipsius, and endeavoured to revive the credit of the Stoic philosophy. Gasper Scioppius,* a German writer, who flourished about the beginning of the seventeenth century, more famous for the violence of his temper, and the severity with which he censured the writings of others, than for any essential service to learning or philosophy, wrote Elementa PhilosophicB Stoicce Moralis, “Elements of the Moral Philosophy of the Stoics.” Daniel Heinsius ■was a great admirer of the moral doctrine of the Stoics, and wrote an elegant “ Oration in praise of the Stoic philosophy.” But the most able advocate for this system among the moderns was Thomas Gataker, born at London, in the year 1574, and educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge. He was afterwards fellow of Sidney college, and lecturer at Lincoln’s Inn. Among other learned works, he wrote a “Commentary on the Meditations of Antoninus,” containing every thing, which a most ex¬ tensive knowledge of the ancients could furnish, towards the illustration of his author, and of the Stoic system. It is, however, to be regretted, that such a learned and able writer should have suffered himself to be so far blinded by partiality for the Porch, as to give a representation of its doc¬ trines by no means consistent with the fundamental principles of the sect, j’ SECTION VII _ OF THE REVIVAL OF THE EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY. The Atomic doctrine concerning the origin of nature, which was taught by Democritus, and was reduced into a regular system by Epicurus, through the general prevalence given in later times to the Platonic or the Aristo¬ telian philosophy, had now for many centuries lain dormant; but, after the revival of letters, there ^vere not wanting several learned men, who, finding little satisfaction in the obscure and subtle speculations of metairhysics, had recourse to the doctrine of Epicurus, as the true key to the mysteries of nature. The first restorer of the Epicurean system among the moderns, was Daniel Sennert,^; an eminent physician of Wittemburg, who flourished at the beginning of the seventeenth century. In a distinct chapter of his * Hayle. Ileiinann. Hist. Lit. Germ. p. v. ]). 188. f Vidend. Rudd, in Phil. St. in Analectis Hist. Pli. Thomas de Exustione Mundi. Boeder. Diss. de Polit. Lipsii. + Ejus Hyponrneuiat. Phys. 1. iii. c. 1. p. 86. Ed. 1638. 554 OF THE REVIVAL OF THE Book VIII. Hypomnemata Physica, “ Heads of Physics,’’ treating of atoms and mixture, he embraces the Atomic system, which he derives from Mochus the Phoe¬ nician. He supposes that the primary corpuscles not only unite in the formation of bodies, but that in their mutual action and passion they undergo such modifications, that they cease to be what they were before their union ; and maintains, that by their combination all material forms are produced. Sennert, however, confounded the corpuscles of the more ancient philoso¬ phers with the atoms of Democritus and Epictetus, and held that each element has primary particles peculiar to itself. The same doctrine was taught, with some inconsiderable variations, by Chrysostom Magnenus,* * * § professor of medicine in the university of Pavia, who, in the year 1646, published, “A treatise on the Life and Philosophy of Democritus.’’f His system is rendered obscure by an attempt to unite the incompatible dogmas of Epicurus and Aristotle. The ablest and most successful attempt towards the revival of the physical and moral philosophy of Epicurus was made by Peter Gas¬ sendi, J who deservedly holds an eminent place among the philosophers of the last century. He was born in the year 1592, near Digne in Provence, and studied first at Digne, and afterwards at Aix, where, at the age of six¬ teen, he was appointed teacher of rhetoric, and at nineteen professor of philosophy. Although the authority of Aristotle was still acknowledged in almost all public schools, Gassendi, after the example of Vives, Ramus, and others, ventured publicly to expose the defects of his system. The lectures which contained his censures of the Aristotelian philosophy, delivered in the indirect form of paradoxical problems, were published under the title of Exercitationes Paradoxicce adversus Aristotelem,^ “ Paradoxical Exercises against Aristotle.” This work, at the same time that it gave great offence to those who still retained their predilection for Scholastic subtlety, obtained the author no small degree of reputation with several learned men, particularly with Nicholas Pieresc, the president of the university at Aix, through whose interest Gassendi was admitted to the degree of doctor of divinity, and created a canon of the church of Digne. A second volume of this work was afterwards published, the immediate design of which was to expose the futility of the Aristotelian logic. It was his first intention to pursue the plan still further ; but the violent opposition which he met with from the zealous and powerful advocates for the autho¬ rity of Aristotle, induced him to desist from all direct attacks upon his philosophy. He still, however, professed his attachment to the system of Epicurus, and defended it with great learning and ability. In order to extend his acquaintance with the learned, Gassendi visited Holland, where his philosophical and literary merit soon procured him many admirers and friends; he formed an intimacy with the learned Mersenus, and wrote an elegant and judicious apology for him in reply to the censures of Robert Fludd, on the subject of the Mosaic philosophy. On his return to France, he was, through the interest of Cardinal Richlieu’s brother, appointed regius professor of mathematics at Paris. In this uni¬ versity he also read lectures on astronomy, a science which he had studied from his earliest years. In this situation Gassendi acquired great popularity, and rose to high expectations ; but after a few years, the fatigues of his office brought an inflammation upon his lungs, which obliged him to leave Paris, • Morhoff. t. ii. 1. ii. p. ii. c. 27. t Lufjd. Bat. 16t8. Hap:. Com. 1C58. J Sorl)iei'e de Vit. Gas.s. Prmt'. Synt. Phil. Hpic. Blount, p. 965. Bayle. § Amst. 1649. Hag. Comet. 1656, 8“. Chap. 3. S. 7. EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY. 555 and return to Digne. Here he obtained some relief, and came back to Paris; but his complaint shortly returned, and he died in the year 1655. Just before he expired, he laid his hand upon his heart, and remarking the feeble state of its pulsation, he said to his attendant, “ See how frail is the life of man ! ” The sound judgment, extensive reading, and capacious memory of Gas¬ sendi, qualified him to attain great distinction among philosophers. He is ranked by Barrow among the most eminent mathematicians of the age, and mentioned with Galileo, Gilbert, and Des Cartes. His commentary on the tenth book of Diogenes Laertius is a sufficient proof of his erudition. With uncommon abilities for the task, he undertook to frame from Lucretius, Laertius, and other ancient writers, a consistent scheme of Epicurean doctrine, in which the phenomena of nature are immediately derived from the motion of primary atoms. But he was aware of the fundamental defect of this system, and added to it the important doctrine of a Divine Super¬ intending Mind, from whom he conceived the first motion and subsequent arrangement of atoms to have been derived, and whom he regarded as the wise governor of the world. Gassendi strenuously maintained the Atomic doctrine in opposition to the fictions of the Cartesian philosophy, which were at that time obtaining great credit ; and particularly asserted, in opposition to Des Cartes, the doctrine of a vacuum. On the subject of morals, Gassendi explained the permanent pleasure or indolence of Epicurus, in a manner perfectly consistent with the purest precepts of virtue. Gassendi wrote many treatises, which were, after his death, collected, and published in six volumes,* by Sorbiere. Among these, one of the most valuable is his “Life of Epicurus,” in which he undertakes to rescue that philosopher from the load of calumny under which his memory had for many ages lain, as well as to give a fair and impartial representation of his doctrine. The most celebrated followers of Gassendi were Francis Bernier, j- a physician of Montpelier; who, besides his “Travels into the East,” wrote an “Abridgment of Gassendi’s Philosophy Walter Charlton, an Englishman, who wrote a treatise entitled Physiologia Epicuro-Gasscndo~ Charletoniana,^ in which he attempts to establish natural science upon atomic principles. A similar treatise was published by G. B. De Sancto lloMANO, a physician at Paris, under the title of Physica d Scholasticis Tricis liherata,\\ “Physics rescued from Scholastic Jargon.’’ The doctrine of atoms and a vacuum has been embraced by the most eminent modern philosophers. Hugyens applies it to explain the cause of gravitation, and Newton admits it into his theory of natural philosophy.^ * Lugd. 1658. f Budd. Hist. Ph. p. 376. MorhofF. t. ii. p. 273. : Par. 1678. § Lond. 1654. || Lugd. Bat. 1684. 12°. ^ Vidend. Mercklin. Linden. Renov. p. 554. Lettre critique et historique de la Vie Gassendi, Par. 1737. 12.° Desselii Bibl. Belg. Mirseus de Scr. Sec. xvi. c. 237. Simon. Bibl. crit. P. iv. p. 100. Stoll. Hist. Lit. P. ii. c. 2. sect. 48. Gerard, de Uries. Diss. de Gassend. Traj. ad Rhen. 1691. Regnaut Entretiens d'Ariste et Eudoxe. Bayle Lettres, t. iii. p. 829. 556 OF MODERN SCEPTICS. Book IX. BOOK IX. OF MODERN PHILOSOPHERS, WHO HAVE ATTEMPTED NEW " METHODS OF PHILOSOPHISING. CHAPTER I. OF MODERN SCEPTICS. From the first revival of letters, the philosophical world was, as we have seen, almost entirely occupied in restoring the Sectarian philosophy of the ancients. Learned men were either too diffident of their talents to suppose themselves capable of any new discoveries, too indolent to attempt them, or too much prejudiced in favour of anticpiity to suppose it possible that any improvement could be made upon Grecian wisdom. During the course of several centuries, only a few enterprising or eccentric geniuses arose, who ventured to disengage themselves from the yoke of authority, and presumed to think it possible, that with the same natural faculties which the ancients enjoyed, and with the example before them both of their successes and failures, new and important advances might be made in knowledge. Of these, some availing themselves of all that was valuable in the stores of ancient philosophy, and at the same time exerting their own talents with a happy union of freedom and caution, made important im¬ provements in philosophy ; whilst others, either on the one side, through an excessive confidence in the pow ers of the human mind, or on the other, through too much distrust of their weakness, forsook the straight path of rational inquiry, and lost themselves in the mazes of scepticism or enthu¬ siasm. Vanity has inclined some to contradict every decision of philosophy, and hastily to conclude the objections against received opinions, which their fertile imaginations have suggested, to be unanswerable ; and it has prompted others to make high pretensions to Divine illumination, and to forsake plain and simple truth in the search of the obscurities of mysticism. On the contrary, a timid, indolent, or volatile temper has often disposed men to prefer the easy task of raising difficulties and cavils, to the more laborious undertaking of investigating truth by a continued course of patient study ; and the same temper, united with a gloomy cast of ima¬ gination, has led many to mistake the dreams of mysticism for Divine wisdom. From these fountains have arisen the two principal errors of the human understanding, scepticism and enthusiasm. Modern Scepticism differs in many respects from ancient Pyrrhonism, and appears in several different forms. Some writers have w'holly denied the power of the human understanding to investigate truth ; and, with the ancient Pyrrhonists, have attempted to bring into discredit both the prin- (•il)lcs and the method of reasoning, which have been commonly employed in the pursuit of knowledge. Others have busied themselves in starting Chap. 1. OF MODERN SCEPTICS. 557 doubts and difficulties on particular topics of inquiry, and endeavoured to involve every subject in uncertainty; whilst others, more cautious than the rest, have made use of the weapons of scepticism against the hypothetical method of investigating truth, for the general purpose of curbing tlie arrogance of dogmatism, or with the particular design of turning the study of nature out of the channel of conjecture into that of experiment. In theology. Scepticism is sometimes labouring, on the one hand, to overturn the sacred edifice of Divine Revelation ; and sometimes, on the other, to support the interest of superstition, or of fanaticism, by declaiming on the imbecility of human reason. Though our limits will not permit us to relate at full length the history of modern Scepticism,* we cannot, consistently with our plan, omit to mention some of the more celebrated Sceptics who have appeared since the revival of letters. Francis Sanchez,'}- a Portuguese physician, born in the year 1562, after having studied in France and Italy, became a preceptor in philosophy in the college of Thoulouse. According to the established law of the college, he lectured upon Peripatetic principles ; but his penetrating genius, superior to vulgar prejudices, could not satisfy itself with a kind of philosophy replete with vague opinions, and rather fitted to obstruct than facilitate the pursuit of knowledge. The fate of Peter Ramus, who, about this time, fell a victim to the resentment of the Aristotelians, prevented him, however, from hazarding a direct attack upon their system ; and he determined to take the more general ground of Scepticism, in opposition to dogmatists of every sect. In a work, De multum nobili et prima universali Scientia, quod nihil scitur^X “ On the very excellent and first universal Science, that nothing is known,” he reprobates the confidence of those philosophers who advance, as indubitable and fundamental truths, such principles as are in their nature exceedingly doubtful. This treatise, which was chiefly intended as an attack upon the Scholastic philosophy, extends its hostilities even to the foundations of science, and discovers much learning and ingenuity. With different views was the cause of Scepticism espoused by Jerom Hernhaym, a learned abbot of Prague, wdio wrote a book De Typho Generis Humaniy^ “ On the Vain Glory of Human Nature,” in which he endeavours to expose the presumption, uncertainty, and falsehood of human science ; a work, as the author professes, written for the relief of the unlearned, and for the admonition of the learned. The evident design of this writer was to depreciate human learning as inimical to Divine wis- dom, and to recommend an indolent life as the only way to attain ‘per¬ fection and felicity. As the most effectual cure of philosophical vanity, he endeavours to prove, that all the vices of mankind are to be ultimately traced up to human science. He maintains the absolute imbecility of the human understanding, and the uncertainty of all information from the senses, and ascribes every appearance of wisdom among men to super¬ natural Divine illuminations. The Scepticism of this writer appears to have been the effect of perverted piety ; and may serve to prove, that religion itself is no sure guide to men who disclaim the use and authority of reason. Scepticism found a much more able ami elegant advocate in Francis Vayer de la Mothe,|| justly reckoned one of the most learned men of * Fabric. Syllab. Scr. cle Ver. Rel. Clir. c. 23. Mersen. de Scepticismo. •f Raymuiid. Delass. Praef. Op. N. Amon. Bibl. Hisp. p. 262. Bayle. + Frankf. 1618. Rotterd. 1649. § Prague, 1676. 4to. 11 Pellisson. Hist, de I’Ac. Fr. )i. 234, Bayle. Boileau, Sat. iv. 558 OF MODERN SCEPTICS. Book IX. his age. He was born at Paris, in the year 1586. His literary merit’'' recommended him to the attention of the great, and he was appointed ;• preceptor to the Dauphin in 1652. He enjoyed the friendship of the celebrated French ministers, the Cardinals Richlieu and Mazarin. He '»f. lived to the age of eighty-six. In the writings of Vayer are found an elegance of genius, and extent of reading, which has obtained him the appellation of the modern Plutarch. Of his numerous works, those which ’l! chiefly mark his Sceptical turn are, his treatise “ On the Philosophy of the J Heathens,” in which he treats of the uncertainty of the senses ; and his J “ Five Dialogues,”, under the name of Oratius Tubero, in which he 1 applauds the Sceptic philosophy. To these were afterwards added four x other dialogues, which breathe the same spirit. Vayer was an avowed f advocate for Scepticism in every branch of science; and though, like many other writers of the same school, he professed great reverence for the 'll authority of the church, and inferred the necessity of Revelation from the iS uncertainty of all human knowledge, he nevertheless fell under the censure fl of impiety. Among his disciples were Sorbiere, who translated part of | Sextus Empiricus into French ; and Fouchier, who wrote a “ History of 1 the Academic philosophy.”* |8 Another celebrated defender of Scepticism was Peter Daniel Huet, -I- || born of an illustrious family at Caen, in the year 1630. After passing ■ through the usual course of juvenile learning, in which he discovered no fl inconsiderable talent for poetry, he applied with great diligence to the 9 study of mathematics and philosophy under a Jesuit, Peter Mambrun. fl The Cartesian philosophy being now' generally received, Huet eagerly 9 embraced it, and for several years continued zealously attached to this new a system. At a more mature age, however, when he came to examine 9 its foundations more accurately, he saw reason to abandon it as a visionary I fabric. At the age of seventeen, in order to qualify himself for the study ■ of antiquity, the desire of which was excited by reading Geographia 9 Sacra, the “ Sacred Geography” of the learned Bochart, whose personal .jl friendship he enjoyed, the study of the Greek and Hebrew languages S became the principal object of his attention. In the university of Paris, 9 to which he removed about the age of twenty, he devoted himself almost ■ entirely to society, and formed an intimate acquaintance with many 9 learned men, among whom were Petau, Labbe, Cossart, Vavassor, and j9 Rapin. With Petau, in particular, he passed much of his time. He was a great admirer of the splendour of his diction, and the variety of his eru- dition ; but he confesses, that in weighing the arguments which he offered in support of his dogmas, he perceived in them a degree of weakness and ambiguity, which obliged him to suspend his assent, and inclined him to- ^ wards Scepticism. Naturally excelling rather in genius than in judgment, ® and the vigour of his understanding having been rather repressed than y' improved by an immense variety of reading, Huet found his mind too . feeble to master the difficulties of metaphysical and theological studies, and concluded that his want of success in the search after truth was owing, not to any peculiar infelicity in his own case, but to the general ' imbecility of the human mind. With this bias towards Scepticism, Huet entered upon his travels. His friend Bochart having, through the recommendation of Isaac Vossius, been invited by that celebrated patroness of learning, Christina, daughter * Op. Ed. SexTomis, Par. 1669. t Huet. de Rebus ad eum pertiiientibus, Ed. 1718. Hag. Niccron. Mem. t. I. Chap. 1. OF MODERN SCEPTICS. 559 of Gustavus Adolphus, Huet accompanied him. On their way, they passed through Holland and Denmark, and became acquainted with the most celebrated scholars of these countries. The queen, upon their arrival, received them with every mark of attention. Huet, during his stay in Stockholm, was usually occupied in examining the ancient nranu- scripts in the royal library, and made such use of his time, as proved very advantageous to the learned world. He copied certain commentaries of Origen, which he afterwards published and illustrated with excellent notes, explaining the history and opinions of that celebrated father. Having visited on his way several seminaries of learning, he returned to Caen, where he remained for a time, and after completing his Originenia, wrote his dialogue De Interpretatione et Claris Interpretibus, “On Translations and famous Translators,” which was well received in the learned world. Here he also instituted a society for the improvement of natural philosophy and anatomy, which, through the interest of Colbert, was liberally endowed by the king, for the purpose of defraying the expenses of philosophical experiments and anatomical dissections. About this time Huet formed a friendship with Cormissus, president of the senate of Aix, who came to re¬ side at Caen. This new intimacy very much contributed to confirm Huet in his propensity towards Scepticism ; for Cormissus, who was well read in ancient philosophy, was a great admirer of the Pyrrhonic sect, and earnestly recommended to his friend the study of Pyrrhonism in the In¬ stitutes of Sextus Empiricus. The literary reputation of Huet procured him the notice of Louis the Fourteenth, who, by the advice of Colbert, appointed him, together with Bossuet, preceptor to the Dauphin. Upon this he removed to Paris, where the labours of his new office did not prevent him from prosecuting his private studies. It was in this situation that he wrote his celebrated defence of the Christian religion, entitled Demonstratio Evangelica, “ A Demonstration of the Truth of Christianity,” in which he undertakes to exhibit the evidences of Christianity in a geometrical form : a work, which indeed discovers great erudition, but in which the judicious reader will perceive, that the writer was more desirous to display his learning, than to establish the Christian faith upon rational grounds. In his preface to this work, he maintains at large the uncertainty of all human knowledge, whether derived from the senses or from reason, and declares it as his opinion, that those methods of philosophising which lead to a suspension of judgment are by no means hostile to Christianity, but serve to prepare the mind for an implicit submission to Divine Revelation, which it is in vain to attempt to establish by argumentation without the grace of God. Ac¬ cordingly he professes to write his “ Demonstration,” merely as an extra¬ neous and adventitious support to faith, by means of which the mind may be more easily inclined to submit itself to the authority of Christ. After having passed ten years at court, Huet, at the age of forty-five, retired into monastic life, and was chosen abbot of the monastery of Alnet. In this tranquil retreat he prosecuted the design he had long formed of defending the Sceptic philosophy, and wrote a work entitled Qtiestiones Alnetance,* “ Alnetane Queries,” in which he endeavours to fix the re¬ spective limits of reason and faith, and maintains, that the dogmas and precepts of each have no alliance, and that there is nothing, however con¬ tradictory tb common sense, or to good morals, which has not been received, and which we may not be bound to receive, as a dictate of faith. He Ed. Lips. 1719. 4to. 560 OF MODERN SCEPTICS. Book IX. lionestly confesses, that he wrote this work to establisli the authorit}" of tradition against the empire of reason. On the same principle, and with no better success, he attempted to refute the principles of the Cartesian philosophy, in his Censura Philosophia; Cartesiance,^ “ Censure of the Cartesian Philosophy ; ” he also wrote a treatise, De Fahulis Romanen- sibiis,\ “On Romance;” and another, De Nnvigationibus Solomonis, “ On the Voyages of Solomon,” which obtained him much applause among the learned. In the year 1692, Huet was advanced to the episcopal see of A vranches; but after a few years he resigned this honour, and retired to the abbey of Fontenay. He spent his last days in the Jesuit’s college at Paris, and I’eft his valuable library as a legacy to their society. He died in the year 1721. After his death appeared minutes of his life, under the title of Commentarium de Rebus ad eum pertinentibus, “ A Commentary on his own Affairs,” written by himself in his old age, and “ A Dissertation on the Weakness of the Human Understanding,” in which the Sceptical spirit, which followed Huet through every change of situation, appears in its full vigour. Of this work, which was originally written in French, the author i left behind him a Latin translation. Little is done in this treatise more than to exhibit the chief heads of the Sceptic philosophy, as given by Sextus Empiricus, and to collect from the history of philosophy such par¬ ticulars as might seem to recommend the Pyrrhonic method of philoso¬ phising, and prove the insufficiency of the human mind to arrive at the knowledge of truth. On the whole, though it cannot be questioned that Huet, on account of his great learning and fertile genius, may justly claim to have his name preserved with honour in the republic of letters, several circumstances must prevent us from ranking him among the first philosophers of the seventeenth century. Better qualified to accumulate testimonies than to investigate truth, and more disposed to raise difficulties than to solve them, he was an injudicious advocate for a good cause. If we are not v'ery much mistaken, Huet did not strictly adhere to the Scholastic art of reasoning which he had learned in the schools of the Jesuits ; otherwise, he must have seen, that there can be no room for faith, or for, what he artfully conceals under that name, the authority of the church, if every criterion of truth be rejected, and human reason be pronounced a blind and fallacious guide. Not inferior to Huet in learning, and much his superior in strength of judgment, and keenness of wit, was Peter Bayle,! justly reckoned one of the most powerful advocates for Pyrrhonism. Fie was born at Carlat in Foix, in the year 1647. Flis father was a member of the Reformed church, and instructed him in the Greek and Latin languages, and in other branches or learning, till he was nineteen years of age, when he entered upon his academic studies in the Jesuit’s college at Thoulouse. So in¬ satiable was his thirst for knowledge, that by incessant application he im¬ paired his constitution, and was twice in danger of losing his life; notwith¬ standing which, with the return of health, his love of study returned, and he read with great avidity authors both ancient and modern in every branch of learning. Among the ancients his principal favourite was Plu¬ tarch ; among the moderns, Montaigne; and from these writers he probably derived his first bias towards Scepticism. About the age of twenty he engaged in the study of logic, and afterwards expressed his regret that lie Paris, 1670. _ f Pa,-. ifig.;. J Nit. a Des Maizeaux. B'isnag’. Picucst. Masson. 'Limier. Nicrron, Conf. Kpist. ct Diction. Chap, 1. OF MODEKN SCEPTICS. 561 had not sooner made himself master of this art. One of his college com¬ panions, a Romish priest, observing the unsettled state of his mind, pre¬ vailed upon him to submit his judgment to the authority of the church ; and not without much surprise and regret on the part of his friends, he made a public profession of the Catholic faith. Not long afterwards, how¬ ever, he was induced by the arguments and persuasions of his brother, a Protestant ecclesiastic, to recant his precipitate conversion, and return to the profession of the Reformed religion. As apostasy from the Catholic faith was at that time a capital offence in France, Bayle found it necessary to leave the kingdom, and in the year 1670 retired to Geneva. Here he studied the Cartesian philosophy, and saw reason to adopt it in preference to the barren subtleties of the Scholastic doctrine, which he had learned in the schools of the Jesuits ; still, however, retaining that freedom of thought which led him, with Horace, to examine all sects, but adhere tenaciously to none. Through the intercession of his friends, Bayle, in the year 1675, ob¬ tained permission to visit Paris, where the society of the most learned men, and the use of the best libraries, enabled him to prosecute his studies with great advantage. Through the interest of Basnage, who was Jiis in¬ timate friend, he obtained the philosophical chair in the university of Paris; and, within two years from that time, wrote a system of philosophy for the use of his pupils. In this situation he entered into a controversy with Poiret, on the subject of his treatise, entitled Cogitationes Rationales de Deo, Anima, et Malo, “ Rational Thoughts on God, the Soul, and Evil.” Whilst Poiret continued a Cartesian, he treated his antagonist with temper ; but when he became a Mystic, he inveighed against him with the utmost rancour. In 1680, Bayle engaged in a dispute with Valesius, a Jesuit, on the Cartesian notion of extension, in which he opposed, with great ingenuity, the doctrine of transubstantiation. The severe persecution which at this time fell upon all Protestants in France obliged Bayle, with many other learned men, to leave the country, and settle in Holland. At the entreaty of one of his former pupils, he made choice of Rotterdam as his place of residence, where, with Jurieu, he founded a new school. He now published a treatise, which, in the year 1681, he had written, but could not obtain license to print at Paris, his “ Thoughts on Comets a work replete with various learning, and well adapted to expose the folly of superstition. This was succeeded by a “ Critical Dissertation on Maimburg’s History of Calvinism in which the author employs the Cartesian weapons against the Romish church. Although the work was so well written, that the Prince of Conde confessed himself delighted with it, and even Maimburg acknowledged it to be an excellent book, it was ordered to be publicly burnt at Paris; nevertheless, it had many readers and admirers. The reputation which Bayle had now acquired as a writer encouraged him to undertake a literary journal, under the title of Nouvelles de la Re- publique des Lettres, “ Intelligence from the Republic of Letters,” in which he undertook to review the most important new publications. He did not content himself, in this work, with a barren detail of contents ; but freely passed his judgment upon the merit of authors, and often illustrated the subject on which they treated by original observations. This work, which was begun in 1684, is justly esteemed one of the most valuable literary journals extant. It was afterwards continued by Basnage under the title o\' Hi stoire des Ouvrages des Savans, “The History of the Works of the Learned.” In a metaphysical dispute which arose in France, o o 562 OF MODERN SCEPTICS. Book IX between Arnaud and Mallebranche, on Pleasure, Bayle defended Malle- branche. He wrote a treatise on Toleration, entitled “ A Philosophical Commentary on the Words of Christ, Compel them to come in,” in which he defended the cause of the Protestants with great eloquence ; but with so much freedom as to offend the more orthodox of the Protestants them¬ selves, and among the rest his friend and colleague Jurieu, with whom he had a long and severe contest. To console himself under the vexations which he experienced from this and other causes, Bayle undertook the design of writing “ An Historical and Critical Dictionary a work which he lived to complete, and which remains as the chief monument of his learning, genius, and wit, and an indisputable proof of his propensity towards Scepticism. The first two volumes of this work appeared in the year 1697 ; and, contrary to the author’s usual manner, they were published with his name. This work contains innumerable illustrations of the history of philosophy, both ancient and modern ; and treats many difficult points with the hand of a bold and able critic : but the author isjustly censured for indulging a degree of latitude, inconsistent with good morals and decency. In the second edition of this work, published in 1702, the author sent it forth chastised, amended, and enlarged. It was published in English by P. de la Roche, in 1709. Bayle’s sceptical spirit further appears in a controversy which he held towards the close of his life with Le Clerc and others on the doctrine advanced by Cud worth, of “Plastic Nature,” and “ On the Origin of Evil,” and “ On the Manichaean System.” The principal works in which these controversies are carried on, are Re- sponsiones ad Provincialem quendam, “Answers to a certain Provincial;” and Entretiens de Maxime et Themiste, “Dialogues of Maximus and The- mistius.” In the midst of these contests and labours Bayle died, in the year 1706. Every impartial judge will acknowledge that Bayle was a man of strong judgment, lively imagination, ready invention, and extensive learning. His friends extol him, too, for many personal virtues. At the same time it must be confessed, that his writings betray a mind impressed with little reverence for religion, and tend to foster that kind of Scepticism which is most pernicious. Upon a comparison of the writings of modern Sceptics, it will appear, that they have adopted this method of philosophising upon very different grounds, and for very different purposes : but in whatever form Scepticism appears, or from whatever cause it springs, it may be confidently pro¬ nounced hostile to true philosophy ; for its obvious tendency is to invalidate every principle of human knowledge, to destroy every criterion of truth, and to undermine the foundations of all science, human and Divipe.* ” Vidend. Ulric. Wild. Diss. quod aliquid sciatur. Lips. 1664. Marville Melanges de'a Lit. t. ii. p. 328. Croix du Maine Bibl. de France, p. 84. Budd. Isagog. 1. i. c. 4. Le‘ Clerc. Bibl. Univ. t. xv. p. 330. Crousaz. Examen Pyrrhonisini. Chap. 2. OF SCRIPTURAL PHILOSOPHERS. 563 CHAPTER II. OF SCRIPTURAL PHILOSOPHERS. If philosophy has its Scylla of Scepticism, it has also its Charybdis of Credulity. Whilst some, in shaking off the ancient prejudice in favour of the Grecian dogmatists, fell into the pernicious error of rejecting at once the authority both of reason and Revelation, others were of opinion that the only remedy for the weakness of the human understanding was to have recourse to Divine Revelation for all philosophical as well as theological knowledge. Despising the light of reason, as a dim taper, wholly incapable of discovering the path of truth, these philosophers have confounded reason and Revelation, two sources of knowledge, which, though they pro¬ ceed from the same author, have their distinct limits and uses. Among those who have chosen this method of philosophising, some have professed to confine themselves to the literal meaning of scripture, and undertaken to derive a system of physics from the writings of Moses, and from other parts of the sacred volumes ; and others, disdaining to employ reason, even as a handmaid to Revelation, have pretended to derive their know¬ ledge of philosophy from immediate inspiration ; and, neglecting the literal sense of scripture have, by the help of allegory, adapted its language to their enthusiastic notions. The former may be called Scriptural Phi¬ losophers, the latter Theosophists. In the class of Scriptural Philosophers we do not mean to include those who have applied the sectarian philosophy to the explanation of scripture, or the illustration of its doctrine ; which was done very suc¬ cessfully, both in logic and physics, by Alsted, Glass, Valesius, Bochart, and others ;* nor those who have endeavoured to show the agreement of their system of philosophy, or of the general principles of reason, and the natural law of morality, with the doctrine of scripture. Under the appellation of Scriptural philosophers we only mean to comprehend those who, after the example of Philo, and all the Jewish cabbalists, as well as many of the Christian fathers, have supposed all philosophy to be derived from Divine Revelation; and who, despairing of being able to arrive at any true know¬ ledge of nature by the light of reason, have had recourse to the sacred oracles, and particularly to the Mosaic history of the creation, and endea¬ voured upon this foundation to raise a new structure of philosophy. From a great multitude of writers who have pursued this track, many of them with little reputation to themselves or benefit to science, it may suffice to select a few, who have been more distinguished than the rest for their learning or ability. The first writer of this class, who deserves distinct mention, is Otto Gasman, j- president of the college of Stade, who flourished about the close of the sixteenth century. He was dissatisfied with the unprofitable subtleties of the Aristotelian philosophy, and determined, in the study of nature, rather to rely upon the decision of the sacred writings than upon the doctrine of the ancient Heathen philosophers. Even in his explanation of scripture he refused to call in the assistance of philosophical rules of Kahl. Bibl. Phil. c. 7. sect. 7. t Budd. Intr. ad Hist. Phil. Ileb. sect. 3G. o o 2 564 OF SCRIPTURAL PHILOSOPHERS. Book IX. interpretation. In a work entitled Cosmopma, “ On the Formation of the j World,” he derives his physical doctrine from the scriptures ; and in his | Modesta Assertio Philosophice et Christiance et VeraA' “ Modest asser- j tion of True and Christian Philosophy,” he professes to write Christian ! Institutes of grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, &c. With Casman may j be joined Henry Alsted,-]' professor of divinity at Alba-Julia till 1638, when he died, in his fiftieth j’^ear. In \\\^ Encyclopedia Biblica,^ he under¬ takes to deduce the elements of philosophy, jurisprudence and medicine from the sacred scriptures ; a work which shows more good intention than sound judgment. These writers have treated the books of the sacred ' scripture as some ancient critics treated Homer, who, whilst they pretended to find in him every kind of science and M'isdom, suffered the time meaning and spirit of his poems to escape their attention. The Philosophia Mosaica, \ “Mosaic Philosophy,” of Pfeiffer is liable to the same censure. What these writers attempted with respect to philosophy in general, . others undertook, but with no better success, in particular branches of science. Conrad Aslach, of Bergen, in Norway, after having been instructed in the family of the celebrated astronomer Tycho Brahe, and visited many of the principal schools of Europe, was, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, made professor of philosophy and theology in the university of Copenhagen, and was the author of “ A System of Christian Ethics and Physics.” Lambertus Danjeus, a celebrated Protestant divine, who was a professor of theology at Geneva, wrote a treatise of the same kind, entitled Physica Christiana, “ Christian Physics.” A Scrip¬ tural System of Politics was also written by Scribanus ; and of Natural Law by Valentine Albert : writers, whose works are more calculated to confound than to discover truth. Among the scriptural philosophers must also be reckoned those who have written Mosaic Cosmogonies, or attempted to give a philosophical explana¬ tion of the origin of the world, on the ground of the Mosaic history of the creation. Of these the two principal are Dickinson and Burnet. Edmund Dickinson, an English physician, born in 1624, wrote a treatise De Physica veteri et vera, “ On true and ancient Physics,”§ in which he attempts, from the scriptural account of the creation, to explain the manner in which the world was formed. Assuming, as the ground of his theory, the Atomic doctrine, and the existence of an immaterial cause of the concourse of indivisible atoms, he supposes the particles of matter agitated by a double motion ; one gentle and transverse, of the particles among themselves, whence elementary corpuscles are formed ; the other circular, by which the whole mass is revolved, and the regions of heaven and earth are produced. By the motion of the elementary corpuscles of different magnitude and form, he supposes the different bodies of nature to have been produced ; and attempts, upon this plan, to describe the process of creation through each of the six days. He explains at large the for¬ mation of human nature; showing in what manner, by means of a plastic seminal virtue, man became an aramated being. The theory, though founded upon conjecture, and loaded with unphilosophical fictions, the author not only pretends to derive from the Mosaic narrative, but main¬ tains to have been consonant to the most ancient Hebrew traditions. The use which this theorist makes of the doctrine of atoms shows him to have been wholly unacquainted with the true notion of the ancients on this * Francof. 1601. 8vo. f Baillet, Jugemens des Savans, t. ii. p. .328. Reimm. Hist. Lit Germ. p. iii. p. 185. J Francof. 1625. 8vo. § Lond. 1702. 4to. Chap. 2. OF SCRIPTURAL PHILOSOPHERS- 565 subject ; and indeed the whole work seems to have been the offspring of a confused imagination rather than of a sound judgment. The same design was undertaken and execufed, with much more learning and ability, by Thomas Burnet,* born in the year 1635, and educated at Cambridge, under Cudworth and other followers of the Platonic phi¬ losophy. Burnet soon discovered, that whatever praise might be due to Plato in theology and morals, he was a very insufficient guide in physics and cosmology. During the course of a literary tour through France, Italy, Holland, and part of Germany, he formed the design of delineating the system of the world according to the Mosaic history of the creation and deluge, and upon his return wrote in Latin the first part of his “ Theory of the Earth.” The novelty of his ideas, and the perspicuity and elegance of his style, recommended his work to the attention of the learned ; and he obtained such a degree of literary reputation, that, in the year IGSI', he was appointed by Charles the Second master of the Charter-house, with a splendid endowment. Here he employed his first leisure in completing his Theory ; the second part of which was dedicated to William the Third ; and in Avriting his Archcdogia Philosophica, ‘‘ Philosophical Antiquities,” a work replete with learnmg, and abounding with judicious observations. It must, however, be confessed that Burnet’s partiality to his theory led him to find in the ancient theogonies, and in the pliysical doctrine of the ancient philosophers, things which others have not discovered. His singular opinions concerning the origin of the world, the fall, the deluge, and other subjects, brought upon him the charge of heresy, and involved him in troublesome controversies. He lived to the age of eighty-five. Before his death he committed to the flames all the manuscripts which he had drawn up for the press, except two treatises, De Statu Mortuorum et Resurgentium, “ On the State of the Dead, and of the Resurrection,’’ and De Fide et Officiis Christiariorum, “ On the Faith and Duties of Christians of which only a few copies Avere at first printed for the use of his friends. The Mosaic cosmogony Burnet thus explains : between the beginning and the end of the world he supposes several intermediate periods, in Avhich he conceives that nature undergoes various changes. Those Avhich respect this terraqueous globe he believes to have been recorded in the sacred scriptures. From these, compared Avith profane history, he attempts to prove, that the primeval earth, as it rose out of chaos, Avas of a different form and structure from the present, and Avas such, that from its dissolution would naturally arise an universal deluge. Such a change in the state of the globe he infers from the general aspect of its surface in the present day ; and he argues, that since it is the nature of fluids to form a smooth surface, the earth, which was at first a chaotic mass in a fluid state, as it gradually became solid by the exhalation of the lighter particles of air and Avater, Avould still retain its regular superficies, so that the ncAv earth would resemble an egg. The earth, in this paradisaical state he supposes to be capable of sending forth its vegetable productions Avithout rain, and to enjoy a perpetually serene and cloudless atmosphere. In process of time he conceived that the surface of the earth, by the continual action of the rays of the sun, Avould become so parched, as to occasion vast fissures, through Avhich the waters of the great abyss, contained Avithin the boAvels of the earth, would be sent forth by means of elastic vapours, expanded by heat, and acting Avith irresistible force upon their surface ; wlience a universahleluge would ensue, and in the violent concussion, lofty mountains, * Acta Pliil. vol. iii, p. 431. 566 OF SCRIPTURAL PHILOSOPHERS. Book IX. craggy rocks, and other varieties in the external form of the earth, would appear. Our theorist also conjectures, that the earth, in its original state, owed its universal spring to the coincidence of the plane of the ecliptic A\ith that of the equator; and supposes that, at the deluge, the pole of the ecliptic changed its position, and became oblique to the plane of the equator. From similar causes he conceives, that the final conflagration will be produced. This theory is well imagined, supported with much erudition, and described with great elegance of diction : but it can only be considered as an ingenious fiction, which rests upon no other foundation than mere conjecture. Whiston,* CLUVERiuSjj- and others, have also, upon the ground of the Mosaic cosmogony, formed theories of the earth ; but these philosophical romances have contributed little towards the im¬ provement of knowledge. Another writer who claims a place among the Scriptural philosophers is Joannes Amos Comenius,;{; a native of Moravia, born in the year 1592, the author of a celebrated and useful grammatical work, entitled Janua Linguarum, “ The Porch of Languages.” His Protestant principles (for he was a minister of the Reformed church, first in his native country, and afterwards in Poland) led him to inquire freely into the grounds of opinions both philosophical and theological ; and he soon discovered the futility of the Peripatetic philosophy, and resolved, if possible, to substitute some¬ thing better in its stead. Taking sense, reason, and scripture for his guides, he framed a system of physics, which he entitled. Synopsis physica ad Lumen Divinum reformata, “ A Synopsis of Physics reformed according to Divine Light.” Coraenius supposes three principles of nature ; matter, spirit, and light : the first a dark, inactive, corporeal substance, which receives forms ; the second, the subtle, living, invisible substance which animates material bodies ; the third a middle substance between the two former, lucid, visible, moveable, capable of penetrating matter, which is the instrument by which spirit acts upon matter, and which performs its office by means of motion, agitation, or vibration. Of these three prin¬ ciples, he conceived all created beings to be composed. This doctrine he attempts to derive from the Mosaic history of the creation ; but the Scholastic fictions which men of this cast ascribe to Moses, Moses himself would probably never have owned. The same track was pursued by Joannes Bayer, § an Hungarian divine, who flourished about the middle of the last century. He adopted the three principles of Comenius ; but introduced distinctions respecting each, which in subtlety may vie with the most subtle speculations of the Scholastic doctors, and which it would be an unpardonable trespass upon the reader’s patience to detail. His work is entitled Atrium Naturce ichnographice Delineatum.,\\ “ The Court of Nature ichnographically de¬ lineated.” Who does not perceive from the particulars which have been related concerning these Scriptural philosophers, that their labours, however well intended, have been of little benefit to philosophy ? Their fundamental error has consisted in supposing that the sacred scriptures were intended, not only to instruct men in all things necessary to their salvation, but to teach the true principles of physical and metaphysical science. Had these philosophers duly considered that reason and Revelation, though both from tiie same fountain, has each its proper office and end, which ought not to * A new Tlieory of the Earth. Lond. 1C98. t Oeologia. Hainb. 1700. 4to. J Bayle. Praif. Op. Didact. § Morhotr. Polyh. t. ii. 1. ii. p. i. c. 3. secfc. 5. § Cassov. 1662. Chap. 3. OF THE THEOSOPHISTS. 567 be confounded, they would have refrained from that misapplication of Jlevelation, which has led them to ingraft the fictions of their own ima¬ gination upon the scriptures ; a practice which has proved exceedingly injurious both to philosophy and religion : to philosophy, by giving more credit and authority to the conceits of fanciful men than they would otherwise have obtained ; to religion, by encouraging writers of more imagination than judgment, to exercise their ingenuity upon the scriptures, in a way which may not only expose themselves, but even the sacred writings, to ridicule.* CHAPTER III. OF THE THEOSOPHISTS. Besides the Scripturalists, there is another class of philosophers who profess to derive their knowledge of nature from Divine Revelation, namely the Theosophists. These men, neither contented with the natural light of human reason, nor with the simple doctrines of scripture understood in their literal sense, have recourse to an internal supernatural light, superior to all other illuminations, from which they profess to derive a mysterious and Divine philosophy, manifested only to the chosen favourites of heaven. They boast that, by means of this celestial light, they are not only admitted to the intimate knowledge of God and of all Divine truth, but have access to the most sublime secrets of nature. They ascribe it to the singular mani¬ festation of Divine benevolence that they are able to make such a use of the element of fire, in the chemical art, as enables them to discover the essential principles of bodies, and to disclose stupendous mysteries in the physical world. They even pretend to an acquaintance with those celestial beings which form the medium of intercourse between God and man, and to a power of obtaining from them, by the aid of magic, astrology, and other similar arts, various kinds of information and assistance. This they affirm to have been the ancient secret wisdom, first revealed to the Jews under the name of the Cabbala, and transmitted by tradition to posterity. Philosophers of this class have no common system ; but every one follows the impulse of his own imagination, and constructs an edifice of fanaticism for himself. The only thing in which they are agreed is, to abandon human reason, and pretend to Divine illumination. The reader will easily perceive, that it must be a difficult task to decipher the systems of such philosophers, and will not be disappointed if he find us unable to illuminate this region of obscurity. In pursuit of our plan, we shall enumerate a few of the principal Theosophists. Many traces of the spirit of Theosophism may be found through the whole history of philosophy : in which nothing is more frequent than fanatical and hypocritical pretensions to Divine illumination. f Vidend. Reimann. Cat. Bib. Theol. p. i. p. 691 — 1108. Gundling-. Hist. Pliil. Mor. c. 7. Ileuman. Act. I’h. v. ii. p. 26 — 81. v. iii. p. 434. Gousalez de Salas Diss. Rarail. de duplici viventiuin terra, Lugd. 1650. Abyssinian Philosophy conliucd, Lond. 1697. Keil’s Examination of Burnet’s Theory, 0.x. 1098. Whitby’s Defence of the Mosaic History of the Creation, Lond. 1705. Rarini Miindus nascetis, Traj. 1686. Moyses illiislr. Amst. 1707. Espagneti Competid. Pliys. Tlieses. Phys. Comen. Berolin. 1702. 568 OF THE ThEOSOPHISTS. Book IX. Among moderns, the first name which appears with distinction in this class of philosophers is Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Para¬ celsus,* a man of a strange and paradoxical genius. He was born at Einsidlen, near Zurich, in the year 1493. His family name, which was Bombastus, he afterwards changed, after the custom of the age, into Para¬ celsus. He was instructed by his father, who was a physician, in languages and medicine. So earnestly desirous was he of penetrating into the mys¬ teries of nature, that, neglecting books, he undertook long and hazardous journeys through Germany, Italy, Spain, Denmark, Hungary, and Moscovy, and probably several parts of Asia and Africa. He not only visited literary and learned men, but frequented the workshops of mechanics, descended into mines, and thought no place mean or hazardous, if it afforded him an opportunity of increasing his knowledge of nature. He consulted all persons who pretended to be possessed of any secret art, particularly such as were skilled in metallurgy. Being in this manner a self-taught philosopher and physician, he despised the medical writings of the ancients, and boasted that the whole contents of his library would not amount to six folios. Rejecting the tedious method of the Galenic school, Paracelsus had re¬ course to new and secret medicines procured from metallic substances by the chemical art : and his bold empirical practice was attended, in many cases, with such wonderful success, that he rose to the summit of popular fame, and even obtained the medical chair in the city of Basil. Among other nostrums, he administered a medicine, to which he gave the name of Azoth, which he boasted was the philosopher’s stone, the medical parihcea, and which his disciples extol as the tincture of life, given through the Divine favour to man in these last days. His irregular practice, and the virulence with which he censured the ignorance and indolence of other physicians, created him many enemies. The rewards which he received for the cures he performed, were by no means adequate to the expecta¬ tions of his vanity and ambition. After meeting with many disappoint¬ ments and mortifications, an incident occurred which determined him to leave Basil. A wealthy canon of Lichfield, who happened to fall sick at Basil, offered Paracelsus a hundred florins to cure his disease. This Para¬ celsus easily effected with three pills of his laudanum^ one of his most pow¬ erful medicines. The canon, restored to health so soon, and, as appeared to him, by such slight means, refused to stand to his engagement. Para¬ celsus brought the matter before the magistrate, who decreed him only the usual fee. Inflamed with violent indignation at the contempt which was, by this decision, thrown upon his art, after inveighing bitterly against the canon, the magistrate, and the whole city, he left Basil, and withdrew' into Alsace, whither his medical fame and success followed him. After tw'o years, during which time he practised medicine in the principal families of the country, about the year 1530, he removed into Switzerland, where he conversed with Bullenger and other divines. From this time, he seems, for many years, to have roved through various parts of Germany and Bo¬ hemia. At last, in the year 1541, he finished his days in the hospital of St. Sebastian, in Saltsburg. Different and even contradictory judgments have been formed by the learned concerning Paracelsus. His admirers and followers have celebrated him as a perfect master of all philosophical and medical mysteries. Some, oil account of the reformation which he produced in medicine, have called * Conf. Script. Aclami Vit. Mecl. p. 28,. 195, 321. Coiiring. de Med. Herni. 1. ii. p. 38. Arnold, H. E. p. ii. p. 308. p. 18. Chap. 3. OF THE THEOSOPHISTS. 569 him the medical Luther. Many have maintained, as indeed he himself boasted, that be was possessed of the grand secret of converting inferior metals into gold ; on the contrary, others have charged his whole medical practice with ignorance, imposture, and impudence. J. Crato, in an epistle to Zwinger, attests, that in Bohemia his medicines, even when they per¬ formed an apparent cure, left his patients in such a state, that they soon after died of palsies or epilepsies. Erastus, who was for two years one of his pupils, wrote an entire book to detect his impostures. He is said to have been not only unacquainted with the Greek language, but so bad a Latin scholar, that he dared not speak a word of Latin in the presence of learned men. It is even asserted, that he was so imperfect a master of his vernacular tongue, that he was obliged to have his German writings cor¬ rected by another hand. His adversaries also charge him with the most contemptible arrogance, the most vulgar scurrility, the grossest intempe¬ rance, and the most detestable impiety. The truth seems to be, that Para¬ celsus’s merit chiefly consisted in improving the art of chemistry, and in inventing, or bringing to light, several chemical medicines, which to this day hold their place in the Pharmacopeia. Without either learning, or urbanity, or even decencyjof manners, by the mere help of physical know¬ ledge and the chemical ^rts, he obtained an uncommon share of medical fame ; and to support his credit with the ignorant, he pretended to an in¬ tercourse with invisible spirits and to Divine illuminations. Paracelsus w'rote, or rather dictated to his amanuensis, many treatises ; but they are so entirely void of elegance, so immethodical and obscure, that one may almost credit the assertion of his chemical assistant, Oponinus, that he dictated most of his books in the night, when he was intoxicated. They treat of an immense variety of subjects, medical, magical, and philosophical. His PkilosopMa Sagax, “ Subtle Philosophy,” is a most obscure and confused treatise on astrology, necromancy, chiromancy, physiognomy, and other divining arts, calculated for no other purpose than to promote vulgar superstition. Several of his pieces treat of philo¬ sophical subjects, such as, “ The Production and Fruit of the Four Elements “The Secrets of Nature, — their Origin, Causes, Character, and Properties,” and the like ; but they are such a confused mass of words, that it would be an Herculean labour to draw out from them any thing which would have the least appearance of a consistent philosophical system.* The chemical or Paracelsic school {Produced many eminent men, whose memoirs rather belong to the history of medicine than of philosophy. Many of these took great pains to digest the incoherent dogmas of their master into a methodical system. A summary of his doctrine may be seen in the preface to ihe Basilica Chymicao^ Crollius ; which after all is nothing better than a mere jargon of words, w ith w'hich it is wholly unnecessary to trouble the reader. What Paracelsus was in the sixteenth century, Robert FLur)D,f an English physician, attempted to become in the seventeenth. He w as born in the year 1574, at Milgate, in Kent, and became a student in the uni¬ versity of Oxford in 1591. After he had finished his studies, he spent six years in travelling, in order to observe and collect what was curious in nature, mysterious in the arts, or profound in science. Returning to England, he was admitted into the college of physicians in London, Avhere * Senncrt de Consensu Cheni. et Galen, c. 3. Severini Idea Medic. Phi). Basil. 157), 4to. Naud. Apol. p. 259. Morlioff. Polyh. t. ii. I. ii. p. i. c. 16. f Wood, Hist.^Ant. Ox. 1. ii. p. 390. Athen. Ox. p. 610. Gassend. Exam. Phil. Fluddianae. 570 OF THE THEOSOPHISTS. Book IX. he obtained great admiration for his singular piety, and the profundity of his chemical, philosophical, and theological knowledge. After a long course of extensive practice, he died in the year 1637. So peculiar was this philosopher’s turn of mind, that there was nothing which ancient or modern times could afford, under the notion of occult wisdom, which he did not eagerly gather into his magazine of science. All the mysterious and incomprehensible dreams of the Cabbalists and Para- celsians, he compounded into a new mass of absurdity. In hopes of im¬ proving the medical and chemical arts, he devised a new system of physics, loaded with wonderful hypotheses and mystical fictions. Pie supposed two universal principles ; the northern or condensing power, and the southern or rarefying power. Over these he placed innumerable intelli¬ gences and geniuses, and called together whole troops of spirits from the four winds, to whom he committed the charge of diseases. He applied his thermometer to discover the harmony between the macrocosm and the microcosm, or the world of nature and of man : he introduced many mar¬ vellous fictions into natural philosophy and medicine : he attempted to explain the Mosaic cosmogony, in a work entitled Philosophia Mosaica, wherein he speaks of three first principles, darkness, as the first matter ; water, as the second matter ; and the Divine light, as the most central essence, cre¬ ating, informing, vivifying all things ; of secondary principles, two active, cold and heat; and too passive, moisture and dryness; and describes the whole mystery of production and corruption, of regeneration and resurrec¬ tion, with such vague conceptions and obscure language, as leaves the sub¬ ject involved in impenetrable darkness. Some of his ideas, such as they were, appear to have been borrowed from the Cabbalists and Alexandrian Platonists. The reader will easily judge what kind of light may be ex¬ pected from the writings of Robert Fludd, when he is informed that he ascribes the magnetic virtue to the irradiation of angels. His philosophical works are, Utrmsque Cosmi Historia ; Veritatis Proscenium; Mono- chordium Mundi Symphoniacum ; Clavis Philosophice et Alchymice; Me¬ teor ologia Cosmica, Sfc. His extravagances were reprobated by several writers, particularly Kepler and Mersenus. In reply,' he wrote an allegoric piece under the title of “ The Contest of Wisdom with Folly.” Mersenus, who did not choose to continue the controversy, engaged Gassendi to chas¬ tise him in his Examen Philosophice Fluddiance ; “ Examination of the Fluddian philosophy a work which should be read by those who wish to form an accurate judgment of Fludd and other Theosophists. One of the most dazzling luminaries in the constellation of Theosophists was Jacob Boehmen,* a famous German philosopher, born near Gorlitz, in Upper Lusatia, in the year 1575. He was brought up a shoemaker, and at twenty years of age married a butcher’s daughter, with whom he lived happily thirty years. Though he never entirely forsook his occupa- tioj), his singular genius soon carried him ultra crepidam, “ beyond his last.” The theological controversies which were at this time spreading through Germany, made their way among the lowest classes of the people; and Boehmen, much disturbed in his mind upon many articles of faith, prayed earnestly for Divine illumination. The consequence, according to his own account, was, that rapt beyond himself for seven days together, he experienced a sacred sabbatic silence, and was admitted to the intuitive vision of God. Soon afterwards, he had a second ecstasy; in which, as he Fr.inkenburg. Vit. Boelim. Sr.gittar. Intr. in II. E. c. 133. sect. 19. p. 899. Weis- scn. Hist. K. t. li. p. 123'I'. Hist. J. Boehm, llamb. 1698. Adam, de Vit. B. Calo, Ltteiiberg;. 17 15. ^ Cliap. 3. OF THE THEOSOPIIISTS. 571 relates, whilst he was observing the rays which were reflected from a bright pewter vessel, he found himself on a sudden surrounded with celestial irra¬ diations ; his spirit was carried to the inmost world of nature, and enabled, from the external forms, lineaments, and colours of bodies, to penetrate into the recess of their essences. In a third vision of the same kind, other still more sublime mysteries were revealed to him, concerning the origin of nature, and the formation of all things, and even concerning Divine principles and intelligent natures. These wonderful communications, in the year 1612, Boehmen committed to writing, and produced his first treatise, entitled Aurora; of which, however, the principles, the ideas, and the language, are so new and mysterious, that we find it wholly imprac¬ ticable to attempt an abridgment. Indeed, the author himself declares these mysteries incomprehensible to flesh and blood ; and says, that though the words be read, their meaning will lie concealed, till the reader has by prayer obtained illumination from that heavenly spirit, which is in God, and in all nature, and from which all things proceed. The Aurora falling into the hands of the minister of Gorlitz, he severely reprimanded the author from the pulpit, and procured an order from the senate of the city for repressing the work, in which Boehmen was required to discontinue his attempts to enlighten the world by his writings. Boehmen ])ayed so much regard to this order, which must be confessed to have been as injudicious as it was oppressive, as to refrain from writing for seven years. His projected work, however, found its way tolhe press at Amster¬ dam, in the year 1619, and the author was encouraged by this circumstance to resume his pen, and from that time sent forth frequent publications. It is said, but upon uncertain authority, that he was summoned to the supreme ecclesiastical court at Dresden, and there underwent an exami¬ nation before a body of theologians, in which he pleaded his cause so suc¬ cessfully, that he was disniissed without censure. Boehmen died in the communion of the Lutheran cluirch, in the year 1624. It will be easily perceived, from the particulars which have been related, that, in Jacob Boehmen, a warm imagination, united with a gloomy temper, and unrestrained by solid judgment, produced that kind of enthusiasm, which in its paroxysms disturbs the natural faculties of perception and understanding, and produces a preternatural agitation of the nervous system, during which the mind is filled with wild and wonderful concep¬ tions, which pass for visions and revelations. Every page of his writings, and even the hieroglyphic figures prefixed to his works, speak a disordered imagination, and it is in vaiti to attempt to derive his Theosophies from any other source ; unless indeed we were inclined to believe the account which he gives of himself, when boasting that he was neither indebted to human learning, nor was he to be ranked among ordinary philosophers: he says, that he wrote, “ Not from an external view of nature, but from the dictates of the spirit ; and that what he delivered concerning the na¬ ture of things, and concerning the works and creatures of God, had been laid open before his mind by God himself.” The conceptions of this enthusiast, in themselves sufficiently obscure, are often rendered still more so by being clothed under allegorical symbols derived from the chemical art. As he frequently uses the same terms with Paracelsus, it is probable that he was conversant with his writings; but he certainly followed no other guides than his own eccentric genius and enthusiastic imagination : and every attempt which has been made by his followers to explain and illustrate his system, has been only raising a fresh ujnis faiuus to lead the bewildered traveller still further astray. 572 OF THE THEOSOPHISTS. Book IX. We honestly- confess it to be wholly beyond our power to give any sum¬ mary of the Boehmen system. This mystic makes God the essence of essences, and supposes a long series of spiritual natures, and even matter itself, to have flowed from the fountain of the Divine nature. His language, upon these subjects, nearly resembles that of the Jewish Cabbala. The whole Divine Trinity, says he, sending forth bodily forms, produces an image of itself, velut Deum quendam parvum, “ as a God in miniature.” If any one name the heavens, the earth, the stars, the ele¬ ments, and whatever is beneath or above the heavens, he herein names the whole deity, who by a power proceeding from himself, thus makes his own essence corporeal. The elements of Boehraen’s Theosophy may be read in his Aurora, and in his treatise, De Trihus DivincB Essentice Principiis, “ On the Three Principles of the Divine Essence.” That Jacob Boehmen had many fol¬ lowers will not be thought surprising by those who have observed the universal propensity of weak and vulgar minds to be delighted with what¬ ever is mysterious and marvellous, especially when it is clothed in obscure and allegorical language.* A more scientific Theosophist than Jacob Boehmen we find in John Baptista Van Helmont,^ a celebrated physician, born at Brussels in 1577. He made such early proficiency in the studies proper to his pro¬ fession, that, at seventeen years of age, he was appointed lecturer in surgery in the academv of Louvain. But he soon discovered, that he had under- taken this office inconsiderately, and had presumed to teach what he himself did not understand. He found that, though he had read many books, and made large common-place collections, he had not yet acquired true and substantial knowledge ; and he lamented that credulous and simple youth are so often deceived by the arrogant pretensions of professors. He now applied with unwearied industry to the study of mathematics, geometry, logistic and algebraic, and of astronomy. But even in these branches of science he did not find the satisfaction he expected. Still complaining of his ignorance, he refused the title of master of arts, and said, that he had hitherto learned no single art in reality, but in appearance only. Under all this seeming modesty. Van Helmont concealed a fastidious contempt of all knowledge but his own, and even of all the learning which had hitherto appeared in the world, and a fond conceit that he was raised up by God to overturn former systems, and to introduce a new method of philosophising. Induced, as he relates, by the pious writings of Thomas-a-Kempis to pray to God that he would enable him to love and pursue the truth, he was in¬ structed by a dream to renounce all Pagan philosophy, and particularly Stoicism, to which he had been inclined, and to wait for Divine illumina¬ tions. Dissatisfied with the knowledge of the nature and virtues of plants, which he derived from the writings of Matthiolus and Dioscorides, and with the principles of medicine which he found in Galen or Avicenna, he concluded that medical knowledge was not to be obtained from the writings of men, or from human industry. Pie had again recourse to prayers, and was again admonished by a dream to give himself up to the pursuit of Divine wisdom. About this time he learned, from an illiterate chemist, the practical operations of the chemical art, and devoted himself with great zeal and perseverance to this pursuit, in hopes of finding in a chemical * Omnia enim stolidi magis admirantur amantque Inversis q\i0e sub verbis latitantia cerriunt. f Coiifcss. t. i. 0(1. p. !). Arnold. H. I'l. ji. iii. c. lieimann Hist. Ooni. I. it. v. iii. p. 437. blonnt, Cciis. p. TSf. Witten. Mem. Med. p. 125. Stdar Clam. A.itist. 1G97. Chap. 3. OF THE TIIEOSOPHI.STS. 573 laboratory that knowledge which he had in vain sought for from books. The medical .skill, which he by this means acquired, he entirely employed in the service of the poor. He administered medicines gratis for several years, and obtained a high reputation both for humanity and medical skill. A cold, which he caught in visiting a poor patient in the night, put an end to his life, in the sixty-seventh year of his age. Van Helmont certainly possessed ready talents, read much, and by the help of experiment improved both the chemical and medical art; but his vanity led him into empirical pretensions. He boasted that he was pos¬ sessed of a fluid, which he called Alcahest, or pure salt, which was the first material principle in nature, and was capable of penetrating into bodies, and producing an entire separation and transmutation of their component parts. But this wonderful fluid was never shown to any person whatever, not even to his son, who also practised chemistry. The contempt which this philosopher entertained for all former systems, led him to frame one of his own, which was a strange compound of theological, medical, and phi¬ losophical paradoxes, and in which Theosophic mysticism is united with Scholastic subtleties. Although he professes to erect the structure of his system upon the foundation of experiment, it is in truth nothing more than a baseless fabric, raised in dreams and ecstasies by a luxuriant and dis¬ ordered imagination. Ambitious of novelty. Van Helmont framed abstrac¬ tions which never existed, but in his own feverish brain ; and, after giving these imaginary entities barbarous names, boasted of them as wonderful inventions. His writings, if we except a few things in practical chemistry and medicine, are, in fact, wholly destitute of that kind of information, which would satisfy a rational inquirer after truth, or an accurate inves¬ tigator of nature. The footsteps of this philosopher ^ere closely followed by his son, Francis Helmont,* who industriously increased the stock of philosophi¬ cal fictions which he inherited from his father, by incorporating with them the dreams of the Jewish Cabbala. His “ Paradoxical Dissertations’’ are a mass of philosophical, medical, and theological paradoxes, scarcely to be paralleled in the history of letters. The most elegant and philosophical of all the Theosophists was Peter PoiRET,'!’ born at Metz, in 1646, and educated in the academy at Basil. Being interrupted in his attendance upon the schools by ill-health, he em¬ ployed himself, during a long confinement, in the study of the Cartesian philosophy. In the year 1668, he became a student in the university of Heidelberg, in order to qualify himself for the clerical profession ; and in 1672 he assumed the character of an ecclesiastic in the principality of Deux Ponts. Here, after a severe illness, he wrote his Cogitationes Rationales de Deo, Anima, et Mala, “ Rational Thoughts concerning God, the Soul, and Evil,” in which he for the most part followed the principles of Des Cartes ; a work which engaged much attention among philosophers, and which he afterwards defended against the censures of Bayle. The public tumults obliged him to leave his clerical cure ; and he withdrew to Holland, and afterwards to Hamburg, where he met the celebrated French mystic, Madame Bourignon, and was so captivated with her opinions, that he became her zealous disciple. Converted from a Cartesian philoso¬ pher into a mystical divine, he determined henceforward to seek for that * Stoll. Intr. in Hist. Lit. p. 1. c. 2. sect 8. t Praef. in Opusc. posth. Arnold Hist. Ecc. p. iii. p. 162. Bentliem. Stat. Eccl. et Schol. Hull. p. ii. p. 420. Niceron. Mem. de Lit. t. iv. Stoll. Hist. Lit. p. ii. c. 2. sect. 7. 574 OF THE THEOSOPHISTS. Book IX. illumination from Divine contemplation and prayer, which he could not obtain by the exercise of his rational faculties. From this time Poiret became a violent enemy to the Cartesian philosophy, and took great pains to detect its errors and defects. At the same time, fascinated with Bou- rignonian mysticism, he rejected the light of reason as useless and dange¬ rous, and inveighed against every kind of philosophy which was not the effect of Divine illuminations. Towards the close of his life, Poiret settled at Rheinsburg, in Holland, and employed the remainder of his days in writing mystical books. He died in the year 1719. His treatises Z>e CEco- nomia Divina^ “ On the Divine Economy and De Eruditione triplici, “ On Three Kinds of Learning and the last edition of his Cogitationes Rationcdes, though in a great measure free from that obscurity which distinguishes the writings of the Theosophists already mentioned, certainly rank him among the class of Mystics. Some of his mystical nonons, as they may be gathered from the preliminary dissertation prefixed to his works,* are as follows : It hath pleased God, in order that he may enjoy a vivid and delightful contemplation of himself, beyond that solitude which belongs to the Divine essence, to create external beings in whom he may produce an image of himself. The essence of the human mind is thought, capable and desirous of light, and joyful complacence ; the properties in which it bears a re¬ semblance of the Divine essence. Nothing is more intimate, or essential to the mind, than this desire ; by which it is borne always towards the true and infinite good. In order to satisfy this desire, the illumination of faith is necessary ; by means of which the mind, conscious of its weakness and impotence, disclaims all the fictions of human reason, and directs itself towards God with an intense and ineffable ardour, till, by the silent con¬ templation of him, it is filled with franquillising light and joyful compla¬ cence : although, whilst oppressed with the load of mortality, it cannot behold his unveiled face. From this Divine illumination proceeds the most pacific serenity of mind, the most ardent love of God, and the most intimate union wdth him. Can there be any doubt concerning the propriety of ranking among fanatics, writers who renounce the light of reason, and seek all wisdom and happiness in submitting the mind, in silence and tranquillity, to the impressions of Divine illumination ? To the class of Theosophists has been commonly referred, the entire society of RosACRUsiANs,t which, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, made so much noise in the ecclesiastical and literary world. The history of this society, w'hich is attended with some obscurity, seems to be as follows : its origin is referred to a certain German, whose name was Rosencreuz, who, in the fourteenth century, visited the Holy Sepulchre, and, in travelling through Asia and Africa, made himself acquainted with many Oriental secrets ; and who, after his return, instituted a small frater¬ nity, to whom he communicated the mysteries he had learned, under an oath of inviolable secrecy. This society remained concealed till the be¬ ginning of the seventeenth century, w hen two books were published, the one entitled, Fama Fraternitatis Laudabilis Ordinis Roscecrusis ; “ The Report of the Laudable Fraternity of Rosacrusians the other, Confessio ' * Ed. Amst. 1684. t Arnold. Hist. Eccl. P. ii. c. 18. p. 613. Sec. 17. p. 58. Struv. Intr. in Hist. Lit. c. 9. sect. 29. p. 466. Biblioth. Phil. c. ii. sect. 13. Colberg. Christ. Plat. Hermet. p. i. c. 6. Serpill. Epitaph. Theol. p. 12. Val. Andreas Turris Habel, c. 25. Chap. 3. OF THE THEOSOPHISTS. 575 Fraternitatis,* “The Confession of the Fraternity.’’ In these books the world was informed, that this fraternity was enabled, by Divine Revelation, to explain the most important secrets both of nature and grace ; that they were appointed to correct the errors' of the learned world, particularly in philosophy and medicine ; that they were possessed of the philosopher’s stone, and understood both the art of transmuting metals and of prolonging human life ; and, in fine, that by their means the golden age would return. As soon as these grand secrets were divulged, the whole tribe of the Para- celsists, Theosophists, and Chemists, flocked to the Rosacrusian standard, and every new and unheard-of mystery was referred to this fraternity. It is impossible to relate how much noise this wonderful discovery made, or what different opinions were formed concerning it. After all, though the laws and statutes of the society had appeared, no one could tell where the society itself was to be found, or who really belonged to it. It was imagined by some sagacious observers, that a certain important meaning was concealed under the story of the Rosacrusian fraternity, though they were wholly unable to say what it was. One conjectured that some chemi¬ cal mystery lay hid behind the allegorical tale ; another supposed that it foretold some great ecclesiastical revolution. At last, Michael Breler,j' in the year 1620, had the courage publicly to declare, that he certainly knew the whole story to have been the contrivance of some ingenious persons, who chose to amuse themselves by imposing upon the public credulity. This declaration raised a general suspicion against the whole story ; and, as no one undertook to contradict it, this wonderful society daily vanished, and the rumours which had been spread concerning it ceased. The whole was probably a contrivance to ridicule the pretenders to secret wisdom and wonderful power, particularly the chemists, who boasted that they Avere possessed of the philosopher’s stone. It has been conjectured, and the satirical turn of his writings and several particular passages in his works, favour the conjecture, that this farce was invented and performed, in part at least, by John Valentine Andrea, a divine of Wartenburg. The preceding detail may suffice to show in what light the sect of the Theosophists is to be considered. Although the eccentricities of this sect are too various to be reduced into a regular system, they are all to be traced back to one common source, the renunciation of human reason. The whole dependence of these philosophers is upon internal inspiration ; in which, while the intellect remains quiescent and passive, they wait, in sacred stillness and silence of the soul, for Divine illuminations; and what¬ ever in these profound reveries is suggested to them by a heated imagin¬ ation, they receive as Divine instruction. They do not indeed openly contemn the authority of the sacred writings ; but they reject their natural meaning ; and by thehelp of childish allegories convert the words of scrip¬ ture to whatever signification they please. With no other guide in the search of truth than their own disturbed fancies, they admit the wildest dreams of a feverish brain as sacred truths, and obtrude them upon the world with insufferable arrogance, as oracular decisions not to be con¬ troverted. These enthusiasts seem to be agreed in acknowledging that all things flow from God, and will return to him ; and particularly, that this is the case with the human soul, which must derive its chief felicity from the contem¬ plation of God ; and that Divine illumination is only to be expected in that submissive state of the soul, in which it is deprived of all activity, and * Franc. 1614. 1617. f In Mysterio Iniqiiitatis Pseudo-Evang. c. iii. p. 100. Alctliea, p. 329. 576 OP THE ENEMIES OF PHILOSOPHY. Book IX, remains the silent subject of Divine impressions. They have, moreover, fancied, that God has not only enstamped his image upon man, but upon all visible objects ; and that this image of God being discovered by certain signs, the hidden nature of things may be understood, the influence of the superior world upon the inferior may be known, and great and wonderful ‘ ) effects may be produced. They have imagined, that by the help of the ' ■ arts of astrology and chemistry, the mysteries of nature may be so far laid ,■ open, that a universal remedy for diseases, and a method of converting in- f ferior metals into gold, or the philosopher’s stone, might be discovered. ;• j' Little needs be said to prove, that the system of Theosophism is founded v ‘‘ in delusion, and that it is productive of mischief both to philosophy and re- n ligion. These supposed illuminations are to be ascribed either to fana- ticism or to imposture. The fastidious contempt with which these pretenders ^ | to Divine wisdom have treated those who are contented to follow the plain dictates of common sense, and the simple doctrines of scripture, has un- f questionably imposed upon the credulous vulgar, and produced an indiffer- § f ence to rational inquiry, which has obstructed the progress of knowledge : and their example has encouraged others to traduce philosophy and theology i in general, by representing them as resting upon no better foundation than ^ | enthusiasm and absurdity. It is to be charitably presumed, that these deluded visionaries have not been themselves aware of the injury which they have been doing to the interests of science and religion. Nevertheless, Ma' it must be regretted, both on their own account, and on account of the multitudes they have misled, that whilst they have thought themselves following a bright and steady luminary, they have been led astray by wandering meteors.* CHAPTER IV. OF THE ENEMIES OF PHILOSOPHY. In enumerating the deviations from the true method of philosophising, which a dislike of sectarian philosophy has produced, we must not omit to mention a class of men, who, though they are not themselves philosophers, have had some effect upon the state of philosophy, those who have appeared as its professed adversaries. Every period in the history of philosophy has produced men of this description. The wise men of Greece were ridiculed by Damon, a Cyrenian. Socrates was persecuted by the Athenians. Phi¬ losophy itself was proscribed in the Roman republic, and by several of the Roman emperors ; and its records have more than once fallen a sacrifice * Vidend. Erastus contra Paracelsum. Crollii Basilica Chymica. Oporini Ep. ad Wier. de Moribus Praeceptoris. Clerici Hist, Med. p. 794. 802. Borrich. de Chemia, c. 6. Budd. Isag. p. i. p. 265. Arnold, Hist. Ecc. p. ii. 1. 17. Morhoff. Polyph. t. ii. 1. ii. p. i. c. 10. 15. Wersendorf, Disp. de Fanaticis Silesiorum. Rapin, Reflexions siir la Philosophic, p. 54. Hinckelman, Detect, fundam Boehm. De Visch. Bib. Ord. Cest. p. 187. Stalkopvii Animadv. in Poiret. Felleri Monum. inedit. Fluddi Tract. Apolog. pro Soc. de Rosea Cruse, 1617. Thomas Prsef. ad Poiret de Erudit. Triplici. Conring. de Hermet. iEgypt. et Paracels, Le Compte de Gabalis. Croll. Amphitheatrum Sa- pientiae Eternoe, Magd. 1608. Chap. 4. OF THE ENEMIES OF PHILOSOPHY. 577 to the bigotry of Mahometan and even of Christian princes. Wits have ridiculed philosophers, and priests have condemned them. It is no wonder, then, that philosophy has experienced a similar fate in modern times. The attacks which have been made upon philosophy since the revival of letters have been of different kinds ; some open and direct ; some oblique and concealed. Among its indirect opponents may be reckoned those advocates for Revelation, who have maintained that its doctrines cannot be reconciled with the dictates of human reason, and those enthusiasts, who have relinquished the use of reason, and abandoned themselves to the extravagances of fanaticism. Of a direct attack upon philosophy we shall give one example, in the controversy which happened in the uni¬ versity of Helmstadt, towards the close of the sixteenth century. Daniel Hoffman,* born in 1538, at Hall, in Saxony, and professor, first of logic and ethics, and afterwards of theology, in the university of Helmstadt, had long distinguished himself as a keen and angry disputant. In his time disputes ran high concerning the ubiquity of the human nature of Christ, which was admitted by the more orthodox theologians, but denied by the Brunswick divines, who contented themselves with maintain¬ ing, that the man Jesus Christ could be present wherever he pleased. The aid of the Scholastic philosophy being called in by both parties, to decide this controversy, Hoffman, whether through pique or vanity it is not easy to determine, took this occasion to erect his standard against .p^iilosophy itself. In an academical disputation, he maintained, that the light of reason, even as it appears in the writings of Plato and Aristotle, is adverse to religion ; and that the more the human understanding is cultivated by phi¬ losophical study, the more perfectly is the enemy supplied with weapons of defence. The partiality, which at this time universally prevailed in favour of the Aristotelian philosophy, was such, that an opinion of this kind could not be advanced publicly, without exciting general dissatisfaction and alarm. A numerous band of professors, though they differed in opinion among themselves, united to take up arms against the common enemy. At the head of this body was John Cassel ; whence the advocates for philoso¬ phy were called the Casselian party. They at first challenged Hoffman to a private conference, in expectation of leading him to a sounder judg¬ ment concerning philosophy ; but their hopes were frustrated. Ploffman, persuaded that interest and envy had armed the philosophers against him, in his reply to his opponents, inveighed with great bitterness against phi¬ losophers, and acknowledged, that he meant to oppose not only the abuse of philosophy, but the most prudent and legitimate use of it, as necessarily destructive of theology. This extravagant assertion, accompanied with many contumelious censures of philosophers, produced reciprocal vehe¬ mence; and Albert Graver published a hook. De Unica Veritate, which maintained “ the Simplicity of Truth a doctrine from which the Casse¬ lian party were called Simplicists ; whilst the followers of Hoffman, (for he found means to engage several persons, particularly among the Theo- sophists, in his interest), opposing this doctrine, were called, on the other hand, Duplicists. John Angel Werdenhagen, a Boehmenite, who pos¬ sessed some poetical talents, wrote several poems against the philosophers. In short, the disputes ran so high, and produced so much personal abuse, that the court thought it necessary to interpose its authority, and appointed arbitrators to examine the merits of the controversy. The decision was against Hoffman, and he was obliged to make a public recantation of his * Elswich. de Fortun. Arist. in Acad. Prot. sect. 27. Arnold. Hist. Eccl. p. ii. iii. Bayle. Reimann. Hist. Lit. Germ. p. iv. p. 96. P P 578 OF THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF Book X. errors, acknowledging the utility and excellence of philosophy, and de¬ claring that his invectives had been only directed against its abuses. After this defeat, Hoffman retired into a neighbouring monastery ; but he was permitted to return to Helmstadt, and open a private school. He died in the year 1611. Werdenhagen, who had been Hoffman’s coadjutor, would not suffer the contest to sleep after the death of its author. His zeal for Boehmean Theosophism impelled him to persist in his invectives against philosophers ; and he pressed into his service a hot-headed youth, Weneslaw Schilling, a Thuringian, who inflamed the quarrel by several virulent publications, one of which was entitled Visitatio Ecclesice Metaphysice, “ A Visitation of the Metaphysical Church.” For his scurrilities he was banished from Wittenberg. Werdenhagen withdrew to Holland, and the dispute ended. A dispute which originated in disappointed vanity, and was supported by enthusiasm and malevolence, only deserves to be recorded as a proof of the necessity of philosophising soberly, and of following reason, rather than imagination or passion, in the search after truth.* BOOK X. OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHY. CHAPTER I. OF THE NATURE AND ORIGIN OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHY. Upon the revival of letters, many attempts were made to restore and to improve philosophy ; but from the preceding narrative it is sufficiently evident, that little was accomplished. The human understanding has, at length, however, through the favour of Divine Providence, asserted its native freedom and dignity, and shaken off the yoke of authority. Many independent and exalted geniuses have arisen, who, despising the servile prejudice of yielding implicit deference to the decisions of the ancients, have determined, by the vigorous exertions of their own faculties, to investigate certain and universal principles for themselves, and upon this foundation to frame a system of opinions, which should be truly and pro¬ perly their own. They have not indeed disdained to consult the records of ancient wisdom ; but they have admitted nothing as true, which their reason and judgment have not approved. From these laudable attempts a species of philosophy has arisen, more pure and excellent than that of any former period, which we shall distin¬ guish by the name of the Modern Eclectic Philosophy : understanding by the term, however, something very different from that specious kind of phi- * Vidend. Weisman. Hist. Ecc. t. ii. p. 1170. Michael Syn. Hist. Ecc. 1. iii. sect. 2. Hutteri Concordia Concors. c. 52. Meieri Monum. c. 3. Chap. 1. MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHY. 579 losophy, which rose in the school of Alexandria, and from that confusion of opinions which some modern writers, by attempting to reconcile Plato¬ nism with Stoicism or Peripateticism, and all these with Christianity, have produced. The true Eclectic philosopher, renouncing every prejudice in favour of celebrated names or ancient sects, makes reason his sole guide, and diligently investigates the nature and properties of the objects which come under his observation, that he may from these deduce clear princi¬ ples, and arrive at certain knowledge. He esteems nothing so disgraceful in philosophy, as jurare in verha magistri, implicitly to acknowledge the authority of a master; and says, with respect to all the different sects and their leaders, Tros Rutulusve fuat, nullo discrimine habebo. (a) It is wholly unnecessary to expatiate upon the superior dignity and use¬ fulness of this method of philosophising above all others; and it is foreign from our purpose to lay down the principles and rules by which it should be conducted. But it may not be improper, in a few words, to explain the reasons why this method of prosecuting philosophical inquiries, so ob¬ vious as well as reasonable, was not sooner adopted. The history of the restoration of learning will itself suggest one cause of this fact. Those learned men on whom the charge of reforming philosophy, as well as reviving letters, devolved, were chiefly employed in the study of the ancients, and were more desirous of excelling in erudition than of im¬ proving science. The Greek philosophy, preserved in those ancient writ¬ ings which principally engaged their attention, came recommended to them under the seducing form of ancient lore; and they easily persuaded themselves, that it was wholly unnecessary to attempt improvements upon the wisdom of Plato and Aristotle. Occupied in grammatical and critical inquiries, they had neither leisure nor inclination to exercise their talents in original researches into nature. Add to this, that indolence probably prevented some, and ignorance of the true nature of philosophy, and of the value of the Eclectic method of philosophising, hindered others, from at¬ tempting new discoveries ; whilst the more enterprising geniuses, from whom ! such improvements might have been expected, such for example, as Mar¬ tin Luther, were devoted to higher pursuits. Philip Melancthon, though I possessed of abilities equal to the task, was of too timid a disposition to ! shake off the sectarian yoke; and contributed, more than became a reformer i in religion, to rivet the chains of authority in philosophy. And, among i the Roman Catholics, such a blind respect for ancient names was still pre- ■ dominant, and so strong was the attachment to those established forms with which ecclesiastical honours and emoluments were inseparably connected, I that philosophical innovations were not to be expected from this quarter. The rigour, with which every attempt towards the introduction of new opinions was at this time suppressed by the heads of the Romish church, doubtless confirmed the general prejudice against alterations of every kind, and deterred those, who were capable of penetrating through the surrounding mist of superstition and error, from yielding to the impulse of nature and genius. These difficulties long retarded the progress of science; but at length certain philosophers of the first order, conscious of internal strength suffi- i cient for the undertaking, ventured to burst the enclosure of authority, and I by the aid of deep reflection and persevering industry, enlarged the boun¬ daries of human khowledge. Clearly perceiving the defects and errors of (a) “No blind respect to names alone I pay.” p p 2 580 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. the several Grecian sects, they deplored the abject state to which the human mind had been reduced by indolence, superstition, and blind submis¬ sion, and with generous indignation threw olF the yoke. The first success¬ ful attempt for this purpose was made by that great man, Lord Bacon, who may therefore justly be called the parent of Modern Eclectic philosophy. In his Novum Organum, a work richly fraught with true and liberal phi¬ losophy, his first object was to cast down the idol, which the philosophical world had so long worshipped, and recal their homage to the divinity of truth. Although some eminent men, who have philosophised after the Eclectic method, have had the vanity to exhibit themselves as the founders of new sects, it is inconsistent with the nature of Eclectic philosophy to admit of sectarian subdivisions. Instead therefore of attempting, as some writers have done, to divide modern philosophy into distinct schools, we shall con¬ tent ourselves with a more simple arrangement, and shall first treat of those philosophers who have more or less successfully endeavoured to improve philosophy in general: and secondly, of those who have applied them¬ selves to the improvement of certain branches of philosophy. Of the history and doctrines of each we shall give such a sketch as the nature of our plan requires, without attempting those details, which it would be im¬ possible to bring within the limits we have assigned to the present work.* CHAPTER II. OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS, WHO HAVE ATTEMPTED TO IMPROVE PHILOSOPHY IN GENERAL. SECTION I.— OF JORDANO BRUNO. The first person among the moderns who attempted any material inno¬ vation in philosophy, was Jordan Bruno, f born at Nola, in the kingdom of Naples. He flourished at the latter end of the sixteenth century, but the exact time of his birth is unknowm. To excellent talents he added a lofty spirit, which arose superior to prejudice, and w'ould admit nothing as true without examination ; whence it is easy to conceive, that in the system of philosophy and theology then taught in the schools of Italy, he met with many things which he could not digest. Fond of retirement and study he entered into a monastery of Dominicans ; but the freedom of his opinions, and the boldness of the censure wLich he passed upon the irregu¬ larities of the fraternity, soon created him enemies, and subjected him to persecutions, which obliged him to quit his order and his country, leaving behind him all his property. In the year 1582, he withdrew to Geneva, * Vidend. Arnold. Wesenfeld. Diss. iv. de Phil. Sect, et Eclect. Mosheira. Hist. Christ, recent, sect. 17. p. 403. t Epist. Scioppii. in Struvii Act. Lit. t. v. p. 64. La Croze Entretiens, p. 187. Steph. Jordan. Disq. Hist. Lit. de J. Bruno. Bayle. Chap. 2. S. 1. JOKDANO BUUNO. 581 where his heretical opinions gave otfence to Calvin and Beza, and he was soon obliged to provide for his safety by flight. After a short stay at Lyons he came to Paris. Here, his innovating spirit recommended him to the notice of multitudes, W'ho at this time declared open hostilities against the authority of Aristotle. In a public disputation, held in the Royal Academy, in 1586, he defended, three days successively, certain proposi¬ tions concerning nature and the world, which, together with brief heads of the arguments, he afterwards published in Saxony, under the title of Acrotismtis,* or, “ Reasons of the physical Articles proposed against the Peripatetics at Paris.” The contempt with which Bruno, in the course of these debates, treated Aristotle, exposed him to the resentment of the academic professors, who were zealous advocates for the old system ; and he found it expedient to leave the kingdom of France. According to some writers,f he now visited England, in the train of the French ambassador Castelneau, where he was hospitably received by Sir Philip Sidney and Sir Fulke Greville, and was introduced to Queen Elizabeth. But though it is certain from his writings that he was in England, he probably made this visit in some other part of his life ; for, about the middle of the same year in which he was at Paris, we find him at Wittenberg, a zealous ad¬ herent of Luther. In that city he met with a liberal reception, and full permission to propagate his doctrines : but the severity with which he inveighed against Aristotle, the latitude of his opinions in religion as well as philosophy, and the contempt with which he treated the masters of the public schools, excited new jealousies; and complaints were lodged against him before the senate of the university. To escape the disgrace which threatened him, Bruno, after two years’ residence in Wittenberg, left that place, and took refuge in Flelmstadt, where the known liberality of the Duke of Brunswick encouraged him to hope for a secure asylum. But either through the restlessness of his disposition, or through unexpected opposition, he left this place the next year, and went to Frankfort to super¬ intend an edition of his works, which were now become numerous, at the press of the celebrated printer, John Wechel; but before this design was completed, he was obliged on a sudden, probably from an apprehension of persecution, to quit that city. His next residence (unless it was at this time that he visited England) was at Padua; there the boldness with which he taught his new doctrines, and inveighed against the court of Rome and the clergy, soon brought him under the censure of the court of inquisition at Venice, as an apostate from the faith ; in consequence of which he was conveyed as a prisoner to Rome, and, after two years’ confinement, was condemned to the flames. This sentence was executed in the year 1600 : a severe fate, which, though it has been ascribed to the impiety of his tenets, was more probably the effect of his desertion from the Romish church, and of his daring attacks upon the majesty of the pontificate. The character of this philosopher was certainly singular and paradoxical. A luxuriant imagination supplied him with wonderful conceptions, intelli¬ gible only to a few, which were never formed into a system. Not possess¬ ing that cool and solid judgment, and that habit of patient attention, which are necessary to a thorough investigation of subjects, he frequently em¬ braced trifling and doubtful propositions as certain truths. His ideas were, for the most pfart, wild and fantastic, and he indulged himself in a most unbounded liberty of speech. Some of his original conceptions are indeed more luminous and satisfactory, and nearly coincide with the principles of * Wittenberg. 1588. f Seiopp. ;tnd Bayle. 582 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. philosophy afterwards received by Des Cartes, Leibnitz, and others: but these sparks of truth are buried in a confused mass of extravagant and trifling dogmas, expressed in a metaphorical and intricate style, and imme- thodically arranged. In brief, though Bruno was not destitute of a vigor¬ ous and original genius, he wanted that good sense, and that steady temper, without which no great reformation, either in philosophy or religion, can be effected. Bruno was a voluminous writer. His most celebrated philosophical pieces are the following: De Umbris Idearum,^ “On Shadows of Ideas;” De V Injinito, Universo, et Mondi,'\ “Of Infinity, the Universe, and World;” Spaccio della Bestia triomfante,'^ “Despatches from the Triumphant Beast;” Oratio valedictoria hahita in Academia Wittenbergensi,^ “A farewell Oration delivered in the University of Wittenberg;” Z)eAfowac?e, Numero, et Figura,\\ “Of Monad, Number, and Figure;” Summa Ter- minorum Metaphysicorum,*\ “ Summary of Metaphysical Terms.” Of these the satirical work, “Despatches from the Triumphant Beast,” is the most celebrated.** The extreme scarceness of the writings of this philosopher, and the in¬ vincible obscurity of those which have come under our notice, render it impossible for us to give a full and accurate view of his doctrine, or to decide with certainty concerning the kind or degree of impiety which it involved. Thus much, however, may on satisfactory grounds be asserted, that the doctrine of Bruno was not, as Bayle and La Croze maintain, founded on the principles of Spinozism, but on the ancient doctrine of emanation. For, though he acknowledges only one substance in nature, yet it appears from many passages in his writings, to have been his opinion, that all things have from eternity flowed from one immense and infinite fountain, an emanative principle, essential to the divine nature. From this source he derives his Minima, or atoms, of which the visible world is formed. To these he ascribes perception, life, and motion. Besides these, he supposes a distinct principle of combination and union, or a soul of the world, derived from the same fountain, by which the forms of nature are produced and preserved. This intermediate agent, which connects all the other emanations from the eternal fountain, is in the system of Bruno, Nature. By means of which, out of infinite emanations from the eternal fountain, infinite and eternal worlds are produced ; whilst, in truth, only one being exists, which is infinite, immutable, indivisible, good, the un¬ created light which pervades all space, and which has within itself one substantial form of all things. This doctrine appears to have been the result of an absurd attempt to unite the Atomic and Emanative systems, in which mathematics, physics, and metaphysics,are injudiciously confounded, and which, on the whole, rather served to perplex than to improve philosophy, j'j- * Par. 1582. f Ven. 1584. J Par. 1584. § Wittenb. 1588. II Frankf. 1591. "Ij Tig. 1595. ** Addison gives a brief account of this work in the Spectator, No. 389, and speaks of the writer as a professed atheist. But, as the plan of the work, given by Addison, is not atheistical, and as it is not probable that he had seen those treatises from which our author drew his abstract of this philosopher’s opinions, more regard is due to Brucker’s elaborate inquiry into the character and doctrine of Bruno, than to Addison’s cursory judgment. fj- Vidend. Heumann, Act. Phil. v. iii. p. 432. Leibnitz. Ep. v. iv. p. 37. Huet. Gens. Phil. Cart. c. 8. Morhoff. Polyh. t. ii. 1. i. c. 15. sect. 6. Vogt. Cat. Lib. rar. p. 139. Chap. 2. S. 2. JEROM CARDAN. 583 SECTION II.— OF JEROM CARDAN. In the class of modern Eclectic philosophers, however eccentric and unsuccessful in his attempts to reform philosophy, we must reckon Jerom Cardan, an Italian physician, born at Pavia, in the year 1501. His father, who was a lawyer by profession, and a man well skilled in secret arts, instructed him very early in the mysteries of numbers and the precepts of astrology. He also taught him the elements of geometry, and was desirous to have engaged him in the study of jurisprudence ; but his inclination strongly prompting him to the medical profession, he entered upon the study of medicine, and obtained the degree of doctor of physic, at Padua. To escape the public tumults he retired into the country, where he formed a matrimonial connexion, of which he bitterly complains as the cause of all his subsequent misfortunes. His friends made re¬ peated efforts to obtain him an advantageous establishment, but he was too supercilious and peevish to profit by their kindness. An offer was made him of the honourable post of physician to the King of Denmark, with an annual salary of eight hundred crowns, and a free table, but he refused it on account of the climate and the religion of the country. In the year 1552, he was invited into Scotland by the archbishop of St. Andrew’s, and received a large gratuity for his medical services. In the course of this journey he visited England, and was earnestly entreated by Edward, whose nativity he calculated, to remain in his court ; but he could not be pre¬ vailed upon to stay longer than a few months. On his return into Italy, after residing some years in the academy at Bologna, he removed to Rome, where he was admitted into the college of physicians, with a pension from the Pope. Thuanus relates, that he saw Cardan at Rome, a few years before his death, and was surprised to find nothing in him which answered to the high reputation he had obtained. In the year 1576, he finished his days, more like a maniac than a philosopher.* Cardan was a wonderful compound of wisdom and folly. Through his whole life he practised the art of astrology, and wrote an account of his own fate, under the title of Explicatio Geniturce, “ A Calculation of Nativity,” in which he confidently hazards many predictions, and marks innumerable contradictions in his own character, which he ascribes to the malign influence of the stars. He had so much confidence in this art, that he maintained that the position of the stars at the birth of our Saviour was such as indicated a wonderful character. His numerous predictions, and the cures which he undertook to perform by secret charms, or by the assistance of invisible spirits, made him pass for a magician with the vulgar, but were in fact only proofs of a mind infatuated by superstition. In the midst of all this weakness. Cardan is universally acknowledged to have been a man of great erudition and fertile invention, and is celebrated as the author of many new and singular observations in philosophy and medicine. His treatise, De Methodo Medendi^ “ On the Practice of Medicine,” discovers a mind capable of detecting and renouncing esta¬ blished errors. His book, Ee Suhtititate et Varietate Rerum, “ On the Subtlety and Variety of Things,” shows, that if he could have preserved his judgment free from the influence of a disordered imagination, he was able to have contributed to the improvement of natural philosophy. Of the dogmas of this philosopher, the following are a specimen : — * Card, de Vita propria. Bayle. Toniassin. Flog. p. 55. Naudaei Judic. de Card. Sevin. Hist. Acad. Reg. Inscript. t. xiii. art. 2. Thiiaii. Hist. 1. xlii. aim. 1576. 584 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. Primary matter, which remains immutably the same, fills every place ; whence, without the annihilation of matter there can be no vacuum. Three principles subsist every where ; matter, form, and mind. There are in matter three kinds of motion ; the first, from form to element ; the second, the reverse of this ; the third, the descent of heavy bodies. The elements or passive principles are three ; water, earth, and air ; for natu¬ rally all things are cold, that is, destitute of heat. The agent in nature is celestial heat ; the air being exposed to the action of the solar rays, is perpetually in motion. The moon and all the other heavenly bodies are luminous from themselves. The heavens are animated by an ever active principle, and are therefore never quiescent. Man, having mind as well as soul, is not an animal. The dispositions of men are produced, and all moral affairs are directed, by the influence of the stars. Mind is univer¬ sally diffused, and though it appears multiplied, is but one ; it is extrin- sically, and for a time, attached to human bodies, but never perishes. Innumerable other singular metaphysical and physical notions are to be found in the works of Cardan ; and they are accompanied with many experiments and observations on natural phenomena. But the whole is thrown together in such a confused mass, as plainly proves, that, though the author’s head was replete with ideas, he wanted that sound under¬ standing and cool judgment, without which the most ingenious and original conceptions must prove abortive. He was too fond of mysticism, too credulous, too superstitious, and, in a word, too much of an astrologer, to be a true philosopher. Cardan, therefore, notwithstanding all the variety and apparent originality of his writings, must be ranked among the unsuc¬ cessful adventurers in philosophy. His works, which treat of metaphysics, logic, natural philosophy, medicine, mathematics, and morals, were col¬ lected by Spon, and published* in ten volumes. He was attacked with much acrimony by several writers, particularly by J. C. Scaliger, who envied his philosophical reputation and medical success.-j- SECTION III.— OF FRANCIS BACON, LORD VEROLAM. That reformation in philosophy, which had been unsuccessfully attempted by Bruno, Cardan, and others, was happily accomplished by that illus¬ trious English philosopher, Lord Bacon, who did more to detect the sources of former errors and prejudices, and to discover and establish the true method of philosophising, than the whole body of philosophers which many preceding ages had produced. Francis Bacon, Baron of Verulam, and Viscount of St. Alban’s, was born in London in the year 1560. His father was Sir Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. It was the good fortune of Lord Bacon, that he appeared at a time when learning was commonly admired and cultivated among men of rank and fortune, and was even fashionable at court. The singular talents with which nature had endued him, and his early proficiency in learning, recommended him, whilst a boy, to the particular attention of several of the nobility, and * Lugd. 1663. f Vidend. Sanchez de Arte nihil sciendi. p. 193. Schmidii Diss. de Themata Christi natal. Scaligeriana primi. p. 48. Vogt, in Cat. Lib. rar. p. 167. Reimann. Hist. Ath. S. iii. c. 4. sect. 1 1. Parker de Deo Disp. i. p. 72, 210. Arnold Hist. Ec. p. ii. I. xvii. p. 324. Voss, de Theol. Gent. 1. iii. c. 8. Chap. 2. S. 3. FRANCIS BACON, LORD VERULAM. 585 introduced him to the notice of the Queen. Fond of school learning, that princess more than once amused herself with endeavouring to puzzle the young scholar with difficult questions ; but his replies discovered such sound judgment, and were expressed in such manly language, that the Queen was exceedingly delighted with him, and used to call him her young Lord Keeper. At twelve years of age he was entered a student at Cambridge, and placed under the tuition of Dr. Whitgift, the master of Trinity college, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. Here he applied with great ardour to the study of the sciences, particularly of the Aristotelian philosophy, which still continued to be taught in the English schools ; but before he had attained his sixteenth year, he began to be dissatisfied with a method of philosophising, which was rather adapted to create disputes, than to promote the happiness of human life, and determined, if possible, to strike out some more promising way of investigating truth, than the Stagirite, or any of the ancients, had dis¬ covered. After he had passed through the usual course of academical studies, Bacon was sent by his father to France with the ambassador. Sir Amias Pawlet, in order to introduce him to the knowledge of political science, and enlarge his acquaintance with the world. How well he profited by this tour, appears from the judicious observations “ On the State of Europe,” which he wrote in his eighteenth year. His father’s death, which happened suddenly during his visit to France, left him, who was the youngest of five brothers, in circumstances which rendered it necessary for him to engage in some lucrative profession ; and he entered upon the study of the law in Gray’s Inn. Here his superior talents, supported by inde¬ fatigable industry, soon made him an eminent proficient in the English law; and he was, by the favour of Elizabeth, appointed one of her council extraordinary. In the mean time he never lost sight of his favourite ob¬ ject ; for it was during this period of his life, that he formed the outline of his great work, “ The Instauration of the Sciences,” in a treatise to which he gave the vaunting title of Temporis Partus maximus, “ The greatest Birth of Time an expression of vanity of which he afterwards repented, as appears from a letter to Father Fulgentio, of Venice. This piece is not found among his works. From this time Bacon appears upon the public theatre of the political world ; but neither his great abilities, nor his accomplished manners, nor the interest of Essex, the Queen’s favourite, nor even the favour of the Queen herself, (for she often consulted him on the affairs of state,) could so far overcome the jealousy of the ministers, and the spirit of faction, as to obtain for him any advantageous post. At last, Essex, who had in vain solicited public favour for his friend, and who saw him now almost driven by spleen and resentment to forsake his country, from his own private bounty presented him with a valuable estate, which he afterwards sold for eighteen hundred pounds : and we must add, though it is an indelible blot upon the memory of this great man, that after the disgraceful execu¬ tion of Essex, he had the disingenuity to write, at the instigation of the ministry, a formal justification of their conduct, at the expense of the re¬ putation of his friend and benefactor. All the obsequiousness of Bacon could not, however, procure him the favour of the court ; and it was not till James the First ascended the throne, that he obtained any reward for his superior learning and abilities more substantial than the empty breath of fame. By means of Jiis excellent treatise “ On the Advancement of Learning,” he soon obtained access to that prince, who valued himselt 586 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X.^ upon being a patron of learning ; and notwithstanding the violent opposition of the Earl of Salisbury and Sir Edward Coke, he obtained, in the year 1607, the place which he had long desired of Solicitor-General. In the midst of the engagements of this office he continued, however, to pursue his philosophical researches; for, in 1610, he published his treatise “ On the Wisdom of the Ancients.” In 1613, Sir Francis Bacon (for James had, soon after his accession, conferred upon Bacon the honour of knighthood) was appointed Attorney- General ; an office, the profits of which amounted to six thousand pounds a-year. This income, together with the wealth he had acquired by mar¬ riage and from other sources, might justly have been expected to have raised so eminent a philosopher above all temptation to servility and pecu¬ lation. But ambition seduced this great man from the path of integrity. In order to obtain the honourable post of Lord High Chancellor of Eng¬ land, he descended to the meanest and most unwarrantable artifices. He endeavoured to destroy the popularity of his rival. Sir Edward Coke ; he made use of undue influence in the House of Commons, and he yielded implicit submission to the will and humour of the prince. By these arts, in the year 1617, Sir Francis obtained the seals with the title of Lord Keeper; and in the year 1618, was created Lord High Chancellor of England, with the title of Baron of Verulam, which he the next year changed for that of Viscount of St. Alban’s. But neither the avocations of the court, nor the labours of his office, could entice him from his favourite studies. In the year 1620, he published a work on which he had been engaged twelve years, and which obtained him immortal honour, his Novum Organum Scientiarum, “ New Organs of the Sciences.” In the midst of Lord St. Alban’s splendour and wealth, an incident occurred which proved ruinous to his fortune, and at the same time to his reputation. The king, in order to supply his extravagances, among other expedients, made use of illegal patents for monopolies : to these patents the learned Chancellor, through the instigation of the Duke of Buckingham, had affixed the great seal. The whole proceeding gave much offence to the public : complaints respecting these unjust and oppressive monopolies were brought into Parliament ; and the Duke of Buckingham, to extricate himself out of this hazardous situation, persuaded the king to lay the blame upon the Lord Chancellor. The King, whose fondness for Buckingham exceeded all bounds, listened to the proposal, and even prevailed upon Lord St. Alban’s to submit his conduct to public examination without at¬ tempting his own defence, or being present at the trial ; promising, on his royal word, to screen him in the last determination of the court, or, if that could not be done, to make him ample recompense. The consequence was, that the Lord Chancellor was, in 1621, accused before the House of Lords of bribery and corruption, and sentenced to undergo a fine of forty thousand pounds, to be imprisoned in the Tower during the King’s pleasure, to be for ever incapable of holding any public office, and never to sit again in parliament, or come within the verge of the court. After a short con¬ finement in the Tower, the King gave him his liberty ; and about three years afterwards revoked the whole sentence by an entire pardon. Lord St. Alban’s was thus restored to his honours, and men seemed willing to forget that so great a man had ever been capable of offending. From this time, however, mortified no doubt by the recollection of his public disgrace, and the consciousness of having too well deserved it, he declined all con¬ cern in affairs of state, and devoted himself to retirement and study. It was during these last years of his life, which were clouded with care, as Chap. 2. S. S. FRANCIS BACON, LORD VERULAM. 587 well as loaded with regret, that Lord Bacon wrote the greater part of his valuable works. After having been for some time in a declining state, he died in the year 1626, of a fever, which was occasioned by pursuing, Avith more application than his strength would bear, certain experiments re¬ specting the preservation of bodies.* Without dwelling upon a subject so humiliating as the inconsistencies and blemishes of a great and exalted mind, we will immediately proceed to consider Bacon in the light in which he will unquestionably be admired by the most remote posterity, as, among the moderns, the first great im¬ prover of philosophy. Possessing by nature a strong and penetrating judgment, and having inured himself from his childhood to a habit of close attention and deep thinking, Bacon was capable of taking an accurate and comprehensive survey of the regions of knowledge, and of thoroughly examining the foundations of those structures which had hitherto been honoured with the title of systems of philosophy. His first great attempt in philosophy was his incomparable treatise “ On the Advancement of Learning,” first pub¬ lished in English, and afterwards translated by himself, with the assistance of some friends, into Latin. The great design of this work was, to take an accurate survey of the whole extent of the intellectual world ; to review the state of knowledge, as it then stood, in its several branehes, in order to discover how far science had been successfully prosecuted, and what improvements might still be made for the benefit of mankind ; and to point out general methods for the correction of error, and the advancement of knowledge. The author, following the division of nature into the three faculties of the soul, memory, imagination, and understanding, classes all knowledge under three general heads, corresponding to these faculties, history, poetry, philosophy. Phi¬ losophy he considers as the universal science, which is the parent of all others, and divides it into three branches ; that which treats of God, or natural theology j that which treats of nature, or natural philosophy ; and that which treats of man, or human and civil philosophy. Natural phi¬ losophy he distributes into speculative and operative ; including under the former head, physics, which treat of the general principles of nature, of the frame of the world, and of distinct bodies, and their common or peculiar properties ; and metaphysics, which treat of form and final causes ; and comprehending under the latter, mechanics, as deduced from general physical causes ; and magic, or the knowledge of peculiar properties and powers in nature, and of their application to produce unusual effects. Mathematics he considers as an appendage to natural philosophy. The philosophy of human nature he views generally and specially ; generally, as it respects the whole man, liable to miseries, or possessing prerogatives, and as regarding the mutual connexion and influence of the mind and body ; specially, as it respects human nature divided into body, the subject of medicinal, cosmetic, athletic, and voluptuary arts; and soul, whether ra¬ tional or sensible, with its various faculties, their use and objects ; and, as it respects civil life, comprehending conversation, negotiation, and govern¬ ment. Under the head of “ The Use and Objects of the Faculties of the Mind,” he includes logic, comprehending inquiry or invention, examina¬ tion or judgment, custody or memory, and elocution or tradition, in all the forms of speech and writing ; and ethics, treating of the nature of good, simple, or comparative, and of the culture of the mind, respecting its Rawley’s and JIallet’s Life of Lord Bacon. Baylc. 588 OF MODERN ECEECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. natural or accidental characters, and its affections and distempers. To all this the author adds a discourse concerning the limits and use of human reason in matters Divine. From this brief analysis of this excellent work, the reader may in some measure perceive, with what compass of thought and strength of judgment Bacon examined the whole circle of sciences ; and if the treatise be care¬ fully perused, as it ought to be by every one who is desirous of methodising and enlarging his conceptions on the general objects of science, the reader will not fail to admire the active and penetrating genius of the author, who could alone discover so many things, of which former ages had been ignorant, and hold up to posterity a light by which they have been so successfully guided into new fields of science. The numerous desiderata, which he has suggested in almost every branch of science, have furnished hints to succeeding philosophers, which have greatly contributed towards the leading object of all his philosophical labours, the advancement of learning. Bacon was now desirous of becoming a faithful and useful guide to others in the pursuit of knowledge, by pointing out to them the best method of employing their reasoning faculties on the several objects of philosophy ; and for this purpose wrote his Novum Organum, a treatise which the author himself esteemed the most valuable of his works. Rejecting the syllogistic method of reasoning, as a mere instrument of Scholastic disputa¬ tion, which could not be applied with any advantage to the study of nature, he attempts, in this work, to substitute in its stead the method of induction, in which natural objects are subjected to the test of observation and experiment, in order to furnish certain facts as the foundation of general truths. By this expedient he hoped to remove those obstructions to the progress of knowledge, the prejudices*(called by our author Idolce) arising from ancient authority, from false methods of reasoning, or from the na¬ tural imbecility of the human mind. Physical experiment, the organ or instrument which he proposed for the investigation of nature, he considered as the only effectual method of drawing men off from those uncertain speculations, which, contributing nothing towards discovering the true nature of things, only serve to bewilder the imagination, and confound the judgment. For the particular precepts which Bacon prescribed for this purpose, we must refer the reader to the work itself, which will amply repay the labour of a diligent perusal. The great number of new terms which the author introduces, and the complex mode of arrangement which he adopts, cast indeed some degree of obscurity over the work, and have perhaps rendered it less useful than it would otherwise have been : but the reader who has the courage to overcome these difficulties will meet with many excellent observations, which may materially contribute, even in the present advanced state of natural knowledge, to the improvement of science. But the principal value of this work is, that it represents in the most lively colours, the nature, the strength, and the mischievous effects of prejudice, and lays open the various circumstances which have, in all ages, hindered the free and successful pursuit of knowledge. The way being prepared. Bacon applied himself chiefly to the improve¬ ment of that branch of philosophy which best suited his inclination, physics ; and though he did not attempt to frame a system of natural philosophy, he wrote several treatises, which contain original observations on various branches of natural science, butare chiefly valuableas a pattern to posterity of the manner in which these researches should be pursued. His philoso¬ phical treatises are, “ Of Words ; of Rarefaction and Condensation ; of €liap. 2. S. 4, THOMAS CAMPANELLA. 589 Sympathy ; of Life and Death ; of the Three Chemical Principles ; of Bodies, heavy and light; on Speculative and Essential Physics ; Description of the Intellectual World; Plan of the Heavens; on the Tides; the Philosophy of Parmenides, Telesius, and Democritus; Indications for the Interpretation of Nature; of the Wisdom of the Ancients; a History of Nature; and, a new Atlantis.” Besides these, he wrote several moral, poli¬ tical, and historical pieces, somewhat obscure in expression, but full of profound thought and just reflection, and worthy of an attentive and fre¬ quent perusal. This latter class of his writings is enlivened with examples, narratives, apophthegms, similes, and many other decorations. His entire works have been published in England, Holland, and Germany. The only thing to be regretted in the writings of Bacon is, that he has increased the difficulties necessarily attending his original and profound researches, by too freely making use of new terms, and by loading his arrangement with an excessive multiplicity and minuteness of divisions. But an attentive and accurate reader, already not unacquainted with philosophical subjects, will meet with no insuperable difficulties in studying his works, and if he be not a wonderful proficient in science, will reap much benefit as well as pleasure from the perusal. In fine. Lord Bacon, by the universal consent of the leai’iied world, is to be ranked in the first class of modern philosophers. He unquestionably belonged to that superior order of men, who, by enlarging the boundaries of human knowledge, have been benefactors to mankind; and he may not improperly be styled, on account of the new track of science which he explored, the Columbus of the philosophical world.* 0 SECTION IV.— OF THOMAS CAMPANELLA. At the same time that Bacon was improving philosophy in Britain, attempts of a similar kind, but with far inferior success, were made in Italy by Campanella, a man whose natural genius prompted him to bold inno¬ vations. Thomas Campanella, j" a native of Calabria, was born in the year 1568. From his infancy he discovered a wonderful memory and a sin¬ gular genius. At thirteen years of age, he was able to write verses with great facility. Having been early instructed in theological subjects, his first ambition was to rival the fame of the great Albert and Thomas Aquinas ; and he entered his name in that monastic order which they had so much adorned, the fraternity of Dominicans. In the convent of San Giorgio, he engaged with great industry and ardour in the study of phi¬ losophy ; but he soon discovered the sterility of the ancient method of phi¬ losophising ; 'and, after in vain seeking for satisfaction from Aristotle or Plato, Zeno or Epicurus, he had recourse, when he was about eighteen years of age, to a modern master, who had professed to study the nature of things rather than the speculations of philosophers. The philosophy of Telesius about this time engaging much attention in Italy, Campanella read his treatise “ On the Nature of Things,” and was so much captiv'ated with the bold and free spirit of this work, that he determined to leave the • Vidend. Oper. Lond. 1740. 1765. f E. S. Cypriani Vit. Camp. Amst. 1705. Niceron. Mem. Lit. t. i. Erythr. Pinacoth. 1. i. p. 41. Struv. Act. Lit. fasc. ii. p. 71. Stollii Hist. I.it. p. ii. c. 1. sect. 91. 590 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. barren desert of the Aristotelian Scholastics, for the more pleasant and fruitful fields of the Telesian philosophy. He wrote a defence of Telesius against Antoninus Marta, who had undertaken the refutation of that phi¬ losopher’s doctrine, in a work entitled Pugnaculum Aristotelis, “ A De¬ fence of Aristotle,” and came to Naples to publish his work, which was entitled, Philosophia Sensibus demonstrata ^ “ Philosophy demonstrated to the Senses.” The eontempt with which Campanella, in this work, treated the authority ' of Aristotle, raised a violent ferment among his monastic brethren, whieh was still further increased by the bold and decisive tone with which he contradicted long established tenets in public disputations. Supported, however, by wealthy patrons, and still more by his own firm and indepen¬ dent spirit, he persevered in the design which he had long formed of attempting the reformation of philosophy. He wrote two treatises, one, De Se7isu Rerum, “ On Sensation the other Re Investigatione, “ On Investigation from a persuasion, as he himself says, that it was neces¬ sary to point out to young men some better way to the knowledge of things than Aristotle or Plato had taught; and that they should be in¬ structed to reason, not after the manner of Raymond Lully, upon mere words, but upon sensible objects. Neither the power of his genius, nor the patronage of his friends, could, however, secure Campanella from insult and persecution. To escape these, he removed from Naples to Rome, and afterwards to Florence, Venice, Padua, and Bologna. At last he settled in his native country ; and, pro¬ bably, in order to cover his innovations with the shield of orthodoxy, wrote in defence of the see of Rome. But, notwithstanding this precaution, he soon fell under suspicions which proved fatal to him. He was aecused of being concerned in a conspiracy againft; the King of Spain and the Nea¬ politan government ; and, after undergoing torture, was confined in prison about twenty-seven years, during a great part of which time he was denied the privilege of reading and writing. As soon as this indulgence was granted him, he wrote several books, among which were a Treatise on the Spanish Monarchy, and his “ Real Philosophy these he sent into Ger¬ many to be published. Many attempts were made by his friends to obtain his liberation ; but they were unsuccessful, till Pope Urban VIIL, a patron of learned men, prevailed upon Philip IV. of Spain to grant him an ac¬ quittal from the charge of treason. In 1626 he was set at liberty; but finding himself still insecure in Italy, he found means, under the connivance and favour of the Pope, to escape to France, where he experienced the favour of Cardinal Richelieu, who procured for him a pension from Louis XHI. He passed the remainder of his days in a Dominican monastery at Paris, where he continued to enjoy the society of many learned men, till, in the seventy-first year of his age, he expired. Campanella was confessedly a man of genius ; but his imagination pre¬ dominated over his judgment. Innumerable proofs of this may be found in his astrological writings, in his book Re Sensu Rerum, and in many other parts of his works. Can it be doubted that a man, who gave credit to the art of astrology ; who believed that he was cured of a disease by the words and prayers of an old woman ; who thought that demons appeared to him, and conversed with him ; and who persuaded himself, that when any danger threatened him, he was, between sleeping and waking, warned of it by a voice which called him by his name ; was destitute of that sound judgment which is so essential a quality in the character of a philosopher? But notwithstanding all his childish credulity, and all the eccentricity of Chap. 2. S. 4. THOMAS CAMPANELLA. 591 his genius, Campanella had his lucid and happy intervals, in which he reasoned soberly. He is chiefly worthy of praise for the freedom with which he exposed the futility of the Aristotelian philosophy, and for the pains which he took to deduce natural science from observation and ex¬ perience.* Of the numerous writings which his fertile imagination pro¬ duced, the most celebrated are Prodromus Philosophice instaurandcB, “ A Precursor to the Restoration of Philosophy Atheismus triumphatus, “ Atheism subdued De Gentilismo non retinendo, “ On the Rejection of Paganism Astrologica, “ On Astrology Philosophia rationalis, “ Rational Philosophy;” Civitas Solis, “ The City of the Sun;” Univer¬ salis Philosophia, “ Universal Philosophy De Libris propriis, “ On his own Books ;” De recta Ratione studendi, “ On the right Method of Studying.” Though Campanella read much, as appears from many of his writings, particularly from his treatise “ On the Method of Studying,” he paid little respect to the opinions of others. He controverted many of the notions even of his master Telesius, and advanced many dogmas of his own in dialectics, physics, and ethics. In dialectics, Campanella’s chief object seems to have been to recede as far as possible from the Peripatetics ; but his logic abounds with subtle distinctions, useless terms, and obscure rules, upon which the lowest cen¬ sure we can pass is, that they are no improvement upon Aristotle. Concerning nature, f the leading doctrines of Campanella were as fol¬ lows : — Sense is the only guide in philosophy, and is distinguished into present perception, anticipation, and inference from things perceived to things not perceived. The essence and existence of things are the same. Space is the first incorporeal substance, immoveable, the receptacle of all bodies. Time is the successive duration of things, and is only measured by motion. God placed matter in the midst of space, and appointed two principles, heat and cold, to act upon the common mass. Heat formed the heavens from rarified matter ; cold produced the earth from matter con¬ densed. Heat, in repelling the contrary principle, moves the heavens in a circular orbit, and where its power of rarefaction is overcome by cold, its portions of matter, being condensed, become lucid bodies, or stars. Cold, continually repelling heat equally in all directions, the earth, the ^ mass upon which it acts, remains immoveable. Matter, being invisible, is ; black ; light is vivid whiteness ; the colour of cold is unknown, but it is probably black. The sun and the earth are the two elements whence all i things are produced ; air and water are not elements, because they cannot I produce their like. The different forms in nature arise from the different i ways and degrees in which the principles of heat and cold act upon matter. All animal operations are produced by one universal spirit, which acts in all sensoriums. All things in nature, the elements, with their causes and eff'ects, have the sense of feeling, in which they are passive, and have withal a consciousness of impressions, and a perception of the objects by which j they are produced. The world is an animal or sentient being, and since ( nature abhors a vacuum, its parts seek each other with delight, and enjoy ^ mutual contact. Matter itself is sentient, and being in its nature dark and without form, seeks to be adorned with colour and forms, which are com- I municated to it by the active principles of nature. The soul or principle of animal life is a rare substance, capable of receiving impressions from * Conring. de Prud. Civ. c. 14. Adami Prsef. Prodrom. Ph. Camp. Id. in Epilogismo. f Prodrom. Phil. Instaur. Compend. Diss. de Natura Kerum. He SenswRerum. 592 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. things dissimilar, but not from those which are similar to itself ; whence it perceives gross bodies, but not air or spirit; it is not a property of the body, but an agent enclosed in, and operating upon, the body. The human soul descends from an infinite cause, towards which it tends, and is im¬ mortal. The world itself has a soul, by which it is directed, as man by the Divine principle within him. The first, greatest, and only true being, in whom power, wisdom, and love, exist as primary principles, transmits his inexhaustible ideas (by means of the active causes, heat and cold) to the corporeal masses, supported in space, the basis of the world, which itself has its stability in God. All creatures are excellent, in proportion to the degree in which they bear the image of the essential principles of the Divine nature : human depravity consists in the loss of this image, and human perfection in its restoration. As far as any idea of the philosophical character of Campanella can be formed from the confused mass of opinions, so diffusely, but obscurely, expressed in his voluminous writings, we must conclude that, notwith¬ standing the censures which have often been passed upon him for impiety, he is rather to be ranked among enthusiasts than atheists ; and that, as in his other undertakings, so also in his attempts to reform philosophy, he was unsuccessful.* SECTION V.— OF THOMAS HOBBES. Another Englishman who made bold attempts towards the improve¬ ment of philosophy was Thomas Hobbes,-|' born in 1588, at Malmsbury, in Wiltshire. Through premature birth, occasioned by his mother’s terror at the rumour of the approach of the Spanish invincible armada towards the British coast, he had a feeble constitution ; but he early discovered uncommon vigour of mind, and made such rapid progress in learning, that while he was a boy, he translated the Medea of Euripides into elegant Latin verse. At fourteen years of age he was sent by his uncle to Oxford, where, for five years, he applied with great industry to the study of logic and the Peripatetic philosophy. He was then appointed tutor to a young nobleman, the son of Lord Hardwick, with whom he made the tour of France and Italy. This opportunity of seeing the celebrated monuments of antiquity, conversing with learned men, and becoming acquainted with the policy and manners of foreign states, Hobbes assiduously improved. Upon his return, entertaining a strong'persuasionof the inanity and inutility of the Peripatetic philosophy, he resolved to devote his leisure to the study of the ancients, that he might collect whatever was most valuable from their writings. His high reputation for learning introduced him to the acquaint¬ ance of Lord Bacon and Lord Herbert of Cherbury, who engaged him to assist them in translating their works into Latin. The conversation of these great men excited in him a violent aversion to Scholastic learning, and an earnest desire of investigating truth with a liberal and independent spirit. It was a circumstance which greatly increased his love of philosophy, that in a visit which he paid to France and Italy, about the year 1635, he be¬ came acquainted with several eminent philosophers, particularly Mersenne * Echarcli Script. Orel. Predic. Branchedori Orat. Praem. de Ortu Pontif. Blount, Gens. p. 436. Morhoff. Polyh. t. ii. I. ii. p. i. c. 14. sect. 3. Naud. Bibliog. c. 2. f Life by R. R. 1685. Bayle. Wood, Hist. Ox. 1. ii. p. 376. Blount, Cens. p. 1046. Epist. praef. Lib. de Give. Chap. 2. S. 5. THOMAS HOBBES. 593 and Gassendi, with whom he formed an intimate friendship, and after his return kept up a constant correspondence. The dissensions in Great Britain, about the year 1637, rising to great violence, Hobbes, whose connexions and principles made him a zealous advocate for the royal cause, rendered himself so obnoxious to the popular party, that he thought it prudent to retire to Paris, where he enjoyed the society of many philosophical friends. Among others, he was introduced to the celebrated philosopher Des Cartes, and began an epistolary corre¬ spondence with him on the nature and laws of motion, on optics, and other topics of natural philosophy. When Des Cartes first wrote his “ Philoso¬ phical Meditations” on God and the human mind, and other pneumatolo- gical subjects, he submitted it to the examination of his learned friends, and amongst the rest to Hobbes, who sent his observations on the work to their common friend Mersenne, by whom they were communicated to Des Cartes. Hobbes, who was of opinion that thought may be a property of body, contradicted some of the first principles of Des Cartes’ system. A correspondence was opened on the subject ; but Des Cartes affecting to treat his opponent with some degree of contempt, as destitute of solidity and depth of judgment, soon dropped the controversy. Whilst Hobbes was in Paris, he was recommended to Charles, prince of Wales, the heir apparent to the crown of England, (who at that time resided in Paris for the sake of safety,) as a proper person to instruct him in the elements of mathematics and philosophy. This circumstance strengthened his attachment to the royal cause, and he completed, his treatise on govern¬ ment, entitled, De Cive, which had long been in contemplation, and in 1642, printed a few copies for the use of his friends. It was afterwards, in 1747, published with material corrections and improvements. The work, the object of which was to check the rising spirit of freedom, by I establishing the claims of monarchy on new principles of philosophy, was as much condemned by one party as it was admired by the other. About this time, Hobbes entered into a controversy with Bishop Bram- hall on the subject of liberty and necessity, in an epistolary correspondence, .which, being communicated to a friend in France, was translated into French, and afterwards, without ,the consent of Hobbes, published in England. Bramhall, displeased at the publication of these papers, con¬ tinued the dispute, andthe whole controversy was collected into one volume, and printed in London in the year 1656.* Hobbes strenuously maintained i the doctrine of necessity established on the absolute power and irresistible F will of God, which was the less surprising, as at that time the Calvinistic i doctrine of predestination was generally received. Many of the clergy, \ in their zeal to oppose the doctrine of Hobbes, which they thought sub- 1* versive of morality, deserted Calvin, and embraced the Arminian tenet of I free will. In the year 1650, Hobbes wrote his treatise on “ Human Nature,” which ■ was, in the opinion of Mr. Addison, his best work ; and another, De Car- ; pore Politico, “ Of the Political Body.” The year following, he published i' his “Leviathan;” a tieatise, in which, in establishing a system of civil tj policy, he represents man as an untameable beast of prey, and government as the strong chain by which he is to be kept from mischief. This work, though learned and ingenious, advanced such bold and paradoxicalopinions, I both in philosophy and policy, that the whole body of the English clergy * Entitled “ Questions touchant ia'Liberte, la Necessity, et le Hazard, eclairces et de- batues entre le Dr. Bramhall, Eveque de Derry, et Thomas Hobbes de Malmsbiiry.” Q Q 594 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. took the alarm ; and the author was strongly suspected to be, in religion, ini¬ mical to Revelation, and in policy, to favour the cause of democracy. The indignation, which this publication excited, was probably in a great measure owing to the freedom with which it inveighs against ecclesiastical tyranny. The suspicions, which were on this occasion raised against Hobbes, dis¬ solved his connexion with Prince Charles at Paris ; and in 1653, he returned to England, and found a welcome asylum in the Devonshire family. From this time, declining all political disputes, he spent his days in philosophical studies, and in the society of learned men, among whom were Harvey and Selden. He published, first in Latin and afterwards in English, a treatise “ On Bodies,” in which he undertakes to explain the principles of nature. He wrote a treatise on geometrj', in which he advanced many things con¬ trary to the received doctrine of geometricians, and brought upon himself (whether justly or not it is not our business to inquire) a severe censure, for attempting to correct what he did not himself sufficiently understand. To complete his body of philosophy, he published, in 1658, “A Disser¬ tation on Man,” in which he advanced many singular opinions concerning the intellectual and moral powers of human nature. After the restoration, Hobbes came to London, and was graciously re¬ ceived by the king, who admitted him to a private audience, and gave him a pension of one hundred pounds joer annum. Through the vigilance of the clergy, he was, however, prevented from executing his favourite design of collecting and republishing his works in English, and was obliged to send them^over to Amsterdam, where an entire edition in Latin was pub¬ lished.* Whilst the writings of Hobbes were reprobated by the general body of the clergy, and occasioned many learned and able replies, they were not without their admirers both at home and abroad. Foreigners of the first distinction visited him, among whom was Cosmo de Medicis, then Prince of Tuscany. Even in the public schools his doctrines had professed advocates ; and Daniel Scargil, a Cambridge scholar, maintained some of his fundamental tenets in a public disputation ; on which account he was expelled from the university. This circumstance brought so much odium upon Hobbes, that Bishop Fell, in his Latin edition of Wood’s AthencB Oxoniensis, thought it necessary to leave out the eulogium which the author had passed upon the philosopher of Malmsbury, and insert in its stead a severe censure. Wood, offended at this freedom, acquainted Hobbes, who wrote a letter in justification of himself to the author of the Athence Oxoniensis, which was published at Oxford. This produced from Fell a bitter invective, to which Hobbes, who was now far advanced in years, made no reply. In his last days he retired into the country, and employed himself in translating Homer and writing the history of the civil Avar. This latter work Hobbes could not obtain the royal permission to publish; but it was sent into the world by a friend without his know¬ ledge. He died in the year 1679, having lived to the great age of ninety-one. Hobbes was certainly possessed of vigorous faculties; and had he been sufficiently careful to form and improve his judgment, and to preserve his mind free from the bias of prejudice and passion, would undoubtedly have deserved a place in the first class of philosophers. The mathematical method of reasoning which he adopted, greatly assisted him in his re¬ searches ; but he was often led into error, by assuming false or uncertain principles or axioms. The vehemence with which he engaged in political * Amst. Bleau. 4to. 1668. Chap. 2. S. 5. THOMAS HOBBES. 595 contests biased his judgment on questions of policy, and led him to frame such maxims and rules of government as would be destructive of the peace and happiness of mankind. An arrogant contempt of the opinions of others, an impatience of contradiction, and a restless ambition to be dis¬ tinguished as an innovator in philosophy, were qualities which appear to have contributed in no small degree to the perversion of his judgment. To enumerate all the particulars in which Hobbes departs from the beaten track of opinions, would carry us beyond our limits. The following posi¬ tions, chiefly selected from his Leviathan,” may serve as a specimen of his philosophy : — All knowledge originates in sensation, and is produced by the pressure, either immediate or mediate, of external objects upon the senses. Sensible qualities are, in their objects, nothing more than the motion of matter operating variously upon the organs of sensation. Imagination and memory are the permanent effects of former impressions upon the senses. Thinking is the succession of one imagination after another, which may be either irregular or regulated with a view to some end. Every con¬ ception, being derived from the senses, is finite ; we have, therefore, no idea of infinity; and God is an object, not of apprehension, but of reverence. No one can conceive of any thing but as existing in some place, of some finite magnitude, and divisible into parts ; nor can any thing be wholly in one place and wholly in another at the same time, or two or more things be at the same time in the same place. Truth and falsehood are attributes, not of things but of language. The intellect peculiar to man is a faculty arising from speech ; and the use of reason is the deduction of remote consequences from the definitions of terms. Science is the knowledge of these consequences. There are in animals two kinds of motion ; one, vital and involuntary ; the other, animal and voluntary. The latter, if it tend towards an object, is appetite; if it recede from it, aversion ; and the object in the former case is said to be good, in the latter, evil. Appetite is attended with pleasure, aversion with pain. In deliberation, the last impulse of the appetite is will; success in obtaining its object, enjoyment. Moral qualities are those by which the peace and security of the state are preserved. Felicity consists not in tranquillity, but in a perpetual progress from one desire to another. The diversity of human characters arises from the different ways in which men pursue happiness. The desire of investigating causes leads to the knowledge and belief of a first cause, the one eternal Deity, although the Divine nature is incom¬ prehensible. From men’s ignorance of true causes arises anxiety, fear, and superstition. Nature has formed all men equal ; whence arises the universal hope of acquiring by violence whatever we desire, and the universal apprehension of suffering violence from others. The necessary consequence is, that a state of nature is a state of perpetual hostility, in which no individual has any other means of safety than his own strength or ingenuity, and in which there is no room for industry, because no secure enjoyment of its fruits. In this state, every one has a right to use his own faculties at plea¬ sure for his preservation, and of doing whatever he judges to be con¬ ducive to this end ; and since there -is no property, there can be no injustice. For the sake of peace and security, it is necessary that each individual recede from a part of his natural right, and be contented with such a share of liberty, or freedom from restraint, as he is willing to allow to others. Q Q 2 596 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. This resignation of natural rights may either be a simple renunciation, or a transfer of them to an individual or body, by mutual consent, for the common good. The multitude, thus brought out of a state of nature, becomes one person, which is called the Republic or State, in which the common power and will are exercised for the common defence. The ruling power cannot be taken from those to whom it has been committed, nor can they be punished for mal -administration. If the supreme magis¬ trate inflict any penalty upon the innocent, he sins against God, but does not act unjustly. The interpretation of the laws is to be sought, not from preceptors nor philosophers, but from the authority of the state ; for it is not truth,’ but authority, that makes law : nevertheless, the king ought to interpret the law according to his own natural reason and conscience. Punishment is an evil inflicted upon the transgressor of the law, to this end, that the apprehension of it may bend the will of the citizens to sub¬ mission. The public law is to be instead of conscience to every individual : it is therefore false that every violation of conscience in a citizen is a sin. The offices of the supreme governors are to be regulated by those ends which comprehend the security of the people. Although Hobbes often admits false principles, and advances pernicious tenets, many just and profound observations are to be met with in his writings, which have probably led the way to the improvement of moral and political science. It is much to be regretted that Hobbes, though he had the precept and example of Lord Bacon to guide him, neglected the new and fertile path of experimental philosophy. So little was he aware of the value of this kind of knowledge, that he censured the Royal Society of London, at its first institution, for attending more to minute experiment than general principles : and said, that if the name of a philosopher was to be obtained by relating a multifarious farrago of experiments, we might expect to see apothecaries, gardeners, and perfumers, rank among philosophers.* SECTION VI.— OF DES CARTES. In modern times, few philosophers have a higher claim to distinction, both on account of the variety and originality of his speculations, and the celebrity which he obtained in the philosophical world, than Des Cartes, who, though the father of a sect, himself pursued his researches with such a free and independent spirit, as justly entitles him to a place among the Eclectics. Renes Des Cartes, -f- a native of France, was born in 1596, at La Haye in Tourain. Whilst he was a child, he discovered an eager curiosity to inquire into the nature and causes of things, which procured him the appellation of the young philosopher. At eight years of age, he was com¬ mitted to the care of Dinet, a learned Jesuit, under whom he made un¬ common proficiency in learning : but a habit of close and deep reflection soon enabled him to discover defects in the books which he read, and in . * Vidend. Burnet’s Hist, of his own Times, v. i. p, 36. 92. 150. 211. Gundling. Obs. Select, t. i. Obs. 2. Gundlingiana, p. xiv. Huberus Orat. de Paedantismo, p. 66. Rapin. Reflex, sur la Phil. p. 55. Cumberland on the Law of Nature, Lond. 1672. Puffendorf. Erid. Scand. p. 206. Andree Discuss, fundam. Hobbesii. 1672. 'f Baillet. Vit. Cartes, Par. 1691. Epit. 1693. Borelli et Tesselii Vit. Cart. Witte. Mem, Phil. dec. iv, p. 580.' Niceron. t. 31. p. 274. Sturm. Diss. de Cart. Bayle. Chap, 2. S. 6. DES CARTES. 597 the instructions which he received, which led him to form the ambitious hope that he should, in some future time, carry science to a point of per¬ fection which it had never hitherto reached. After spending five years in the diligent study of languages, and in reading the ancient poets, orators, and historians, he passed on to severer studies, and made himself well ac¬ quainted with the elements of mathematics, logic, and morals, as they had been hitherto taught. His earnest desire of attaining an accurate know¬ ledge of every thing which became a subject of contemplation to his in¬ quisitive mind, did not, however, in any of these branches of science meet with full satisfaction. Concerning logic, particularly, he complained, that after the most diligent examination he found the syllogistic forms, and al¬ most every other precept of the art, more useful in enabling a man to communicate to others truths already known, or, rather like the Lullian art, in qualifying him to discourse copiously upon subjects which he does not understand, than in assisting him in the investigation of truths of which he is at present ignorant. Hence he was induced to forsake the beaten track, and to frame for himself a brief system of rules or canons of reason¬ ing, in which^ followed the strict method of the geometricians. He pursued tliesarne plan with respect to morals. But after all his specula¬ tions, he was not able to attain the entire satisfaction which he so earnestly desired ; and, at the close of eight years’ assiduous application in the Jesuit’s college at La Fleche, he returned to his parents, lamenting that he had derived no other benefit from his studies, than a fuller conviction that he, as yet, knew nothing with perfect clearness and certainty. Despairing of being able to discover truth in the paths of learning, he now bade adieu to books ; and resolved henceforth to pursue no other knowledge, than that which he could find within himself, and in the great volume of nature. Not yet more than seventeen years of age, he was sent to Paris by his father, who had such entire confidence in his understanding and discretion, that he left him to his own direction. He now, for a while, gave free scope to youthful vanity and the love of pleasure ; and would probably have been entirely lost to the philosophical world, had not the society of several learned men, to whom he was introduced, recalled his attention to mathematical studies, which he again prosecuted, in solitude and silence, for the space of two years. Still, however, unsatisfied with the result of his speculations, he renewed his purpose of forsaking books ; and entered upon the military life, as a volunteer in the Dutch army, chiefly because he apprehended, that this profession would give him an advantageous op¬ portunity of conversing with the world. But even amidst the ^vocations of his new profession, his natural propensity to study returned, and he engaged in mathematical disquisitions with an eminent mathematician at Breda, and wrote a philosophical dissertation, in which he attempted to prove that brutes are automata, or mere machines. From the Dutch array Des Cartes passed over into the Bavarian service. In winter quarters, whilst he was pursuing his speculations, perplexing himself with doubts, and sup¬ plicating Divine illumination, he was informed of the wonderful pretensions of the Rosicrusian fraternity, and was willing to hope that he might gain, from men who boasted of Divine inspiration, that light which he had in vain sought from others. But, not being able to meet with any one who could unfold to him the mysteries of this sect, he soon finished his short excursion into the regions of enthusiasm, and returned to the humble path of rational inquiry. Wherever he went he conversed with learned men, and rather appeared in the character of a philosopher than a soldier. At last, he quitted the military profession; and alter a, tour through the northern 598 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. parts of Germany, in the year 1622, returned to his own country, with no other profit from his travels, as he himself confesses, than that they had freed him from many prejudices, and rendered his mind more fit for the reception of truth. Des Cartes now for a while made Paris his place of residence ; and returned to the study of mathematics, not as an ultimate object, (for he thought it a fruitless labour to fill the head with numbers and figures,) but in hopes of discovering general principles of relations, measures, and proportions, applicable to all subjects, by means of which, truth might be with certainty investigated, and the limits of knowledge materially en¬ larged. But not at present succeeding according to his wishes in this speculation, he turned his attention chiefly to ethical inquiries, and at¬ tempted to raise a superstructure of morals upon the foundation of natural science ; for he was of opinion, that there could be no better means of discovering the true principles and rules of action, than by contemplating our own nature and the nature of the world around us. This investi¬ gation produced his treatise “ On the Passions.” Having employed a short time in these studies, Des Cartes undertook a literary and philosophical journey, and spent about two years in Italy, conversing with eminent mathematicians and philosophers, and attended to various objects of inquiry in natural history. He then returned into France ; but his mind remaining in an unsettled and sceptical state, he found it impossible to pursue any regular plan of life, till, in the year 1629, he determined to withdraw from his numerous connexions and engagements in Paris, and retire into some foreign country, where he might remain unknown, and have full leisure to complete his great design of framing a new system of philosophy. The country he chose for this purpose was Holland ; and he went thither with so much secresy, that the place of his retirement was for some time known only to his intimate friend, Marsenne, at Paris. He at first resided near Amsterdam, but afterwards went into the more northern provinces, and visited Deventer and Lewarden ; he at last fixed upon Egmond, a pleasant village near Francher, in the province of Friesland, as the place of his more stated residence. Here he prosecuted his philosophical labours, and saw them engage the attention of the learned world, in a manner which could not but be highly flattering to a mind not indifferent to honest fame. In his retirement, Des Cartes employed himself in investigating a proof from reason, independent of Revelation, of those fundamental points in religion, the existence of God, and the immortality of the soul, and in other important metaphysical speculations. The result of these specula¬ tions afterwards appeared in his treatise entitled Meditationes Philoso- phicce de prima Philosophia, “ Philosophical Meditations on the First Philosophy.” At the same time he pursued the physical inquiries which he had begun in France, particularly on the subject of optics ; and these researches gave birth to his treatise “ On Meteors.” Besides this, he paid no slight attention to medicine, anatomy, and chemistry ; he spent a whole winter in dissecting and examining animal bodies, and in chemical opera¬ tions. He also wrote an astronomical treatise on the system of the world ; but when he heard in what manner the astronomer Galileo had been treated by the court of inquisition, he was deterred from publishing it, and concealed his opinion concerning the true doctrine of the solar system. Ihe tenets of Des Cartes made their first appearance in the schools at Deventer, where, in 1633, they were introduced by the professor of philosophy, Henry Rener, a learned man and an intimate friend of Gassendi. Chap. 2. S. 6. DES CARTES. 599 Not long afterwards, when at the request of his friends, he published a specimen of his philosophy in four treatises, the number of his admirers and followers soon increased ; and at the same time, as was to be expected, his new doctrine had many opponents. At Utrecht, Leyden, and Amster¬ dam, and in other Dutch schools, the Cartesian doctrines were zealously espoused by many learned men ; whilst several theologians, alarmed at the idea of innovation, strenuously opposed them, and even attempted to bring their author under the censure of the civil magistrate. In Great Britain, the Cartesian philosophy obtained such a degree of credit, that Sir Charles Cavendish, brother to the Earl of Newcastle, gave Des Cartes an invitation to settle in England. Charles I. gave him reason to expect a liberal appointment; and Des Cartes was not disinclined to place himself under such respectable patronage. But the civil wars frustrated this design, and Des Cartes remained in Holland. In his native country, his doctrine was at first well received ; but a strong party soon rose against it among the Jesuits. Bourden, one of the fraternity, attacked his Dioptrics in the public schools, and a violent contest was long kept up between the Jesuits and Cartesians. In the course of the disputes which the Cartesian philo¬ sophy occasioned, Des Cartes himself appeared earnestly desirous to become the father of a sect, and discovered more jealousy and ambition than became a philosopher. During the course of Des Cartes’ residence in Holland, he paid three visits to his native country ; one in the year 1643, when he published an abstract of his philosophy, under the title of Specimena Philosophica, “ Philosophical Specimens the second and third, in 1647 and 1648, when he was amused with a promise of an annual pension of 3000 livres, which he never received. His chagrin upon this disappointment was, however, relieved by an invitation which, through the hands of the French ambassador, he received from Christina, Queen of Sweden, to visit Stock¬ holm. That learned princess had read his treatise “ On the Passions” with great delight, and was earnestly desirous to be instructed by him in the principles of his philosophy. Des Cartes, notwithstanding the diffi¬ culties which he apprehended from the severity of the climate, was prevailed upon to accept the invitation, and arrived at Stockholm in 1649. The Queen gave him a respectful reception, and the singular talents which he discovered, induced her earnestly to solicit this eminent philosopher to remain in her kingdom, and assist her in establishing an academy ot sciences. But Des Cartes had not been more than four months in Sweden, when a cold which he caught in his early morning visits to the Queen, whom he instructed in philosophy, brought on an inflammation of the lungs, which soon put a period to his life. The Queen is said to have lamented his death with tears. His remains were interred, at the request of the French ambassador, in the cemetery for foreigners, and a long historical eulogium was inscribed upon his tomb. Des Cartes died at the beginning of the year 1650. His bones were afterwards, in the year 1666, carried from Sweden into France, and interred with great pomp in the church of St. Genevieve du Mont.* The writings of this philosopher, the principal of which have been mentioned in the preceding narrative, prove him to have possessed an accurate and penetrating judgment, a fertile invention, and a mind superior to prejudice ; qualities which, united with an early acquaintance with * Blount. Cells, p. 1014. Liltus tie Leibnitz ct Pelisson, p. 339. Leibnitz, p. 7. i20. Fontenelle Eloge de M. Leibnitz. 600 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. ancient learning, and indefatigable industry in the investigation of truth, might seem to promise no inconsiderable share of success in the great design of reforming and improving philosophy. Des Cartes would have been more successful, had he been less desirous, of applying mathematical principles and reasonings to subjects which do not admit of them ; had he set less value upon mere conjectures, and had he been less ambitious of the honour of founding a new sect in philosophy. His leading dogmas have, however, too much originality and celebrity to be overlooked in this work. Upon the subject of Logic,* Des Cartes lays down the following rules for the discovery of truth, which are derived from the practice of geometricians. Nothing is ever to be admitted as true, which is not certainly and evidently known to be so ; that is, in judging of truth all prejudice and precipitancy is carefully to be avoided, and nothing more is to be admitted in the conclusion, than what appears to the understanding so distinctly and clearly that it cannot possibly be doubted. Difficulties must be accurately examined, and divided into so many parts as may be most convenient for their easy solution. In proving any truth, the ideas are always to be brought forward in a certain order, beginning from things the most simple and most easily known, and advancing, by regular steps, to those which are more complex and difficult. All the parts of a demonstration should be so distinctly numbered, that the relation of each to the whole may be clearly seen, and that it may be certainly known that nothing is omitted. The chief heads of the Metaphysics f of Des Cartes are these : — Since every man is under the influence of prejudice, he ought, once in his life, in speculation, to doubt of every thing. Since the senses err, and dreams deceive, it is first to be doubted whether sensible objects have a real existence. We must also doubt concerning those things which we have thought most certain, even mathematical axioms, because we are not sure that we may not have been so formed as to lie under a perpetual deception. We find ourselves, in the mean time, at liberty to withhold our assent from those propositions which are uncertain, and capable of guarding against error ; for which purpose the mind must divest itself of prejudice, and place itself in a proper situation for the reception of truth. Whatever else we doubt of, it is impossible we should doubt whether we ourselves, who are conscious of exercising the power of thinking, exist. I THINK, therefore I AM, is then the first and most certain truth in philosophy. In inquiring what sort of beings we are, before we admit the existence of any thing external, we perceive belonging to our nature Thought, which has neither extension, figure, local motion, nor any other property which we commonly ascribe to bodies, and of the existence of which we have a prior , and more certain knowledge than of that of any thing corporeal. The mind, which now knows itself, but still doubts of the existence of all other things, in looking around to extend its knowledge, first finds within itself Ideas ; concerning the existence of which, whilst it contemplates these alone, and neither affirms nor denies anything like them to exist externally, it cannnt be deceived. It also finds within itself certain common notions, and from these frames various demonstrations, of the truth of which, whilst it attends to them, it is entirely persuaded. But because it does not yet know, whether it may not be so formed as to be deceived in those things which appear most evident, it perceives it im¬ possible to admit any certain science till it has discovered the author of its being. Revolving within itself its various ideas, it finds one of a being * Diss. de Mctliodu. f Princip. Phil. p. 1. Chap. 2. S. 6. DES CARTESi 601 supremely intelligent, powerful, and perfect, in which it discovers an existence, not possible and contingent only, as in its ideas of all other things, but necessary and eternal. Since it finds within itself this idea of a supreme being, which could not be a fiction of its own, it concludes with certainty that it must have proceeded from a really existing deity, and consequently that it represents a true and immutable nature, which cannot possibly but exist, that is God. Attending to this innate idea of deity, we find him to be eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, the fountain of all goodness and truth, the creator of all things. Nothing can be an attribute of the Divine nature which implies limit or imperfection ; therefore, he is incor¬ poreal, indivisible,and void of passion; and exercises his understanding and volition, not by continued operations, but by the most simple action. In reasoning concerning natural things, we should argue not from final but efficient causes; and judge, not from what we imagine concerning the designs of God, but from what we know of his attributes. Because the perfect deity must be a being of veracity, and incapable of deceiving his creatures, we may be assured that whatever we clearly and distinctly per¬ ceive to be true, is really so. The Cartesian doctrine of Physics* may be thus stated : — ' In nature there are two kinds of substance, that which thinks, or mind ; and that which is extended, or body : the essence of the former is thought, of the latter extension : other attributes ascribed to each are modes or qualities. All sensation proceeds from something different from the mind, which affects the senses. The idea of extended matter is presented to the mind ; if therefore matter did not really exist, God, who presents this idea before the mind, would be a deceiver. Matter has therefore a real exist¬ ence. From the constant testimony of feeling, we know that our minds are intimately united to an organised body. The sole essential property of body is extension ; and quantity differs from extended substance only in our conceptions. Space, and the corporeal substance contained in it, are then in reality the same; for extension, in length, breadth, and depth, which constitutes space, also constitutes body. Since extension is universal, there is in nature no vacuum. It is impossible that any atoms, or particles of matter, should be so small as to be indivisible. Matter is one and the same through the whole universe, and exists without limit. Matter, con¬ sidered with respect to its parts, is indivisible and immoveable ; and all its variations depend upon motion, which consists in the removal oi^ one body out of the vicinity of those which immediately touch it, into the vicinity of other bodies. There can be no motion but in a circuit ; one body expelling another from the place into which it enters, while it is itself succeeded by a third w'^hich occupies the place it has left. The first universal cause of all motion is God, who in the beginning communicated motion to matter, according to three laws of nature : the first, that every body will remain in the same state without some external cause of change ; the second, that all bodies in motion move, or tend to* move, in a right line; the third, that when one moving body meets another, if its moving force be less than the force of resistance in the other, it will retain all its motion, and only change the direction in which it moves. The sun and all the fixed stars shine by their proper light; the moon, the earth, and the planets, borrow their light from the sun. The heavens may be conceived to be a vast fluid mass, revolving, in the manner of a vortex, round the sun. Each planet has its own portion of this fluid, or its own * Princip. Phil. p. ii. iii. iv. Dioptric. 602 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. heaven, which revolves round the sun. These all move in the same direc¬ tion, but with greater velocity in proportion as they are nearer the sun. Each planet, therefore, and among the rest the earth, is fixed with respect to its own vortex or heaven, but moves in its vortex round the sun. Within the greater vortices of the planets are other less vortices, moving in the same direction with the greater: one, in the centre of which is Jupiter; and another, in the centre of which is the earth; by means of which the satellites of J upiter, and the moon of the earth, revolve periodically round these planets. The formation of the world may be conceived to have been thus effected. Suppose the matter of the world to have been originally divided into equal particles, having in the whole the same quantity of motion which is at present in nature: suppose these particles to have been equally moved, both individually and separately, round their respective centres, forming the fluid mass of the heavens; and collectively round eertain fixed points, dis¬ posed in the. same manner as are now the fixed stars and planets ; whence as many vortices would be produced as there are at present moveable celes¬ tial bodies: suppose all the particles, in the beginning equal in matter and motion, to have been of irregular form, but in process of time made round by continual attrition arising from their circular motion : lastly, suppose the intervals between these to be filled up by a perpetual succession of those very minute eorpuseles which are separated from the rest by attrition ; these minute corpuscles to have been in the same manner still further dimi¬ nished, and as they decrease in quantity to increase in velocity, and to have been driven in every oblique direction by the first order of particles, which continue in their direct course. Hence two elements of things would arise; the first, that matter which is divided into indefinitely small cor¬ puscles, of forms adapted to fill up all possible vacuity ; the seeond, that which is divided into minute spherical particles, of a determinate quantity. To these may be added a third, having parts more gross, or figures less fitted for motion. From the first element, the sun and fixed stars; from the se¬ cond, the heavens; and from the third, the earth with the other planets and the comets, may be supposed to have been formed, subjeet to certain fixed laws of nature. The motion of the celestial globes produces a con¬ tinual action upon the particles of the third element, which is the cause of various effects on the terrestrial globe, and among the rest of gravity. The principles of Morals,* Des Cartes deduced from the physical na¬ ture of the passions. His doctrine on this subject is : — Whatever happens is called passion, with respect to the subject to which it happens; and action, with respect to that which causes it to happen. Nothing acts upon the mind more immediately than the body to which it is joined; whence what is passion in the mind, is action in the body. Heat and the motion of the limbs, proceed from the body ; and thoughts from the mind ; but the mind cannot give motion and heat to the body. The more vivid and subtle parts of the blood, which heat rare¬ fies in the heart, are ineessantly entering into the cavities of the brain, and form animal spirits, which are in the brain separated from other less subtle parts of the blood. These animal spirits, which are corporeal, excited as by the soul itself, so also by the action of external objects upon the senses, are the immediate cause of all the original motions of the body. Whence all the limbs may be moved by means of the objects of sense and the ani¬ mal spirits, without any action of the soul. Nothing is to be attributed to the soul but thoughts: and these are of two kinds; active, or volition. De passionibus animae. Chap. 2. S. 6. DES CARTES. 603 including desire and aversion ; and passive, including intelligence, percep¬ tion, and feeling or passion. The soul is united to all the parts of the body ; but its chief functions are exercised in the pineal gland of the brain, where it receives notice of the impressions made upon the senses, and whence it sends forth animal spirits through the nerves, which put the muscles into motion. The passions are feelings of the soul, produced and continued by the action of the animal spirits ; the chief effect of the passions is to excite the soul to volition. All volition is in its nature free, and consists in causing the gland, with whieh it is intimately connected, to move in that manner which is most suitable to produce an effect corresponding to the volition. Judgment comprehends not only the perception of the understanding, but the assent of the will, and it is from the abuse of its natural liberty of assenting or not assenting to a proposition that error springs. The soul, in the act of recol¬ lection, exercises a volition by means of which the pineal gland inclines itself successively this way and that way, and impels the animal spirits to different parts of the brain, till that part is found upon which the object which we wish to recollect has left traces. The soul of man, which is one, is both sensitive and rational ; and the conflict between its inferior and superior parts is nothing else but a struggle between the motions which the body, by means of its animal spirits, and the soul by its own volition, are at the same time endeavouring to excite in the pineal gland. By the result of this contest, every one may judge of the strength or weakness of his soul. The soul acquires the dominion over the body by means of firm and clear decisions concerning good and evil, produced by the contemplation of truth, which it determines to follow without suffering itself to be seduced by present passion. The passions belong to the body, and are to be imputed to the soul only as it is united to the body. Their use is to excite the mind to exert those volitions which are necessary to the preservation or perfection of the body, and the attainment of that which is in its nature good. All the passions are useful, and only become injurious by excess. The general remedy against the excess of the passions is to consider all the appearances which they present to the imagination as deceitful, and to postpone volition and action till the commotion which they have excited in the blood is appeased, or where immediate action is necessary, to follow reason in opposition to passion. Since nothing beyond our own thoughts is absolutely in our own power, it is wiser to endeavour to subdue ourselves than fortune, and to change our own desires than the order of the world. Animals are not only destitute of reason, but probably of all thought; and perform their various functions as mere automata, excited to motion only by means of animal spirits which act upon the nerves and muscles. This last extravagant opinion Des Cartes has been suspected of borrow¬ ing from a Spanish writer, Gomez Peiraera, by whom it was maintained in his Margarita Antoniana ; but it is more probable that it was a conclusion originally deduced from his notion of the animal spirits in the economy of human nature. Although some parts of the Cartesian system appear to have been de¬ rived from the Grecian philosophy; particularly the notion of innate ideas, and of the action of the soul upon the body, from Plato ; the doctrine of a plenum from Aristotle ; and the elements of the doctrine of vortices from the Atomic school of Democritus and Epicurus ; Des Cartes must, never¬ theless, be confessed to have discovered great subtlety and depth of thought, as well as fertility of imagination, and to have merited a distinguished place 604 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. among the improvers of philosophy. But his labours would have been more valuable had he not sutFered himself to be led astray into the romantic regions of hypothesis, by the false notion that the nature of things may be better understood by endeavouring to account for appearances from hypo¬ thetical principles, than by inferring general principles from an attentive observation of appearances. His fondness for hypothesis led him to con¬ found the ideas of attribute and substance, as in his definition of matter and space ; and those of possibility and probability, as in his doctrine of vortices. Even his celebrated argument for the existence of God (which, by the way, was maintained before his time by the Scholastic Anselm) con¬ founds the idea of an infinite being with the actual existence of that being ; and substitutes a mere conception of the meaning of a term, in the place of the idea of a being really and substantially existing. Hence, though Des Cartes is by no means to be ranked among the enemies of religion, as he was by many of his bigoted contemporaries ; though it be even true that his whole system is built upon the knowledge of God, and supposes his agency ; it must nevertheless be regretted, that in establishing the doctrine of deity, he forsook the clear and satisfactory ground of final causes, and had recourse to a subtle argument, which few can comprehend, and with which fewer still will be fully satisfied. The system of Des Cartes, notwithstanding its defects, had so much subtlety, ingenuity, and originality, that it not only engaged the universal attention of the learned, but long continued, in the midst of all the oppo¬ sition which it met with from the professed enemies of innovation, to be zealously defended by many able writers, and to be publicly taught in the schools throughout all Europe ; till at length, when the more sober method of philosophizing, introduced by Lord Bacon, began to be generally adopted, and the fabrications of romantic theory gave way to the experi¬ mental study of nature, the system of Des Cartes, like “ the baseless fabric of an air-vision,” has disappeared, and has scarcely “ left a wreck behind.”* SECTION VII.— OF GODFRED WILLIAM LEIBNITZ. What Des Cartes undertook in France, was at the same time attempted in Germany by Leibnitz, a distinguished ornament of his age and country. Godfred William LEiBNiTz-j- was born at Leipsic, in the year 1646. He was the son of a learned professor of morals in the university of that city. In his childhood, such was his thirst after learning, that, not contented with the daily instruction of his preceptors, he frequently with¬ drew into his father’s study to read the ancients. Livy and Virgil were his favourite authors ; and he was so intimately conversant with the latter, * Vidend. P. Daniel Iter Cartes, per Mund. p. i. p. 14. Kortholt. Ep. Leibn. v. iii. Thomas, Hist. Sap. t. ii. p. 114. Spanheim. ep de Noviss. Dissid. in Belgio. Pfaff. Hist. Lit. Theol. p. ii. p. 299. Sagittar. Intr. Hist. Eccl. p. i. p. 925. p. ii. p, 627. Benthem. Stat. Eccl. Schol. Bat. p. ii. c. 4. Cudworth, Int. .Syst. c. v. sect. 1. Parker, Disp. iii. de Deo, p. 221. vi. p. 489. Huet. de Rebus suis, 1. vi. p. 162. Huet. Mem. pour Cartesianisme. Rapin, Reflex, sect. 23. Ritter de Religione Cartesii. Petermanni Vind. Phil. Cart. Lips. 1704. Alberti Diss. de Cart, et Loccuanism. Monmor. Diss. de Physique de M. Des Cartes, 1718. f Elogie de Leibnitz, par Fontenelle. Guntheri Ludovici Hist. Phil. Leibnizian. Lips. 1737, 8vo. Fabric. Hist. Bibl. suae, v. i. p. 317. Reimann. Hist. Lit. Ger. p. iii. p. 576. p. iv. p, 147. p. V. p. 262. Stollii. Hist. Lit. p. ii. c. 1. Niceron. Mem. t. ii. p. 64. Chap. 2. S. 7. LEIBNITZ. 605 that, even when he was an old man, he could repeat from memory almost the whole of his poems. This early and assiduous attention to classical learning laid the foundation of that correct and elegant taste which appears in all his writings. At fifteen years of age Leibnitz became a student in the university of Leipsic, where, under the direction of able masters, he prosecuted with unusual success the various studies of law, medicine, phi¬ losophy, and theology, and made himself w'ell acquainted with many eminent writers in each. In the university of Jena, where he finished his academical studies, the principal objects of his attention were history, law, and mathematics. On his return home, he continued to study philosophy, particularly in the writings of Plato and Aristotle, whom he endeavoured to reconcile. In 1666, he took his degree in philosophy, and in the public disputations upon this occasion, displayed uncommon ability. He published, the same year, his Ars combinatorial “ Combinatory Art a work in¬ tended to show in what manner universal arithmetic may be applied to the elucidation of other sciences. This piece was accompanied with “ A Mathematical Demonstration of the Existence of God.” Though this early production was not entirely approved by his own more mature judgment, it bore evident marks of an inventive genius. In the midst of his philosophical and mathematical speculations, Leibnitz had never neglected the study of jurisprudence ; and he made himself so perfectly master of this science, that, in 1668, he published his Nova MetJio- dm docendcc descendceque JurisprudenticB,* “New Method of teaching and learning Jurisprudence,” which gained him great applause, and introduced him to the notice of the Elector of Mentz, by whom he was employed in affairs of state. Still, however, he persevered in his philosophical inquiries ; and when he found it in vain to attempt to collect any consistent system from former philosophers, he detenmined to exercise his own invention in framing a new hypothesis. This first effort of his philosophical genius produced a work, entitled Theoria Motus concreti, “A Theory of Concrete Motion,” inscribed to the Royal Society in London; the principles of which were further explained in another work, Theoria Motus abstracti, “ The Theory of Abstract Motion,” inscribed to the French Academy of Sciences. The solution of the phenomena of nature, proposed in these treatises, the author afterwards abandoned for his doctrine of Monads. The mathematical speculations of Leibnitz were original and profound. During a visit which he made at Paris in 1672, he gave such proofs of his eminent skill in the higher geometry, as excited the general admiration of the French mathematicians. A royal pension was offered him if he would remain in France; but his attachment to the Protestant religion induced him to decline the proposal. Going over, at this time into England, he formed an acquaintance with several eminent philosophers, and among the rest with Newton. Upon the death of his patron, the Elector of Mentz, he re¬ turned into Germany, and was admitted into the service of Frederic, Duke of Brunswick Lunenburg. After another visit to his mathematical friends in France and England, he settled at Hanover, and became a member of the duke’s Aulic Council. In this situation his civil labours did not pre¬ vent his philosophical lucubrations. It was at the beginning of the year 1677, that he first mentioned his mathematical invention of Differentials to Newton, who had just before written to Leibnitz on account of his own invention of Fluxions. He also, about the same time, brought to light some discoveries which he had made in mechanics and chemistry. His * Fiankf. l2mo. 606 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. Notitia Opticm promotCB, “ Hints of Improvement in Optics,” relates a new method of polishing optical glasses, on which subject he corresponded with Spinoza, who was an excellent optician. Memoirs of experiments and observations made by Leibnitz on various subjects in natural philoso¬ phy are preserved in the Leipsic Journal, entitled, Acta Eruditorum, “ Works of the Learned in which, from the year 1683, he had a con¬ siderable share. One of his most valuable pieces, preserved in this period¬ ical work, is his “Thoughts on Knowledge, Truth, and Ideas.” Whilst Leibnitz was employed in collecting, at the request of the Duke of Lunenburg, materials for a History of the House of Brunswick, he availed himself of the opportunities, which his journeys on this business afforded him, for enlarging his knowledge of nature and the arts. Upon his return, he pursued, with indefatigable industry, several objects of entirely different kinds: he engaged in further mathematical and philoso¬ phical researches ; he maintained a theological dispute with Pellisson : and he wrote an important work on the Law of Nations, entitled. Codex Juris Gentium diplomaticus. No sooner was this elaborate treatise finished, than he applied his thoughts to the great design of renovating the science of metaphysics, and particularly, of correcting and improving the philoso¬ phical notion of substance, as the means of arriving, in the most simple way, at the knowledge of nature. With this view he wrote his treatise Ee ipsa Natura sive Vi insita, “ On Nature itself, or the Innate Force.” He, moreover, conceived the idea of a new science of forces, in which the laws of mechanics, and the measure of living forees, might be clearly defined. Of this science, which he called Dynamics, he inserted a specimen in the Acta Eruditorum. In 1695, Leibnitz published, in the Parisian Journal, a specimen of a new system of the nature and communication of substances, and of the union between body and mind; in which he unfolded his notion of a pre- established harmony between the body and soul of man, Avhich afterwards so much engaged the attention of philosophers. About the same time he wrote his “ Thoughts on Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding,” in which he controverts that philosopher’s opinions on innate ideas, sub¬ stance, a vacuum, and other subjects ; communicated to the world his ingenious mathematical invention of the arithmetical Binary ; and wrote a reply to Bayle in defence of his doctrine of Pre-established Harmony. It was by means of the laudable exertions of Leibnitz, that an Academy of Sciences was instituted at Berlin. He attempted to introduce similiar institutions at Dresden, Vienna, and Petersburg. In the two former places, through the commotions of way, the attempt proved abortive ; but at Petersburg, the Emperor Peter carried this useful plan into execution, and rewarded the projector with a liberal pension. In the midst of these engagements, Leibnitz found leisure to complete a work, in which he explained more fully than he had before done the principles of his new system. It was entitled “ Theodicea, or a Dissertation on the Goodness of God, the Liberty of Man, and the Origin of Evil.”* He also maintained an extensive correspondenee with learned men and philosophers; of which a valuable specimen is preserved in a collection of letters which passed between Leibnitz and Newton, Clarke, and others, on topics of philosophy, natural religion, and mathematics. f * Vid. Ed. Gottshedii cum Annot. et Gall. Edit. Amstelod. 1734. cum Vita Auctori.s a L. de Neufville. t Epistolae Leibn. Edit, a Kortholt. Lips. 1742. iv. vols. Clarke on the Being and Attributes of God, Lond. 1717. 8vo. Chap. 2. S. 7. LEIBNITZ. 607 These various and important labours were often interrupted by violent attacks of the gout and the stone ; till at length, rather exhaused by acute pain than worn out by age or labour, this great man expired in the seven¬ tieth year of his age. Leibnitz may justly be ranked among those universal geniuses, who at once surprise and benefit the world. With wonderful strength of under¬ standing, an excellent faculty of invention, and a most capacious and retentive memory, he united an uncommon degree of industry. He frequently spent a great part of the night, as well as the day, in reading ; and has been known to pass whole months in his study without allowing himself any unnecessary avocations. Hence he was enabled, not only to acquire much general knowledge, but to become eminent in attainments of various kinds. The improvements which he made in the higher geometry and algebra, particularly his method of subjecting indefinitely small quan¬ tities to calculation, called his Calculus Differentialis, rank him in the first class of mathematicians. He was intimately conversant with the doctrines of philosophy, both ancient and modern, and cast ne\^' light upon almost every branch of knowledge, particularly on the first principles of science, on which his speculations were profound. In theology, he was well read in the writings of the Christian fathers, and in the polemics of his own times. On history and jurisprudence he wrote with a degree of accuracy and solidity, which might lead the reader to suppose these subjects to have been his chief study. With all this his attainments in the knowledge of antiquity, in philology, and polite literature, were such as to entitle him to the character of an elegant scholar, as sufficiently appears from his Latin and French Poems, and his Letters on Miscellaneous Subjects. This great man had, however, his imperfections ; among which we must reckon his fondness for the conjectural method of philosophising, and the facility with which he admitted hypotheses unsupported by induction and experiment. Although Leibnitz wrote no entire system of philosophy, a summary of his metaphysical tenets may be collected from his Theodicea, his treatise “ On the Principles of Philosophy,” his “ Thoughts on Knowledge, &c.” and his “ Cause of God asserted.” They are as follows : A monad is a simple substance without parts. The existence of monads must be admitted, since without these no compound or aggregate of simple substances could exist. These simple substances are properly called mo¬ nads, because, as unity is the fountain and origin of numbers, and com¬ prehends all their powers, so simple substances are the matter, of which all corporeal masses are formed. Since monads have no parts, they have neither extension, figure, nor divisibility. They are the true atoms of nature, and elements of things, incapable of destruction, except by the power of God. Each monad differs from every other ; for, it is impossible that any two things should be found in nature perfectly alike. Monads have an internal principle of alteration, by means of which they are continually varying in a certain manner; whence arises a plurality of properties and relations. This perpetually varying state, which involves and represents multitude in unity, is perception, which is not, however, to be confounded with consciousness. The action of the eternal principle of monads, by which a transition is made from one perception to another, may be called appetite. The perception and appetite of monads are not to be explained mechanically by figure and motion, because they are affections of a simple substance without parts. In monads, therefore, nothing is found but perception and appetite : and in this respect all monads may be said to partake of the nature of soul ; although that term is more 608 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. properly applied to those living beings which have distinct perception united with memory. The present state of monads arises from the past, and perception from perception, as motion from motion. Monads are in a state of perception similar to that of a mind in a stupor, vrhich has a perpetual succession of minute and indistinct perceptions. Nature, by granting organs to animals, has made them capable of dis¬ tinct perception, memory, and imagination. Man is distinguished from in¬ ferior animals by the power of knowing necessary and eternal truths. It is by this power that we are capable of those reflex acts, by which we are conscious of our own existence, and form the ideas of being, substance, and God. Our reasonings are raised upon two great principles ; the one, that of consistency, by means of which we judge that to be false which involves a contradiction, and that to be true which is the reverse of the false ; the other, that of sufficient reason, which admits nothing to exist without a sufficient reason of its existence, though that reason may not be known to us. Of contingent truths or facts, a sufficient reason must be found, which may be traced up through a series of preceding contingencies, till they ultimatelj^ terminate in a necessary substance, which is a sufficient reason of the whole series of changes, and with which the whole series is con¬ nected. This supreme substance, which is sole, universal, and necessary, since every thing external, by the supposition, depends upon it, cannot be capa¬ ble of limit, and must contain within itself the principle of every possible reality. God is supremely perfect, and the source of all existence and perfection. He is, moreover, the fountain of all possible essences; these depending on the existence of a necessary being, in whom possible essence includes existence. It is true of God alone, that, if his existence be possi¬ ble he must necessarily exist ; and since nothing external can make it im¬ possible, and the supposition involves no contradiction, the existence of God is on this ground demonstrably established. Besides this demonstration of the Being of a God d priori, it may also be proved d posteriori ; for contingent things exist, which can have no sufficient reason of existence but in a necessary being, which has within itself the reason of its own existence. Eternal truths depend upon God, not arbitrarily, but necessarily. God alone is primitive unity, or simple original substance, from whom are produced all created or derived monads. These owe their existence to the effusion of the rays of divinity, limited in their effects by the finite capacity, of the creatures who receive them. Creatures have not pro¬ ceeded necessarily from the Divine essence, but have been created, ac¬ cording to the plan of the Divine understanding, by the energy of the Divine will and power ; and their continued preservation is a continual creation. Monads have universally an influence upon each other, and are reci¬ procally active and passive. They are active in proportion as their percep¬ tions are distinct ; passive, as they are confused. In simple substances, the influence of one monad upon another is not mechanical, but ideal, and is not effectual without the intervention of the Deity, who directs them according to the ideas of his own intellect. The Deity is always determined in his choice by sufficient reason ; and this can only be found in the degrees of perfection of possible worlds. His wisdom knows, his goodness chooses, and his power produces the best possible world. Chap. 2. S. 7. LEfBNITZ. 609 From the universal influence of' all creatures upon each individual, and of each upon all, it follows, that every simple substance receives an im¬ pression or image of all the rest, and becomes, as it were, a perpetual living mirror of the universe. As the same city, viewed from different places, appears different, and is optically multiplied ; so it happens, that in consequence of the infinite multitude of simple substances in nature, pictures of the universe are multiplied without end, according to the dif¬ ferent points of sight of different monads. By this means all possible variety, and consequently all possible perfection, is produced in the universe. Since there is in nature a universal plenum, the motion of any body or composition of monads must affect every other body by means of intervening bodies ; and every present motion will have a necessary connexion with every future motion : whence he who sees all things, can read in the present whatever will happen in any future time or dis¬ tant place. Although each created monad reflects the whole universe, that monad which is the animating principle of any body reflects that body more dis¬ tinctly than all others. As the body reflects the whole universe by the connexion of all matter in pleno, so also the soul reflects the whole uni¬ verse, while it reflects that organised body by which it is in a peculiar manner perceived, and with which it forms a living animal. Since matter is not only infinitely divisible, but is actually divided without limit, every portion of matter may be conceived to be a world of living creatures ; and every part of a living body to be itself fidl of other living bodies. All bodies are like rivers, perpetually flowing ; some parts entering, and others passing away. The soul changes its body, not instan¬ taneously, but by degrees ; so that, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as death, or a state in which the soul is separated from the body. In con¬ ception, no new animal is produced ; but a pre-existing animal is disposed to a transformation, by which it passes into another species. In death, though the machine, in part, perishes, the animal itself remains indestruc- , tible. In the united state of soul and body, each follows its own laws ; but ! they agree together by means of a pre-established harmony between all substances, which renders each a representation of the universe. The soul acts according to the law of final causes, or by motives ; the body, ac¬ cording to efficient causes, or by motion : and between these two kingdoms of nature there is an harmony, originally established and continually pro- served by the power of God, in consequence of which, whilst body and mind follow their respective laws without interruption, the body effects what the mind dictates, and both conspire to preserve the order of nature. As souls in general are mirrors of animated beings ; spirits,which partake of the nature of divinity, are images of the author of nature, and hence are capable of intercourse with the Deity, as subjects with a prince, or as children with a parent. Thus the world of spirits constitutes the city of God; a kingdom most perfect under a perfect monarch. From this metaphysical theory, which must be confessed too hypothetical to afford entire satisfaction, Leibnitz deduced many dogmas respecting the Divine nature and operations, the nature of human actions, good and evil natural and moral, and other subjects, which he treats with great subtlety, and in a connected train of reasoning. But for the particulars of these, we must refer the reader to his works, particularly the treatise entitled Causa Dei Asserta. It will be easily perceived, that the monads of Leibnitz approach nearly R R / 610 OF MODERN ECLECTIC l^HILOSOPHEKS. Book X. to the permanent intelligible natures, called by Pythagoras numbers, and by Plato ideas, than to the solid and indivisible atoms of Epicurus. Our philosopher’s sufficient reason, without which nothing can exist, though easily confounded with, is in truth different from a necessary cause : and a due attention to this distinction is of importance in the question concerning liberty and necessity, so ably canvassed in the memorable controversy between Leibnitz and Clarke. The doctrine of a pre-established harmony between body and soul, was an ingenious attempt towards the solution of the perplexing question concerning the connexion between matter and spirit. Aware of the difficulties attending the opinion of the physical influence or action of substances totally dissimilar upon each other, Leib¬ nitz had recourse to the idea of an harmony, originally established by the Creator, between the series of physical and moral events ; by means of which, while each follows its own laws, the ends of the Divine government with respect to both are accomplished. To this doctrine it has been objected, by Newton and others, that it supposes a perpetual miracle. But it is not our business to decide these controversies ; our undertaking only requires that we mention them.* SECTION VIIL— OF CHRISTIAN THOMAS. Among the Germans, who have attempted the general improvement of philosophy, some degree of praise is due to Christian Thomas, who, not without obloquy and hazard, threw off the Sectarian yoke, and introduced Eclectic freedom into the German schools. Christian Thomas j' was born at Leipsic, in 1655, and was well educated, first under his father, and afterwards in the Leipsic university. At first, he acquiesced in the established doctrines of the schools; but, upon reading Puffendorf’s “ Apology for rejecting the Scholastic Prin¬ ciples of Morals and Law,” light suddenly burst upon his mind, and he determined to renounce all implicit deference to ancient dogmas. He read lectures upon the subject of Natural Law, first from the text of Grotius, and afterwards from that of Puffendorf, freely exercising his own judgment, and where he saw reason, advancing new opinions. Whilst his father was living, paternal prudence and moderation restrained the natural vehemence and acrimony of the young man’s temper, which was too apt to break out, even in his public lectures. But when he was left to himself, the boldness with which he advanced unpopular tenets, and the severity with which he dealt out his satirical censures, soon brought upon him the violent resentment of theologians and professors. An “Introduction to Puffendorf,” which Thomas published in the year 1687, wherein he deduced the obligation of morality from natural prin¬ ciples, occasioned great offence. The following year he became still more unpopular, by opening a monthly literary journal, which he entitled, “ Free Thoughts ; or. Monthly Dialogues on various Books, chiefly new ;” in which he attacked many of his contemporaries with great severity. * Vidend. Ludovici. Hist. Pliil. Leibnitz. Langii Recentio Script. Anti-Leibn. Script, adv. Phil. Wolf. Hal. 1725. Epbem. Lips, et Paris, et Baylii et Basnagii. Act. Erud. ](J83. Act. Erud. t. vii. Supp. xi. p. 501. Recueil des Pieces de Phil. t. ii, p. 218. Hansihii Princip. Phil. Leibnitz. Voltairii Compar. Metaph. Leibn. et Newton. 1741. Des Maizeaux, Praef. Coll. Gallic. Diss. Clarkii et Leibnitzii. t Leporin. Germ. Lit. p. ii. Program. Jurisp. Div. Prooem. Caussae Jurid. p. iii. n. 1. 7. et praef. Libr. ejus. Chap. 2. S. 8. CHRISTIAN THOMAS. 611 The raillery of tliis satirical work was too provoking to be endured: com¬ plaints were lodged before the Ecclesiastical Court of Dresden ; the book¬ seller was called upon to give up the author ; and it was only through the interest of the Mareschal that Thomas escaped punishment. The title of the w'ork was now changed; but its spirit remained. A humorous and satirical Life of Aristotle, and several other sarcastic papers, kept alive the flame of resentment ; till at length it again burst forth, on a charge brought against him before the same court by the clergy of Leipsic for contempt of religion ; but he defended himself with such ability, that none of his adversaries chose to reply, and the matter w'as dropped. A satirical review, which he wrote, of a treatise “ On the Divine Right of Kings,” published by a Danish divine ; “ A Defence of the Sect of the ' Pietists,” and other eccentric and satirical publications, at last inflamed the resentment of the clergy against Thomas to such a degree, that he was threatened with imprisonment. To escape the storm which thickened about him, he entreated permission from the Elector of Brandenburg, in whose court he had several friends, that he might read private lectures in the city of Hall. This indulgence being obtained, Thomas became a voluntarj’- exile from Leipsic. After a short interval, he was appointed public pro¬ fessor of Jurisprudence, first in Berlin and afterwards at Hall. In these situations, he found himself at full liberty to indulge his satirical humour, and to engage in the controversies of the times : and, as long as he lived, he continued to make use of this liberty in a manner which subjected him to much odium. At the same time, he persevered in his endeavours to correct and subdue the prejudices of mankind, and to improve the state of philosophy. He died at Hall in the year 1728. Besides the satirical journal already mentioned, Thomas wrote several treatises on Logic, Morals, and Jurisprudence ; in which he advanced many dogmas contrary to received opinions. In his writings on physics, he leaves the ground of experiment and rational investigation, and appears among the Mystics. His later pieces are in many particulars inconsistent with the former. His principal philosophical works are “ An Introduction to Aulic Philosophy, or Outlines of the Art of Thinking and Reasoning;”* “ Introducton to Rational Philosophy “A Logical Praxis ;”f “ Intro¬ duction to Moral Philosophy ;” J “ A Cure for Irregular Passions, and the Doctrine of Self-knowledge “The new Art of discovering the secret Thoughts of Men “Divine Jurisprudence;” “ Foundations of the Law of Nature and Nations ; ” “ Dissertation on the Crime of Magic ; ” “ Essay on the Nature and Essence of Spirit, or Principles of Natural and Moral Science ;”|| “ History of Wisdom and Folly.” We shall subjoin a brief specimen of the more peculiar tenets of this bold, eccentric, and inconsistent philosopher. Thought arises from images impressed upon the brain ; and the action of thinking is performed in the whole brain. Brutes are destitute of sen¬ sation. Man is a corporeal substance, capable of thinking and moving, or endued with intellect and will. Man does not always think. Truth is the agreement of thought with the nature of things. The senses are not de¬ ceitful, but all fallacy is the effect of precipitation and prejudice. From perceptions arise ideas, and’their relations ; and from these, reasonings. It is impossible to discover truth by the syllogistic art. No other rule is necessary in reasoning, than that of following the natural order of investi¬ gation ; beginning from those things which are best known, and proceeding, by easy steps, to those which are more difficult. * Lips. 1688. t Bah- 1691. t 1692. § 1696. 11 1699. R n 2 612 OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS. Book X. Perception is a passive affection, produced by some external object, either in the intellectual sense, or in the inclination of the will. Essence is that without which a thing cannot be perceived. God is not perceived by the intellectual sense, but by the inclination of the will : for creatures affect the brain ; but God, the heart. All creatures are in God : nothing is exterior to him. Creation is extension produced from nothing by the 'Divine power. Creatures are of two kinds, passive and active; the former is matter; the latter, spirit. Matter is dark and cold, and capable of being acted upon by spirit, which is light, warm, and active. Spirit may subsist without matter, but desires a union with it. All bodies consist of matter and spirit, and have therefore some kind of life. Spirit attracts spirit, and thus sensibly operates upon matter united to spirit. This attraction in man is called love; in other bodies, sympathy. A finite spirit may be considered as a limited sphere in which rays, luminous, warm, and active, flow from a centre. Spirit is the region of the body to which it is united. The region of finite spirits is God. The human soul is a ray from the Divine nature ; whence it desires union with God, who is love. Since the essence of spirit consists in action, and of body in passion, spirit may exist without thought: of this kind are light, ether, and other active principles in nature. Good consists in the harmony of other things with man and his several powers. The highest felicity of man consists in tranquil delight. The fountain of this delight is the rational love of man and of God. Internal love and reverence are all the homage which nature teaches us to pay to God. With respect to God the two capital errors are atheism and super¬ stition. Superstition is worse than atheism. The love of God is a super¬ natural affection, which prepares the soul for future felicity. The rational love of man comprehends all social virtues. Rational self-love includes self-preservation, temperance, purity, industry, fortitude. To wise men, virtue is its own reward. Laws are appointed for the sake of fools, to conduct them to internal tranquillity and external peace. Of fools, there are three classes: those who disturb external peace ; those who do nothing to promote it; and those who do not enjoy internal peace. The first have need of authority ; the second of authority and counsel ; the third of counsel alone. The obligation of authority and law extends only to ex¬ ternal actions, which are just when they are conformable to law ; justice is therefore to be distinguished from virtue, which respects the internal man, and requires a conformity to the law of nature. These specimens of the philosophy of Thomas discover some originality of thought ; but contain too many hasty and ill-founded positions, and breathe too much of the spirit of mysticism, to merit any considerable share of attention. The author principally deserves notice in this work on account of the boldness with which he threw off the yoke of ancient authority, and the perseverance with which, in the midst of much oppo¬ sition, and many vicissitudes of fortune, he maintained and exercised the right of free inquiry.* * Vidend. Schurtzfleisch. Ep. Arc. 379. Juncker de Epheinerid. Erud. c. 17. Bayle Lettres, t. iii. p. 446. Siollii Lit. Hist. p. iii. c. 5. sect. 30, Hollman, Theol. Nat. c. 1. sect. 19. p. 79. Chap. 2. S. 9. CHRISTIAN WOLFE, 613 SECTION IX.— OF CHRISTIAN WOLFE. No philosopher has been more generally or justly celebrated in Germany, than Christian Wolfe,* born at Breslau, in the year 1679. After having been well instrueted in the rudiments of learning and seience in his own country, Wolfe prosecuted his studies successively in the universities of Jena, Hamburgh, and Leipsic. At the age of twenty- six, he had acquired so much distinction in the schools, that he was ap¬ pointed professor of mathematics, and soon afterwards of philosophy in general, in the university of Hall ; and seience received considerable improvements from his researches. After Leibnitz had published his Theodicea, Wolfe, struek with the novelty of the metaphysical edifice which that philosopher had raised, was ambitious of the honour of making some additions to the strueture, and assiduously laboured in the investigation of new metaphysical truths. He also digested the Elements of Mathematics in a new method, and attempted an improvement of the art of reasoning, in a treatise “ On the Powers of the Human Understanding.” Upon the foundation of Leibnitz’s doctrine of monads, he formed a new system of Cosmology and Pneumatology, di¬ gested and demonstrated in a mathematical method. This work, entitled, “Thoughts on God, the World, and the human Soul,” was published in the year 1719 ; to which were added, in a subsequent edition, “ Heads of Ethics and Policy.” Wolfe was now rising towards the summit of philosophical reputation, when the opinion which he entertained on the doctrine of necessity being deemed by his colleagues inimical to religion ; and an oration, which he delivered in praise of the morality of the Chinese having given much offence; an accusation of heresy was publicly brought against him in the university of Hall, and afterwards transferred to the courts of Berlin : and, though he attempted to justify himself in a treatise which he wrote on the subject of fatality, a royal mandate was issued, in November 1723, requiring him to leave the Prussian dominions. Having been formerly invited by the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel, to fill a professorial chair in the university of Cassel, Wolfe now put himself under the patronage of that prince, who had the liberality to afford him a secure asylum, and appointed him pro¬ fessor of mathematics and philosophy. The question concerning the grounds of the censure which had been passed upon Wolfe was now every where freely canvassed : almost every German university was inflamed with disputes on the subject of liberty and necessity ; and the names of Wolfians and Anti- Wolfians were every where heard. After an interval of nine years, the current of public opinion turned in favour of Wolfe, and the King of Prussia reversed his sentence of exile, and appointed him vice-chancellor of the university of Hall, where his return was welcomed with every expression of triumph. From this time he was employed in completing his Institutes of Philosophy, which he lived to accomplish in every branch except policy. In 1745 he was created a baron by the Elector of Bavaria, and succeeded Ludowig in the office of chancellor of the university. He continued to enjoy these honours till the year 1754, when he expired. Wolfe possessed a clear and methodical understanding, which by long * Pinacotheca Script, illust. Dec. i. ii. 10. Gottschedii Elog. Wolf. 1755. Hall. 4to. Ludovici Hist. Phil. Wolf. Langii Sjnops. Stript. 614 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. exercise in mathematical investigations was particularly fitted for the em¬ ployment of digesting the several branches of knowledge into regular systems ; and his fertile powers of invention enabled him to enrich almost every field of science, in which he laboured, with some valuable additions. The lucid order which appears in all his writings enables his reader to follow his conceptions with ease and certainty, through the longest trains of reasoning ; but the close connexion of the several parts of his works, together with the vast variety and extent of the subjects, on which he treats, renders it impracticable to give a summary of his doctrines.* CHAPTER III. OF MODERN ECLECTIC PHILOSOPHERS WHO HAVE ATTEMPTED IMPROVEMENTS IN PARTICULAR BRANCHES OF PHILOSOPHY. SECTION 1.— OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE DIALECTICS AND METAPHYSICS. Among the moderns who have renounced implicit respect for ancient authority, and, upon the true Eclectic plan of gathering up wisdom from every quarter, have attempted to enlarge the boundaries of human know¬ ledge; besides those who have been, or have wished to be thought, reformers of universal philosophy, innumerable learned men have appeared, who have directed their attention towards the improvement of particnlar sciences. To take no notice of these, might be justly deemed a material defect in a general history of philosophy ; at the same time it must be evident to every one, who is tolerably acquainted with the philosophical world, that to give a distinct view of the modern state of every branch of science, would be in itself a task still more laborious than that which we have endeavoured to execute. Such a work would require, not only biographical memoirs of those writers who have distinguished themselves in each department, but a distinct de¬ lineation, and an accurate comparison, of their various systems and opinions ; an undertaking too extensive and important to be attempted at the close of the present work. The intelligent reader will therefore expect, in this chapter, nothing more than an enumeration of a few of the more singular and important facts, respecting the improvement of particular branches of philosophy, which occurred between the period of the revival of letters and the commencement of the present century. Although, about the time of the Reformation, many learned men, par¬ ticularly Valla, Agricola, and Vives, spoke with great freedom of the de¬ fects of the Aristotelian Logic, no one attempted to substitute a better in its stead, till Peter Ramus undertook the task, and executed it with a degree of courage and success which has justly given his name consider¬ able celebrity. * Vidend. Wolf. Declar. de Scriptis prop. Rothfischer. Victoria Veritatis Nov. Lit. Lips. 1723. Fortney Eloges des Academ. de Berlin, t. ii. Elogium Historicum de Wolf. Hal. 1755. Chap. 3. S. 1. DIALECTICS AND METAPHYSICS. 615 Peter Ramus, or De la Ramee,* who was born in 1515, in a village of Vermandois, was a servant in the college of Navarre at Paris. Here, by his own industry, he gathered up the rudiments of learning, and became acquainted with the Logic of Aristotle. His talents and perseverance at last procured him a more honourable station in the college, and he became a candidate for the degree of master of philosophy. Upon this occasion he held a public disputation against the authority of Aristotle, in which he maintained his thesis with such ingenuity and ability as confounded his examiners. From this time Ramus determined to exert his utmost efforts to overturn the Aristotelian logic, and to introduce a better method of reasoning. He wrote “ Animadversions upon Aristotle,” in which he inveighed with great vehemence against his Organon, and to which he subjoined new “ Institutes of Dialectics.” These bold attacks upon a system which had for ages been universally admired, gave great offence, as might be expected, to the Peripatetics, and raised a violent storm of resentment against Ramus. At first his adver¬ saries made use of no other weapons against him than those of logic and eloquence, sufficiently envenomed, however, with spleen and calumny. But they at length proceeded to harsher measures. A complaint was brought to the civil magistrate, in the name of the academy, that Ramus, in opposing Aristotle, had committed [open hostility against religion and learning. The affair engaged the public attention ; and the king ordered that Ramus and his chief antagonist, Antony Govea, should hold a public disputation ; and that each party should choose two judges, and the king appoint an umpire. In the course of the contest, Ramus complained of unfair proceedings on the part of his antagonist ; but could obtain no re- vdress, for three of his judges were against him. The accusation was con¬ firmed ; the penalty inflicted upon him was an entire prohibition to write or teach philosophy ; and his enemies persecuted him with lampoons and satires, and even held him up to public ridicule upon the stage. Ramus, however, did not long remain under disgrace. The following year, 1544, a plague happened in Paris, which dispersed the students of the university and cut off several of the professors. On their return, Ramus, notwithstanding the royal prohibition, was recalled to his pro¬ fessorial chair; and in 1547, the sentence of Francis I. was reversed by Henry H. and Ramus was appointed Regius-professor of eloquence and philosophy, and afterwards of mathematics. Still, however, the embers of jealousy, though smothered, were not extinguished. They burst out into an open flame, as soon as it was known that Ramus favoured the party of the Huguenots ; and he found it necessary to withdraw from the university. In the intervals of peace, he returned to his station ; but, in the year 1568, when the civil war was a third time renewed, he resolved to leave France and make a tour through Germany. After spending three years in visiting the principal German universities ; in which, notwithstanding the zealous endeavours of the Aristotelian pro¬ fessors to fortify the minds of the pupils against the doctrines of Ramus, much respect was shown him, and many honours conferred upon him, he resolved, fatally for himself, to return into his own country. On the execrable day of St. Bartholomew’s festival, in the tumult of the Parisian massacre, Charpentaire, a professor of mathematics, who had been eclipsed by the superior talents of Ramus, seized the opportunity of being revenged * Vita scripta a Freigio, Nancelio, Banosio, Sammarthano, Bayle. Lamiois De Fort. Arist. c. 14. Galland. in Vit. Castellani, n. 4, 5. Thuanus ad Ann. 15 1 2. Verulain Impel. I’ll. V. iii. Op. p. 462. 616 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. upon his rival, and under the pretence of religion, employed assassins to murder him. The commission being executed, his body was thrown into the street to the enraged pupils of Charpentaire, who dragged it igno- miniously along the streets, and threw it into the Seine. Such was the tragical end of Peter Ramus, who must be acknowledged to have deserved a better fate. Few persons, in the present day, will be inclined to doubt whether Ramus did right in attempting to undermine the foundations of that authority which Aristotle had so long possessed in the schools : and no one, who will take the trouble to examine the manner in which he laid open the defects and inconsistencies of the Organon, will hesitate, in allowing him considerable merit in this part of his design. In attempting a new logical institute, Ramus was not, however, equally successful. The general outline of his plan is this : — Considering Dialectics as the art of deducing conclusions from pre¬ mises, he endeavours to improve this art by uniting it with that of rhetoric. Of the several branches of rhetoric, he considers invention and disposition as belonging equally to logic. Making Cicero his chief guide, he divides his treatise on dialectics into two parts ; the first of which treats of the invention of arguments, the second of judgments. Arguments he* derives not only from what the Aristotelians call middle terms, but from any kind of proposition, which, connected with another, may serve to prove any assertion. Of these he enumerates various kinds. Judgments he divides into axioms, or self-evident propositions, and diano'ea, or deductions by means of a series of arguments. Both these he divides into various classes, and illustrates the whole by examples from the ancient orators and poets. In the logic of Ramus,* many things are borrow^ed from Aristotle, and only appear under new names ; and many others are derived from other Grecian sources, particularly from the Dialogues of Plato and the Logic of the Stoics. The author has the merit of turning the art of reasoning from the futile speculations of the schools to forensic and common use ; but his plan is defective in confining the whole dialectic art to the single object of disputation, and in omitting many things which respect the general culture of the understanding, and the investigation of truth. Not¬ withstanding the defects of his system, we cannot, however, subscribe to the severe censure which has been passed upon Ramus by Lord Bacon f and others ; for much is, w'e think, due to him for having with so much firmness and perseverance asserted the natural freedom of the human understanding. The logic of Ramus obtained great authority in the schools of Germany, Great Britain, Holland, and France ; and long and violent contests arose between the follow^ers of Ramus and those of the Stagirite. These were not, however, sufficiently important in their consequences to require a distinct relation. The fame of Peter Ramus vanished before that of Des Cartes, whose labours in this branch of philosophy have been already noticed. Among the modern innovators in metaphysics, we must not omit to mention the w ell known name of Spinoza ; a philosopher who had the impious temerity to advance a new theory of nature destructive of all reli¬ gion, and w'hich he pretended to establish by geometric demonstration. * Cotif. Ars Cogitandi. Gundling. Via ad Verit. P. i. p. 78. Elswicli, De Fort. Arist, in Acad. Protest. Walch. Hist. Log. f Augm. bcient. 1. vi. c. 2. Cliap. 3. S. 1. DIALECTICS AND METAPHYSICS. 617 Benedict de Spinoza,* born at Amsterdam in 1632, was a Jew by- descent and education ; but very early discovered such dissatisfaction with the religion of his fathers, and advanced opinions so contrary to their esta¬ blished tenets, that a sentence of anathema was pronounced upon him by his brethren. Excommunicated from the synagogue, certain Christians, who were personally attached to him, granted him an asylum, and afforded him an opportunity of acquiring the knowledge of the Latin and Greek languages, and studying the Cartesian philosophy. The vehemence with which he continued to attack the religion of his countrymen alarmed and terrified them ; and they attempted, first to bribe him to silence by offer- ing.him an annual pension of a thousand florins, and afterwards to take him off by assassination. Both these measures proving ineffectual, they accused him, before the magistrate, of apostacy and blasphemy ; and he was banished from the city. In his exile, Spinoza studied mathematics and natural philosophy^, and supported himself by the mechanical art of polishing optical glasses. His chief residence was at Rhenburg, where he was often visited by followers of Des Cartes, who came to consult him on difficult questions. At their request, he published, in 1664, “ The principles of the Cartesian philosophy demonstrated geometrically,” with an Appendix, in which he advanced metaphysical opinions wholly inconsistent with the doctrine of Des Cartes. To escape the odium which this publication drew upon him, he retired to a village not far from the Hague ; thither he was followed by many per¬ sons, both countrymen and foreigners, who were inclined to espouse his doctrines. He was even invited by the Elector Palatine to fill the chair of philo¬ sophy at Heidelberg; but from an apprehension that his liberty would, in that situation, be abridged, he declined the proposal. He lived in retire¬ ment, with great sobriety and decency of manners, till a consumption brought him to an early end, in 1677. Spinoza, in his life time, published, besides the work already mentioned, Tractatum theologico-politicum, “ A Treatise theological and political.” H is “ Posthumous Works” contain five treatises. 1. Ethics demonstrated geometrically. 2. Politics. 3. On the Improvement of the Understanding. 4. Epistles and Answers. 5. A Hebrew Grammar. The impieties con¬ tained in these treatises excited general indignation ; and refutations wege sent forth from various quarters, by writers of all religious persuasions, in which the empty' sophisms, the equivocal definitions, the false reason¬ ings, and all the absurdities of the writings of Spinoza, are fully exposed. The sum of his doctrine is this : — The essence of substance is, to exist. There is in nature only one sub¬ stance, with two modifications, thought and extension. This substance is infinitely diversified, having within its own essence the necessary causes of the changes through which it passes. No substance can be supposed to produce or create another; therefore, besides the substance of the uni¬ verse there can be no other ; but all things are comprehended in it, and are modes of this substance, either thinking or extended. This one universal substance, Spinoza calls God, and ascribes to it Divine attributes. He expressly asserts, that God is the immanent, not the tran¬ sitive, cause of all things. His doctrine is, therefore, not to be confounded with that of those ancient philosophers, who held God to be to ixav “ The * Coler. Vit. Spinoz. Bayle. Niccron. t. xiii. p. 94. Basnage, Hist, cles Juifs, p. ix. c. 37. 618 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. Universal Whole foi*, according to them, the visible and intellectual worlds are produced by emanation from the eternal fountain of divinity, that is, by an expanding, or unfolding, of the Divine nature, which Avas the effect of intelligence and design ; whereas, in the system of Spinoza, all things are immanent, and necessary modifications of one universal sub¬ stance, Avhich, to conceal his atheism, he calls God. Nor can Spinozism be with any propriety derived, as some have imagined, from the Cartesian philosophy ; for, in that system, two distinct substances are supposed ; and the existence of Deity is a fundamental principle. It may seem very surprising, that a man who certainly was not destitute of discernment, abilities, and learning, should have fallen into such im¬ pieties. And this could not have happened, had he not confounded his conceptions with subtle and futile distinctions concerning the nature of substance, essence, and existence, and neglected to attend to the obvious, but irrefragable argument for the existence of God, arising from the appearances of intelligence and design in all the productions of nature. The impious system of Spinoza was maintained with so much ingenuity, that it found many patrons in the United Provinces, among whom were Lewis Meyer, who republished Spinoza’s works, and himself wrote a work entitled, “ Philosophy the Interpreter of Scripture and Van Leenhof, an ecclesiastic of Zwoll, Avho wrote a piece entitled, “ Heaven in Earth,” of the doctrine of which he was obliged to make a public recantation ; others, under the pretence of refuting Spinoza, secretly favoured his system. But, against the poison of their impious tenets sufficient antidotes were soon provided by many able defenders of religion, whose writings are well known, particularly in Cudworth’s “ Intellectual System,” the professed object of which is the refutation of atheism.* A singirlar metaphysical hypothesis has given celebrity to the name of Nicholas Mallebranche,-!- who was born at Paris, in 1638. Devot¬ ing himself, at twenty-two years of age, to monastic life, he engaged in the study of ecclesiastical history and biblical criticism ; but with so little satisfaction, that he was inclined to abandon his studies, and giving him¬ self up wholly to devotion, to wait in silence for Divine illumination. Whilst he was in this perplexed state of mind, he happened to meet with Des Cartes’ treatise “On Man,” and found in it so much perspicuity, and so many new ideas, that he immediately determined tp make himself per¬ fectly master of the author’s system of philosophy. From this time, he immersed himself in profound meditation, and spent ten years in pene¬ trating into the depths of the Cartesian philosophy, and in exploring new regions of metaphysics, not very remote from the precincts of enthusiasm. Having satisfied himself concerning the mysterious union of the soul and body, and having discovered, as he conceived, a still more mysterious union between the soul of man and God, he wrote his famous treatise “ On the Search after Truth.” This work made its first appearance in 1673, and was, a little before the author’s death, which happened in 1715, republished with considerable variations and enlargements. The doctrine of this book, though in many respects original, is raised upon Cartesian principles, and is in some particular’s Platonic. The author represents in strong colours, the causes of error, arising from the disorders of the imagination and passions, the abuse of liberty, and implicit confi¬ dence in the senses. He explains the action of the animal spirits ; the * Jaenichen, Hist. Spinoz. Leenhoff. Acta Phil. v. ii. p. 120. Mus. Bremen, v. ii. p. i. p. 145. f Vic, par Fontenellc, dans I’llistoirc do I’Ac. 11. dcs Sciences, p. 208. Chap. 3. S. 1. DIALECTICS AND METAPHYSICS. 619 j nature of memory ; the connexion of the brain with other parts of the body, and their influence upon the understanding and will. On the subject of intellect, he maintains, that thought alone is essential to mind, and deduces the imperfect state of science from the imperfection of the human understanding, as well as from the inconstancy of the will in inquiring- after truth. Rejecting the ancient doctrine of species sent forth from material objects, and denying the power of the mind to produce ideas, he ascribes their production immediately to God : and asserts, that the human mind immediately perceives God, and sees all things in him. As he derives the imperfection of the human mind from its dependance upon the body, so he places its perfection in union with God, by means of the knowledge of truth and the love of virtue.* Singular and paradoxical as the notion of “seeing all things in God,” and some other dogmas of this writer, must have appeared, the work was written with such elegance and splendour of diction, and its tenets were supported by such ingenious reasonings, that it obtained general applause, and procured the author a distinguished name among philosophers, and a numerous train of followers. Its popularity might, perhaps, be in part owing to the appeal which the author makes to the authority of St. Augus¬ tine, from whom he professes to have borrowed his hypothesis concerning the origin of ideas. The immediate intercourse which this doctrine sup¬ poses between the human and the Divine mind, has led some to remark a strong resemblance between the notions of Mallebranche and those of the sect called Quakers. Attempts similar to those of Mallebranche, for the acjvancement of the knowledge of the human mind, were about the same time made in Germany by Walter Tschirn Hausen,-|- a celebrated mathematician. A dili¬ gent inquirer after truth himself, he was desirous of furnishing others with a kind of first philosophy, which might conduct them with ease and cer¬ tainty to wisdom and happiness. With this view, he wrote a work, en¬ titled, Medicina Mentis, sive Artis inveniendi Prcecepta generalia,\ “ The Medicine of the Mind, or general Precepts of the Art of Invention wherein he applied geometry and universal arithmetic to metaphysical and moral subjects, in hopes of opening a way, by which any one might, for himself, discover what is true and useful. The work is properly a mathe¬ matical logic, more theoretical than practical, and only to be understood by such as are intimately conversant with mathematical speculations. Among modern metaphysicians, the ancient questions concerning the human soul, its nature, its faculties, its duration, its connexion with the body, and the like, have been much debated. Many writers have main¬ tained its materiality and natural mortality ; among whom are Coward, in his “ Thoughts on the Soul,”§ who was answered by Broughton, in his treatise “ On the Nature of the Rational Soul;” and by Dodwell, who maintained that the soul derives its immortality from the spirit of God in baptism. Other writers have maintained a long and still undecided controversy concerning the freedom of the human mind ; among whom are Leibnitz, Placette, King, Collins, and Clarke. || But the philosophy of the human mind has never been more ably in¬ vestigated, than by the celebrated British metaphysician, John Locke,^ who was born at Wrington, near Bristol, in the year 1632. He received • Pritii Diss. de Enthusiasmo. Mallebr. Leibn. Ilec. t. ii. p. 326. + Vit. Germanice, Gorl. 17051. Fontenelle, I. c. t. ii. + Lips. 1695. § Lond. 1703. || Bibl. Raisonn6e, t. iv. p. ii- p- 458. ^ Vit. a Clerico. praef. Op. 620 OF MODEIIN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. tlie first part of his education at Westminster school, and became a stu¬ dent in Christ Church College, Oxford, 1651. The early produce of his genius promised a rich harvest ; but his progress in knowledge was for a while retarded by defects which he discovered in the established modes of education ; his solid and penetrating judgment, little disposed to be satisfied with trifles, was disgusted with the unprofitable subtleties wdiich occupied the schools. Despairing to find that intellectual light, for which he earn¬ estly longed, in the chaos of Peripatetic and Scholastic philosophy, he grew tired of academic studies, and conversed more with men of wit and genius than with philosophers. The first writer, who taught him to think it possible that the darkness which hung over the human intellect might be dispelled, was Des Cartes. Though he did not adopt his system, he was delighted with the perspicuity of his writings. He was now convinced, that the general prevalence of error and uncertainty was not so much owing to the imbecility of the human mind, as to the imperfection of the present method of instruction : his natural thirst after knowledge re¬ turned ; and he resumed his inquiries with fresh ardour. He passed through a course of medical studies ; but, thinking it unsafe, on account of the delicate state of his health, to enter upon clinical practice, he declined taking his degree as doctor of physic. In the year Locke, in order to improve his knowledge of human nature by an extensive acquaintance with mankind, accompanied the British ambassador to the court of Berlin. After remaining there a year, he returned to Oxford, and chiefly pursued the study of natural philosophy. Here he had the, good fortune to form an intimacy with Lord Ashley, afterwards Earl of Shaftesbury; a man of superior genius, extensive read¬ ing, and elegant taste, from whose conversation Locke acknowledges him¬ self to have derived great pleasure and advantage, and with whom he preserved an intimate friendship through life. He accompanied this noble¬ man, both as his medical adviser and philosophical friend ; and was intro¬ duced by him to the acquaintance of many persons of the first distinction, to whom his good sense, extensive knowledge, and polished manners, ren¬ dered him highly acceptable. In 1668, he attended the Earl of Northum¬ berland into France. On his return, he undertook to superintend the education of Lord Shaftesbury’s only son. It was in the leisure which he commanded during this engagement, that he digested his ideas concerning the powers and operations of the human understanding ; and at the re¬ quest of his friends, committed his thoughts upon this subject to writing. When his friend and patron was appointed Lord Chancellor, Locke shared his honours ; and when, in the political struggles which threatened the destruction of the liberties of Great Britain, the Earl of Shaftesbury was dismissed from his office, Locke partook of his disgrace. In the year 1674, apprehending himself in danger of a consumption, by the advice and at the expense of his patron, he visited Montpelier, where he enjoyed the society of Mr. Herbert, afterwards Earl of Pembroke. On his return to England, an asthma obliged him to reside chiefly in the country ; and he occupied his leisure in the study of the scriptures, chiefly the New Testament. When Lord Shaftesbury retired into Holland, to escape the political storm which threatened his life, Locke, despairing of safety at home, followed him ; and, in 1683, fixed his residence in Amsterdam, where he had frequent intercourse with Le Clerc, Limborch, and other learned men, and where, after many interruptions, he finished his “ Essay on the Human Under¬ standing.” During his absence, his name, on account of the share which he was supposed to hav'e had in Lord Shaftesbury’s political offences, was Cliap. 3. S. 1. DIALECTICS AND METAPHYSICS. 621 by order of the king, struck out of the register of his college; and secret instructions were issued for seizing him and bringing him back to England. Timely notice was, however, given him of his danger; and he remained in concealment among his friends. During this recess, he wrote “ Two Letters on Toleration,” which he addressed to Limborch. In 1685, he was offered a pardon from James II. by William Penn; but he refused it upon the noble plea, that having been guilty of no crime, he needed no pardon. At the happy period of the revolution, Locke accompanied the Princess of Orange to England, and was restored to the society of his numerous friends and to his useful labours, political and philosophical. The “Essay on the Human Understanding” was first published in English in 1690, and was soon afterwards translated into French and Latin, and judiciously abridged by Wynn, Bishop of St. Asaph. The same year Locke published his treatise “On Civil Government,” in which he boldly and successfully attacked the principles of despotism. The last days of his life he spent in retirement, at the country seat of his friend Sir Francis Masham, where he wrote his treatise “On Education;” “Third Letter on Toleration;” “Reasonableness of Christianity;” “Letters to Stillingfleet, Bishop of Worcester,” and other tracts. In his theological works, he strenuously maintained, that there is nothing in the Christian religion contrary to reason; and at the same time that he showed himself a true friend to the cause of Revelation, was a zealous advocate for the doctrine of the unity of the Divine nature. The last labours of this great and good man were em¬ ployed upon the scriptures; and it was whilst he found himself hastening to his end, that he finished his “ Commentaries upon the Epistles to the Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, and Ephesians,” published after his death, which happened in the year 1704. He died in a manner worthy of his excellent principles and character; and left a letter, to be delivered after his death to a friend, which concludes thus: “ This life is a scene of vanity, which soon passes away, and affords no solid satisfaction, but in the con¬ sciousness of doing well, and the hopes of another.” That Locke possessed a noble and lofty mind, superior to prejudice, and capable, by its native energy, of exploring truth, even in the regions of the intellectual world before unknown ; that his judgment was accurate and profound; that his imagination was vigorous; and that he w'as well fur- nished'with the ornaments of elegant learning, were there no other proofs, might be without hesitation concluded from liis great and immortal work, “The Essay on the Human Understanding;” in which, discarding all systematic theories, he has, from actual experience and observation, de¬ lineated the features, and described the operations, of the human mind, with a degree of precision and minuteness, not to be found in Plato, Aristotle, or Des Cartes. After clearing the way by setting aside the whole doctrine of innate notions and principles, both speculative and prac¬ tical, the author traces all ideas to two sources, sensation and reflection ; treats at large of the nature of ideas, simple and complex ; of the operation of the human understanding in forming, distinguishing, compounding, and associating them; of the manner in which words are applied as representa¬ tions of ideas; of the difficulties and obstructions, in the search after truth, which arise from the imperfection of these signs; and of the nature, reality, kinds, degrees, casual hindrances, and necessary limits, of human knowledge. To discuss at large the merits of this excellent work would require a distinct treatise. Suffice it to remark, that though several topics are 622 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO' IMPROVE. Book X. treated of, which may be considered as episodical with respect to the main design; though many opinions which the author advances may admit of controversy; and though on some topics, he may not have expressed him¬ self with his usual perspicuity, and on others may be thought too verbose, the work is of inestimable value, as a history of the understanding, not compiled from former books, but written from materials collected by a long and attentive observation of \rhat passes in the human mind. A small treatise, “ On the Conduct of the Understanding,” written by the same author, is a valuable supplement to his main work. On the subject of logic, modern times have produced many treatises, which either for novelty of matter, for perspicuity of arrangement, or for a free rejection of Peripatetic trifles, might deserve notice. Among these we must not omit particularly to mention the system of logic published under the name of the Society of Port Royal, which is commonly ascribed to Arnaud; “The Art of Thinking,” by Crousaz; and the logic of the illustrious Le Clerc; a writer to whom the learned world is under great obligations for many excellent works in various branches of learning, and whose name would have merited a conspicuous place in a general history of literature. SECTION II.— OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE MORAL AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. Scarcely had philosophy emerged out of the darkness of barbarism, when learned men, tired of treading for ever the barren path of Scholastic controversy, began to visit the flowery and fertile fields of moral philo¬ sophy. Several of those writers, to whom the world is indebted for the revival of polite learning, wrote moral treatises after the manner of the ancients; among those were Petrarch, Verger, and Cardan. But the first writer who treated the subject of ethics in the true Eclectic method, was Michael de Montaigne,* a native of Perigord, in France, who was born in 1530, and lived till 1592. The first language which was taught him was the Latin, which he could speak fluently at six years of age, when he knew nothing of the French tongue. He received his scientific education in the college of Guyenne. Though addicted to plea¬ sure, he early formed a habit of reflection, which made him master of much originality of thought and diction. The fruits of Montaigne’s lucu¬ brations are preserved in his “ Essays ;”j- consisting of miscellaneous observations, chiefly moral, written with great ingenuity and vivacity. Many of his reflections, it must be owned, have a tendency to encourage scepticism; and sometimes he indulges a luxuriance of fancy and freedom of language, which grossly violates the rules of decorum; but he must not be wholly excluded from the class of useful moralists. Montaigne’s Essays are not transcripts from former writers, but the genuine productions of a vigorous and cultivated mind; and it is a circumstance, which renders them peculiarly interesting and valuable, that the w'riter, with perfect openness, discloses his owm feelings, and describes the peculiarities of his OAvn character. Montaigne died in 1592. * Blount, Gens. p. 819. Teisser. Elog. t. iv. p, 167. I Lond. 1723. Conf. Art. de Pens. 1. iii. c. 20. Mallebranclie de Inv. Ver. t. i. 1. ii. c. 5. p. 271. Huet. de lleb. suis, p. 178. Fontevivan. Apol. pro Mont. Hist, apud Ouv, des Savans, 1700. Chap. 3. S. 2. MORAL and political philosophy. ‘ 623 The footsteps of Montaigne were followed by Peter Charron,** a native of Paris, who was born in 1541, and died in 1603. He wrote a treatise “ On Wisdom a work which abounds with ingenious and origi¬ nal observations on moral topics, but gives a gloomy picture of human nature and of society. A valuable treatise “ On Morals ” w^as published at Leyden, in 1593, by Abraham ScHULTET,f a divine of Heidelburg. It consists of two books ; the former of which is “ On a Virtuous Life the latter, “ On a Happy Life.” The great merit of this work is, that it is free from the useless subtleties with w'hich most of the writings of this period are encumbered. The subsequent period abounds with moral writings of various kinds; among which we must mention, with peculiar distinction. Lord Bacon’s Essays, which are full of judicious and useful observations on life and manners. To these may be added, the ethical writings of PLACCius,j; a native of Lubeck, particularly his “ Institutes of Moral Medicine and his “Moral Philosophy. ”|| This w'riter was, if not the first, certainly among the first, who distinguished the science of ethics from that of juris¬ prudence, and attempted to assign each its proper limit. But these sub¬ jects were afterwards more fully and scientifically handled by Grotius and Puffendorf, whose eminent services, in this and other branches of science, entitle them to particular notice. Hugo Grotius,^ or Hugo de Groot, a native of Delft, in Holland, was born in 1583. He gave early proofs of a superior genius, in the Latin verses which he wrote before he was nine years old. At twelve years of age he w'as admitted into the university of Leyden, where he made a rapid progress in theology, jurisprudence, mathematics, and other sciences. Under the celebrated Scaliger, he acquired much philological knowledge ; and at fifteen, he published an edition of Capella, with notes, which obtained him the applause of the critics. In 1598, he accompanied the Dutch ambassador to France, where he became acquainted with many learned men, and was introduced to Henry IV. Though early engaged in civil affairs, he did not suffer them to interrupt his studies. He wrote a treatise “ On the Freedom of the Seas,” which gave his countrymen so high an opinion of his abilities, that, in the year 1615, they entrusted him with an embassy to the court of Great Britain, to settle a dispute con¬ cerning the right of fishing in the Northern seas. This journey intro¬ duced him to the acquaintance of many learned Englishmen. In the theological disputes between the Arminians and Calvinists, which so long distracted the United Provinces, Grotius publicly appeared on the side of the Arminians : and, with other friends to toleration, took such spirited measures to screen them from persecution, as inflamed the resent¬ ment of the opposite party ; and after a long struggle, which terminated in the decree of the synod of Dort, condemning the Arminian tenets, he was brought to trial, and received a sentence of confiscation of goods and perpetual imprisonment. He was accordingly confined in the fortress of Louvestein, in South Holland. Conscious that his conduct had not merited such punishment, Grotius bore his confinement with great com¬ posure, and relieved the tediousness of solitude by literary labours ; of which the principal were “A Latin Version of Stobseus,” and an invaluable • Bayle. f Reimann. Hist. Lit. G. p. iv. p. 598. Freker. Theat. p. 424', X Fabricii Vita Flaccii in Theatr. Pseudon. Leibn. Ep. vol. iv. p. 1S8. § Hamb. 1675. || Helmstadt. 1677. ^ Scliudtii Vit. Grot. Frankf. ad Mcsn. 1 722. *15ayle. Niceron. 624 Of MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. treatise “ On the Truth of the Christian Religion.” This latter work has been universally read and admired, and has been translated into eleven different languages.* When Grotius was beginning to despair of regaining his liberty, he ob¬ tained an unexpected rescue by the meritorious ingenuity and heroism' of his wife. During his whole confinement, which had now continued from May, 1619, to March, 1621, that excellent woman had endeavoured to devise means for her husband’s escape. At last, she shut him up in a chest in which books had been brought into his apartment, herself, in the mean time, remaining in the prison ; and he was, in this manner, conveyed to the house of a friend at Goreum ; whence, in the habit of a mason, with his rule and trowel, he escaped out of the town. Grotius, thus released by his wife (who was herself, upon her petition to the States- General, in a few days set at liberty) fled out of Holland into Brabant, and afterwards to Antwerp, where he remained some time in concealment. Through the interest of the French ambassador in Holland, and other friends, he at length settled in Paris, whither he was followed by his wife and children, and where he enjoyed the friendship of many eminent men who assisted him in prosecuting his literary designs. During this exile, Grotius, at the request of his learned friend Peiresc, undertook and completed his great work, De Jure Belli et Pads, “ On the Rights of War and Peace.” His design, which extended beyond the limits of the title prefixed to the work, was to settle the grounds of the rights of men in civil society. The natural right of men he founds upon the social principle in human nature ; the rights of nations, upon the con¬ ventions of states. The doctrines which he advances, he supports by a connected train of reasonings deduced from acknowledged principles, and confirms by authorities from ancient writers, from the Civil Law, and from the Scholastics. His Eclectic spirit clearly appears, in the general maxim which he lays down concerning ancient systems : that, “ as there never was any sect so enlightened as to see the whole truth, so there never was any one so erroneous as to be entirely destitute of truth.” The work, which was first published at Paris, in 1625, soon engaged the universal attention of scholars and statesmen.-j- After remaining eleven years in France, Grotius was, by Cardinal Richelieu, deprived of a pension which he had enjoyed during the greater part of the time ; upon which he determined to hazard a return to Amster¬ dam. But, though his friends were numerous, he soon found that the party of his enemies was still too powerful to allow him a peaceful settlement in his own country. An order being issued for seizing his person, he found it necessary to withdraw from Holland, and determined to retire to Ham¬ burgh ; here he remained till, after refusing repeated solicitations from several potentates to engage in public affairs, he was prevailed upon, in 1634, by the court of Sweden, to go as ambassador to France. It is to the leisure which Grotius enjoyed during his second residence in France, that the world is indebted for many of his valuable works, par¬ ticularly his learned and liberal commentaries upon the Scriptures ; but these literary occupations so far interrupted his attention to civil affairs, that the Swedish minister thought it necessary to send another agent to Paris, which so displeased Grotius, that he requested to be recalled. Upon his return to Stockholm, he was graciously received and liberally rewarded * French, German, English, Danish, Swedish, Dutch, Greek, Arabic, Persian, Indian, and Chinese. t Thomas Hist. Jur. Nat. p. G8. Greening, Bibl. Jur. Gent. p. 251. Bibl. Juris Imperant. p. 16. Chap. 3. S. 2. MORAL AND TOLITICAL PHILOSOPHY. 625 by the Queen ; but, either through an apprehension of suffering by court- intrigue, or through the love of literary retirement, he declined all public offices, and determined once more to hazard a return to his native country. Setting sail for Lubeck, a storm arose, and the vessel was driven upon the coast of Pomerania. Grotius, during the passage, fell sick ; and, after his landing, was conveyed, by a tedious journey of eight days, to Rostock ; where he died, in 1645, leaving behind him an immortal name for the elevation and extent of his genius, the variety and depth of his learning, the uprightness of his character, and the important services which he had rendered to religion and philosophy. The success with which Grotius attempted the improvement of juris¬ prudence led Selden,* a learned Englishman, born in 1587, and educated at Oxford, to form a new system of the law of nature and nations, on the basis of the Jewish institution, which he supported with a vast display of Oriental learning; but the work is rather a commentary on the Hebrew code than an institute of natural law.j- The edifice of jurisprudence begun by Grotius was finished by Puffen- DORF,j; a German, born at Flah, near Chemnitz, in 1631, and educated at Leipsic. The Swedish ambassador at the court of Copenhagen engaged him to undertake the education of his sons ; but he was scarcely entered upon his new station, when, a war breaking out between Sweden and Den¬ mark, Copenhagen was besieged, and Puffendorf was made prisoner, and kept in confinement eight months without books or the conversation of his friends. In this solitude, he diligently revolved in his mind the differ¬ ent doctrines of Grotius and Hobbes on the law of nature ; and, having long before rejected the Peripatetic notion that moral subjects do not admit of demonstration, he determined to attempt the construction of a system of ethics on evident and indubitable principles. After his release, Puffendorf, in the year 1659, removed, with his pupils, to the Hague. Plere, by the aid of diligent study, and the conversation of learned men, he so far accomplished his design, as to publish “Elements of Jurisprudence,” written after the geometric manner. The work was dedicated to the Elector Palatine, who entertained so high an opinion of the author’s abilities, that he appointed him professor of the law of nature and nations in the university of Heidelburg. This chair he filled with great credit and success ; at the same time prosecuting his studies with indefatigable industry. At the request of the chancellor of Sweden, he afterwards removed to the university at Lunden, where he taught juris¬ prudence and wrote his celebrated treatise “ On the Law of Nature and Nations.” No sooner was this work known, than it at once raised a nume¬ rous host of enemies, who reproached the author as an enemy to religion and government, and a seducer of youth, and who, in short, loaded him i with every kind of obloquy. Puffendorf, however, vindicated his doctrine e and character so successfully, that his adversaries were silenced, and his i public honours continued and increased. He was appointed historiographer to the King of Sweden, and wrote a “ History of the Affairs of Sweden, 8 from the Commencement of the Reign of Gustavus Adolphus.” The title « of Baron was also conferred upon him. His honours and labours were I) terminated by death, in the sixty-third year of his age. j The strength of Puffendorf’s genius, the clearness of his discernment, (j the accuracy of his judgment, and the variety and depth of his erudition, * See Wilkins's Life of Selden, prefixed to his works. t Thomas, Hist. Jur. Nat. p. 66-88. Puff. Erid. Scand. p. 200. X Thomas, Hist. Jur. Nat, p. 90, &c. Niceron. t. xviii. 626 OB' MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. are clearly seen in liis elaborate treatise De Jure Natures et Gentium^ “ On the Law of Nature and Nations.” His system was erected on the same foundation with that of Grotius, the social nature of man. Religion he considers as a pi’inciple which serves to strengthen the bonds of civil society. In order to give the work, as much as possible, the force of demonstration, he carefully defines moral terms, investigates the moral nature of man, considers the distinct qualities of moral actions, and derives from these sources the several duties of men towards themselves, towards each other, and towards God. Our limits will not permit us to relate, in detail, the contents of this great work ; and it is the less necessary, as the author himself has left a clear and elegant compendium of it in his treatise De Officiis Hominis et Givis, “ Of the Duties of a Man and a Citizen.” These works have been generally read and admired, and have been trans¬ lated into several languages. If the larger treatise be at present less known than formerly, it is probably owing to its extreme prolixity, the effect of an unnecessary accumulation of quotations and references to the ancients.* That branch of philosophy which treats of Policy, or Civil Govern¬ ment, has, from the time of the revival of letters, been the subject of frequent discussion. The modern Peripatetics, after the example and upon the principles of Aristotle, have endeavoured to accommodate the art of government to the actually subsisting state of communities. Others, who have deserted the Stagirite, and speculated with Eclectic freedom on questions of policy, have treated the subject in various ways, systematic or miscellaneous. To enumerate all these in the present work would be im¬ practicable : we shall mention a few of the principal. Among the learned of the sixteenth century, a name of some celebrity in this branch of philosophy is John BoDiN,f a French lawyer, born at Angier, and educated in the university of Thoulouse. Thuanus relates that Henry H. of France, who was a lover of letters, frequently conversed with him. He accompanied the Duke of Alen^on into England. He wrote a treatise “ On States,” which is much applauded by Thuanus and others, and was publicly read in the university of Cambridge ; it is chieffy valuable for the immense variety of examples and authorities which the writer has collected.^; Another political writer of this period is the Spanish Jesuit, Balthazar Gratian,§ who died in 1658. Most of his pieces, of which “ The Courtier,” and “ The Oracle,” are the principal, have been translated into other languages. His observations are not always consistent with the true principles of morality; but they prove the author to have been a shrewd observer of men. To a cautious and judicious reader they may suggest many curious and useful ideas. We may here also mention Trajan Boccalini,]] a native of Rome, an ingenious and elegant writer, who employed his wit in satirising the follies and vices of princes and courtiers, and particularly in detecting the errors of the Spanish government. His principal works are, “ Tales from Parnassus,” and “ The Political Touchstone.” But for knowledge of the corrupt arts of policy, and the intrigues of courts, no writer is so famous as Nicholas Machiavel,^ a Florentine, * Thomas, Hist. Jur. Nat. I. c. Bibl. Jur. Imp. 1. c. t Lyser de Vit. Bodin. 1715. Appar. Lit. Witteb. col. ii. p. 312. Bibl. Juris. Imp. p. 95. Bayle. Lond. 1606. § Alegamb. Bibl. Soc. Jes. 11 Erythraji Pinacotli. i. p. 272. iii. p. 223. Bayle. ^ Jovii Klog. c. 87. F. Christ, de N. Mach. Vit. Chap. 3. S. 3. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 627 who flourished at the beginning of the sixteenth century. In his political conduct, Machiavel was an enemy to despotism. He violently opposed the tyranny of the house of Medicis, and was thrown into prison on suspicion of having been concerned in a conspiracy against it ; but the charge not being made good, he was released, and soon afterwards received an annual stipend for writing “ The History of the Affairs of Florence.” In a sub¬ sequent conspiracy against the Medicean Cardinal, afterwards Pope Clement VH. he again fell under suspicion, in consequence of his having, in writing, exhibited before his countrymen the example of Brutus and Cassius, to incite them to a strenuous assertion of their liberties. Though not convicted of any treasonable offence, he was deprived of his annuity, and lived in poverty till the year 1526, when he expired in the forty-eighth year of his age. Machiavehs principal works are, “ Dissertations on the first Decad of Livy “ A History of Florence and “ The Prince.” It is to this latter work chiefly, that this writer owes his celebrity ; but what is the proper character of the piece, or with what design it was written, has been much disputed. Many have understood it to be a system of corrupt policy, written with the serious purpose of instructing princes and statesmen iii all the intrigues of state and the arts of oppression ; and consequently have not scrupled to call Machiavel the preceptor of tyrants. But, since the author was, in his political conduct, an enemy to despotism, it is perhaps more reasonable to consider “ The Prince” as a satirical work, intended to pull off the mask from the face of tyranny, and by exposing its base and mischievous stratagems, to render it hateful to mankind. The work is indeed dedicated to the house of Medicis 3 but this might be only an expedient for concealing more effectually the author’s design. If it should be thought, that in thus laying open the mysteries of courts, Machiavel furnished a manual of political iniquity, it is to be remembered, that the arts of false policy, and the machinations of ambition and tyranny, have been known and practised where Machiavel’s “ Prince” has never been read.* The pernicious maxims of despotism have, since the days of Machiavel, been often refuted, and the true principles of government established by Sydney, Locke, Montesquieu, and many other able writers, whose names would appear with splendour in a History of Civil Policy. SECTION III.— OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. The illustrious Lord Bacon, in turning the attention of philosophers from the speculative and hypothetical to the practical and experimental study of nature, opened an extensive field of inquiry, little known to tlie ancients, which has since been cultivated with astonishing success. To enumerate all the celebrated names which have appeared in this class of modern philosophers ; to relate the most interesting particulars of their lives; to trace the progress of their respective researches ; to report the advances which have been made in the several departments of physical knowledge, the new facts which experiment and observation have brought * Paeon de Augm. Scient. 1. vii. c. 2. Arnd. Bibl. Polit. p. iii. See Clarend. Hist. Reb. Book X. S S 2 628 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. to light, and the general truths which they have established ; to point out the desiderata which yet remain, and deduce from things already known hints for further improvement ; to execute all this with diligent accuracy and sound judgment, would be a great and meritorious work, w'ell de¬ serving the best exertions of the most enlightened philosopher. But such an undertaking will be easily perceived to be far beyond the limits of the present work. Nothing further will be expected in this place, than that we briefly review the lives and labours of a few of those philosophers wdio, from the revival of letters to the commencement of the present cen¬ tury, have eminently distinguished themselves by their inquiries and dis¬ coveries in natural philosophy. That spirit of innovation which, in other branches of philosophy, was discouraged as dangerous to the established systems, was early permitted in physics. Towards the close of the sixteenth century, Telesius, in Italy, advanced new doctrines ; several philosophers in France ventured to con¬ tradict the physics of the Peripatetic school ; and in England Nathaniel Carpenter* WTOte a treatise entitled, Philosophia libera, \ “ Free Phi¬ losophy,” in which many paradoxical notions were advanced, sufliciently remote from the received doctrines of the schools. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, a philosopher appeared in Great Britain, to whom natural philosophy is much indebted, both because he had the courage to rely upon his own powers, and to recede from the Aristotelian doctrines, to which the British schools at that time superstitiously adhered ; and because he engaged, with wonderful industry and success, in the design of investigating the causes of natural appear¬ ances by experiment. Gilbert, j; born at Colchester in 1540, wrote a treatise entitled, Philosophia nova de Mundo nostro suhlunari, “New Philosophy concerning our sublunary World and he made, at a great expense, and with incredible perseverance, a course of experiments on the magnet, the result of which he relates in his treatise, De Magnete mag- neticisque Corporihus, “ Of the Magnet and magnetic Bodies.” He main¬ tains that the magnetic virtue is placed by nature in the terrestrial globe, and that the earth is a vast magnet. Gilbert acquired great and general reputation by this work ; and his doctrine was afterwards applied by Halley to explain the variation and dipping of the magnetic needle. The first modern among the Germans who appears with any distinc¬ tion in the class of natural philosophers is Daniel Sennert,§ a phy¬ sician, who was born at Breslaw in 1572, w'as educated at Wittenburg, and died in 1637. He wrote Hypomneuma Physica, “ Minutes of Physics,” in which he contradicts many of the Aristotelian principles. He was the first philosopher who introduced into the German schools the study of chemistry freed from the fanciful hypotheses of the Paracelsians. His works are voluminous : they are printed in six volumes. |] After the time of Lord Bacon, many philosophers, upon his principles, and after his example, made use of the art of chemistry as an instrument in the investigation of nature. Among these was Sir Kenelm Digby,^ an Englishman, born at Gothurst, in Buckinghamshire, in 1603, and edu¬ cated at Oxford ; who, in the midst of military services, industriously prosecuted physical researches, and, particularly, spared neither labour nor expense in order to make himself master of the secrets of chemistry : these he applied to the improvement of medicine, which he practised with * Wood Athaen. Oxon. f Oxon. 1636. J Morhoff. Polyh. t. ii. p. 410. § Witt. Mem. Med. p. 89. Bayle. || Lug^d. 1676. fol. *11 Wood Athaen. Oxon. Bullart. Acad, des Scion, t. ii. p. 1137. Bayle. Chap. 3. S. 3. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 629 great success. Assuming rarefaction and condensation as physical prin¬ ciples, he endeavoured, in a distinct treatise “ On Plants,” to explain the process of vegetation. He also wrote “ On the Nature of Bodies,” and “ On the Immortality of the Soul.” Chemistry was from this time studied and practised by many other eminent physicians and philosophers, among whom the name of Boer- HAAVE ought to be mentioned with peculiar distinction, both on account of the improvements which he made in this art, and the pains which he took to show its utility, not only in medicine, but in the general study of physics. He died in 1738, aged seventy years. One of the most industrious and successful interpreters of nature which the seventeenth century, so fruitful in great men, produced, was Robert Boyle, descended from the illustrious family of the Boyles, in Ireland. He was born at Lismore, in the year 1627. After travelling through France, Italy, and Switzerland, to extend his acquaintance with the works of nature and art, he fixed his residence at Oxford, where he devoted himself to the study of medicine and natural philosophy. It was during his residence here that the design was formed and completed, by himself and several other philosophers, of establishing a society for the improvement of natural knowledge. After its establishment in London, under the patronage of Charles 11. and under the name of the Royal Society, Boyle removed thither, and employed the remainder of his days in researches into nature. Fie died, much lamented by all the friends of science and virtue, in 1691.* Boyle possessed every advantage for the prosecution of physical in¬ quiries ; an extensive intercourse with the philosophical world, a fortune adequate to the expense of experiments, great industry, a sound judgment, and an ardent thirst after knowledge ; and his success was equal to every expectation which these circumstances might create ; as fully appears 1‘rom his own account of his experiments on Air, on Hydrostatics, on Colours, on the Atmosphere, on the human Blood, and other subjects. This great man was no less celebrated for his personal virtues than for his knowledge of nature: probity, modesty, humanity, and piety, were pro¬ minent features in his character. His religious temper appears in many of his writings, and was particularly shown in the reverence which he ex¬ pressed for the name of God, which he is said never to have mentioned without a pause. There is no class of men to whom natural philosophy is more indebted than to mathematicians. These have largely contributed to its improve¬ ment, by the diligence and accuracy with which they have made and registered astronomical observations, and by the pains which they have taken to subject the known laws of motion to arithmetical calculation and geometrical demonstration, and hence to deduce mathematical principles of physics. Out of the numerous body of mathematical philosophers, we must only select the great names of Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Kepler, Galileo, and Newton. Nicholas Copernicus -f was born at Thorn, in Prussia, in 1472. Having acquired, during the course of his education at Cracow, a fond¬ ness for mathematical studies, and particularly for astronomy, he went to Bologna to prosecute these studies under an eminent astronomer of that university. Here he obtained such distinction that he was appointed pro¬ fessor of mathematics at Rome. Returning, after some years, to his * His works are printed in five volumes, folio, London, 1/44. t Gassend. Vit. Cop. Wiedler. Hist. Astron. Adam. Vit. Phil. 630 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROV'D Book X. native country, he obtained a canonry in the cathedral church of Frauen- burg, and in the leisure which this situation afforded him, pursued his astronomical speculations. Perceiving the Ptolemaic system (which sup- j)oses the earth to be fixed in the centre, and the Moon, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, to revolve about it in concentric circles) to be inconsistent with the phenomena, and encumbered with many alisiirdities, he had recourse to the Pythagorean hypothesis, which places the sun in the centre of the system, and makes the earth a planet, revolving annually with the rest about the sun, and daily about its own axis. Upon this system, compared with the observations which had been made by others and himself, he proceeded to ascertain the periodical revo¬ lutions of the planets, and wrote his treatise De Orbium Ccelestium Re- volutionihus, “On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies,” in which he demonstrated them geometrically. A doctrine which explained the celestial phenomena with so much sim¬ plicity could not fail to engage the attention and admiration of astronomers and philosophers. But, on account of its apparent inconsistency with some passages of scripture, it was rejected by many divines, and censured in an express decree of the Romish church. Nevertheless, the doctrine daily gained ground, and is now universally received. Copernicus died in 1543. In order to remove the offence which was taken by so many learned men against the doctrine of Copernicus, a Danish astronomer, Tycho Brahe,* invented a system between the Ptolemaic and Copernican. This philosopher, born at Knudstorp, in Sweden, in 1546, was educated for the profession of the law, first at Copenhagen, and afterwards at Leipsic; but relinquished that profession, and gave himself up to the study of astronomy. After various journeys, in which his astronomical know¬ ledge procured him great reputation, the King of Denmark, through the recommendation of the Landgrave of Hesse Cassel, furnished him with a house, an observatory, and an astronomical apparatus in the islandof Huen, in the Sound ; and appointed him an annual stipend, on condition that he should devote himself to astronomy. Here he continued his observations for many years; but at length the King of Denmark, offended at the philosopher, as it is said, on account of his having pretended to cure diseases by secret means, deprived him of his salary. Tycho Brahe, upon this, removed to Prague, where he was patronised by Rodolphus IL, and had for his assistant in astronomical calculations the celebrated Kepler. In this place he died in the year 1601. The system of Tycho Brahe supposed the earth quiescent, and the sun, with the whole heavens, to revolve about it with such a complex motion, that while the earth is the centre of the sun’s orbit, the sun is the centre of all the planetary orbits. The author of this system was preparing a geometrical demonstration of its agreement with the celestial phenomena, when death put an end to his labours. Tycho Brahe was a man of violent passions, impatient of contradiction, intemperate, libidinous, and super¬ stitious. He only deserves to be remembered on account of his astrono¬ mical observations and his system of the celestial motions which, however, being the mere fiction of an ingenious brain, perished with its author. Science was less indebted to Tycho Brahe than to his colleague John Kepler, j- a German, born in 1571, at Wiel, in the duchy of Wirtemburg, and educated at Tubingen. Flis early and uncommon proficiency in * Gasseiid. Vit. Tycli. Br. f Gassetih. t. v. p. 451. 471. Baylc. Weidler, 1. c. c. 15. p. 414. Chap. 3. S. 3. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 631 mathematical learning recommended him to the attention of the university of Gratz, in Stiria, as a proper person to occupy the mathematical chair. From this time astronomy became the chief object of his attention ; and, in 1595, he published Mysterium Cosmographicum, “ The Mystery of Cosmography in which he undertook to demonstrate, upon geometrical principles, the admirable proportions of the celestial orbs, and to explain the reasons of their number, magnitudes, and periodical revolutions ; a work abounding with clear and accurate mathematical reasoning. At Prague, whither he was driven, about the year 1600, by the troubles and persecutions of his own country, Kepler with his family, notwithstanding his personal abilities and merit, and his connexion with Tycho Brahe, were reduced to poverty. At length, through the indulgence of the Emperor, he was recalled to his native country, and taught mathematics, first at Lints, and afterwards at Sagan, in Silesia. He died in the year 1631. For the particulars of Kepler’s great discoveries and improvements in astronomy, we must refer the reader to his works. We cannot, however, omit to remark that this penetrating philosopher suggested hints in natural science which Des Cartes afterwards assumed as his own ; and discovered truths which served as a firm foundation for subsequent improvements in the great edifice of mathematical astronomy. Kepler found that every primary planet describes an elliptic orbit, in one focus of which is the sun ; that, in equal times, equal areas are described by a line drawn from the sun to the planet ; and that the squares of the periodical times of the planets are as the cubes of their distances from the sun. He was also acquainted with the principle of gravitation, and knew that revolving bodies endeavour to fly from their orbit in a tangent ; but, not knowing how to apply the principle of gravitation to the explanation of the laws of the celestial motions which he had discovered, he ascribed them to the influence of a distinct animating principle, or soul, which he supposed to reside in each planet. Contemporary with Kepler was Galileo Galilei,* a native of Flo¬ rence, whose astronomical inventions and discoveries have immortalized his name. Destined by his father for the medical profession, he was educated in the schools of Pisa; but he soon discovered so strong a predilection, and such uncommon talents, for astronomical studies, that he was permitted to follow the natural bias of his mind without any professional restraint. Having been well instructed in the Greek tongue, he read Euclid, Archi¬ medes, and other ancient mathematicians, in the original. His reputation as a mathematician became so great that the Duke of Tuscany appointed him, before he was twenty-six years of age, to the mathematical chair in the university of Pisa. Afterwards, in the year 1592, at the invitation of the republic of Venice, he removed to Padua. With the study of mathematics Galileo united that of physics, par¬ ticularly the doctrines of mechanics and optics. Being informed, in the year 1609, that Jansen, a Dutchman, had invented a glass by means of which distant objects appeared as if they were near, he turned his atten¬ tion to the subject ; and after several attempts to apply his ideas on the doctrine of refraction to practice, he invented and constructed an optical instrument, by means of which, as he himself says, objects appeared mag¬ nified a thousand times. Turning his Telescope towards the heavens, he discovered unheard-of wonders. On the surface of the moon he saw lofty mountains and deep valleys. The milky-way he discovered to be a * Viviani Vit. Gal. Act. Phil. v. iii. p. 261. 400. 632 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. crowded assemblage of fixed stars, invisible to the naked eye. Venus he found to vary, in its phases, like the moon. The figure of Saturn he ob¬ served to be oblong, consisting of three distinct parts. Jupiter he saw surrounded with four moons, which he named Medicean stars. And on the sun’s disk he perceived spots, from the motion of which he inferred, that the sun revolves about its axis. The book in which these wonderful discoveries were recorded Galileo dedicated to the Duke of Tuscany, who was so delighted with his countryman’s ingenuity and success, that he wrote him a congratulatory letter, and gave him the title of the philosopher and mathematician of Tuscany. The whole astronomical world applauded his attempts ; although not a few were secretly inclined to suspect that his supposed discoveries were only the amusing dreams of a brilliant imagination. Galileo now began to inquire to what useful purpose his new discoveries might be applied ; and soon perceived that, by means of observations which he was now able to make upon the satellites of Jupiter, geographical longitudes might be found. He engaged the Duke of Tuscany to apprize the King of Spain of the great benefits which navigation might derive from this discovery ; but no regard was paid to the suggestion. A comet appearing in the year 1618, Galileo, in order to correct the prevailing errors of philosophers upon the subject of celestial wrote a treatise, which he called Systema Cosmicum, “ The System of the World,” in which he showed the perfect agreement of the Copernican system with the appearances of nature. The publication of this treatise, though preceded by another in which it was proved, from the authority of the fathers and other orthodox divines, that the language of scripture is not to be strictly followed on questions merely physical, raised a general alarm among the bigots of the Romish church. This incomparable phi¬ losopher was, in 1615, cited before the court of inquisition, accused of heresy, and thrown into prison. W’^ell knowing that any justification of himself, or explanation of his doctrine, would be fruitless, Galileo retracted the obnoxious tenet, that the sun stands still ; and, after five months’ con¬ finement, was released. His work was censured and prohibited. In 1636 this ingenious and industrious philosopher resumed his design of measuring geographical distances in longitude, and communicated his plan to the States General of the United Provinces. By their order, the plan was examined, and the necessary calculations were made for drawing the tables ; but a misfortune which at this time happened to Galileo in¬ terrupted the laudable design : after the astronomical labours of twenty- seven years, this useful philosopher lost his sight. The papers which he had drawn up were sent to Holland, and it was still hoped that he might furnish further instructions towards completing the design ; but, about the beginning of the year 1642, a slow fever, occasioned by the pain which he suffered in his eyes and limbs, released him from envy and persecution. The light which Galileo cast upon natural philosophy by his astronomical inventions and improvements, which are doubtless in a great measure to be ascribed to his knowledge of mathematics, entitle him to a place in the first class of mathematical philosophers. He discovered that, in the de¬ scent of falling bodies, the spaces described are as the squares of the times; and that the motion of projectiles is in the curve of a parabola. From the time of Galileo the practice of applying mathematics to the improvement of physical knowledge became general ; and many excellent geometricians arose, who subjected the phenomena of nature to mathema¬ tical calculation. Gregory de St. Vincent, who enlarged the boundaries of Chap. 3. S. 3. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 633 the higher geometry, applied tlie properties of the hyperbola to astronomy. Des Cartes, Wallis, Huygens, and others, pursued a similar track. Since the sublime inventions of the Differential Calculus by Leibnitz, and of the Method of Fluxions by Newton, natural philosophy has received continual improvement by the labours of Leibnitz, L’Hospital, Varignon, the Ber- nouillis, Cotes, Saunderson, Maclaurin, and other eminent mathematicians. But the first luminary in this bright constellation, by the universal consent of philosophers, is the immortal Newton. Isaac Newton* was born at Woolstrope, in Lincolnshire, in the year 1642. He received his first instruction at the grammar-school at Gran¬ tham. He gave early indications of that sublime genius which afterwards performed such wonders, in his insatiable thirst after knowledge, and the almost intuitive facility with which he first conceived the theorems of Eu¬ clid. Though not inattentive to classical studies, he directed the chief exertions of his penetrating and exalted understanding towards mathe¬ matical science, in which, not contented with a perfect comprehension of whatever had been already done by others, he was wonderfully assiduous and successful in investigating new truths. The University of Cambridge boasts the honour of having educated Newton. His first preceptor was the celebrated geometrician Isaac Barrow. In 1667, Newton took his degree of Master of Arts, and was soon after¬ wards admitted Fellow of Trinity college, and appointed Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, In 1688 he was chosen representative in the convention parliament for the university, and continued to adorn this high station till the dissolution of this parliament in the year 1701 ; he was also appointed Master of' the Mint, and in this post rendered signal service to the public. In the year 1703 he M'as elected President of the Royal Society, and remained in that office as long as he lived. Whilst Newton gave many proofs of his astonishing capacity for mathe¬ matical researches, he showed himself possessed of a mind equally capable of extending the knowledge of nature, by the reports which he made to the Royal Society of many curious and important experiments in natural philosophy. In the year 1671 his papers on the properties of light were read to that society, from which it appeared that colour, which had hitherto been explained by ingenious but unsupported hypotheses, was in fact owing to a property in the rays of light hitherto unobserved, their different degrees of refrangibility. These papers were afterwards completed; and, in the year 1704, the whole was published in three books, under the general title of “Optics; or, a Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections, and Colours of Light.” The result of this great philosopher’s successful endeavours to subject the phenomena of nature to the laws of mathematics, was first communi¬ cated to the public in the year 1687, in the immortal work entitled Phi- losophice naturalis Principia mathematical “ Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy : ” this was succeeded by several treatises purely mathe¬ matical, in which the wonderful genius of this great geometrician is further displayed. His method of Fluxions was first published in 1704. In the midst of his philosophical and mathematical labours, Newton found leisure to attend to critical inquiries. He wrote a treatise “On the Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms;” in which, from a diligent comparison of various notes of time in ancient writers with each other, and with * Elogc, par Fontenelle. Pemberton’s Review, praef. Hist, of the Royal Soci Life of Newton, Lond. 1728. Biog. Brit. Gen. Diet. 634 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. astronomical 'phenomena, he concludes that, in former systems of chro¬ nology, the more remote events of ancient history are placed too far back¬ wards. He also wrote commentaries on Daniel, and on the Revelations.* Notwithstanding the strenuous exertion of the faculties, which the pro¬ found researches of this philosopher must have required, he lived to the eighty-fifth year of his age. This glory of the British nation, and orna¬ ment of human nature, left the world in the year 1727. During his life he rose to higher reputation, and after his death obtained a greater name, than had been the lot of any former philosopher. The epitaph under his statue well expresses his singular merit ; it is as follows : H. S. E. IsAACus Newton, Eques Auratus, Qui Animi Vi prope divina, PJanetarum Motus, Figuras, Cometarum Semitas, Oceani jEstus, Siia Mathesi Facem prseferente. Primus demonstravit. Radiorum Lucis Dissimilitudines, Colorum inde nascentium Proprietates, Quas nemo antea vel suspicatus erat, Pervestigavit. Naturae, Antiquitatis, S. Scripturae, Sedulus, sagax, fidus Interpres, Dei O. M. Majestatem Philosophia asseruit, Evangelii Simplicitatem Moribus expressit. Sibi Gratulentur Mortales, Tale tanturaque extitisse Humani Generis Decus, Natus 25 Dec. A. E. 1642. Obiit20 Mar. 1726. (a) (a) Here lies interred ISAAC NEWTON, Knight, Who, With an Energy of Mind almost divine. Guided by the Light of Mathematics purely his own, First demonstrated The Motions and Figures of the Planets, The Paths of Comets, And the Causes of the Tides ; Who discovered. What before his Time no one had even suspected, That Rays of Light are differently refrangible. And That this is the Cause of Colours ; And who was A diligent, penetrating, and faithful Interpreter Of Nature, Antiquity, and the Sacred Writings. In his Philosophy He maintained the Majesty of the Supreme Being; In his Manners He expressed the Simplicity of the Gospel. Let Mortals congratulate themselves, That the World has seen So great and excellent a Man, The Glory of Human Nature. He was born Dec. 25, 1642. Died March 20, 1726. * Newton’s Works were published by Dr. Horsley, since Bishop of St. David's, in 1784. 5 vols. 4 to. Chap. 3. S. 3. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 635 To give the reader a perfect idea of the philosophy of Newton, would be to conduct him through every part of his philosophical works. We must content ourselves with a brief account of the design and plan of his Principia, and a few miscellaneous observations chiefly extracted from the Queries subjoined to his Optics. Dissatisfied with the hypothetical grounds on which former philosophers, particularly Des Cartes, had raised the structure of natural philosophy, Newton adopted the manner of philosophising introduced by Lord Bacon, and determined to raise a system of natural philosophy on the basis of experiment. He laid it down as a fundamental rule, that nothing is to be assumed as a principle, which is not established by observation and expe¬ rience ; and that no hypothesis is to be admitted into physics, except as a question, the truth of which is to be examined by its agreement with appearances. “Whatever,” says he,* “ is not deduced from phenomena is to be called an hypothesis ; and hypotheses, whether physical or meta¬ physical, whether of occult qualities or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy.” In this philosophy, propositions are drawn ^rom phenomena f and are rendered general by induction. This plan of philosophising he pursued in two different methods, the Analytic and the Synthetic; collecting from certain phenomena the forces of nature and the more simple law's of these forces, and then proceeding, on the founda¬ tion of these, to establish the rest. In explaining, for example, the system of the world, he first proves from experience that the power of gravitation belongs to all bodies ; then, assuming this as an established principle,, he demonstrates, by mathematical reasoning, that the earth and sun, and all the planets, mutually attract each other, and that the smallest parts of matter in each have their several attractive forces, which are as their quantities of matter, and which, at different distances, are inversely as the squares of their distances. In investigating the theorems of the Principia, Newton made use of his own analytical method of fluxions ; but, in explaining his system, he has followed the synthetic method of the ancients, and demonstrated the theorems geometrically. The leading design of the Principia is from certain phenomena of motion to investigate the forces of nature, and then from these forces to demonstrate the manner in which other phenomena are 23roduced. The former is the end towards which the general propositions in the first and second books are directed ; the third book affords an example of the latter, in the explanation of the system of the world. The laws of motion, which are the foundation of the Newtonian system, are these three : 1. Every body perseveres in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a right line, unless compelled, by some foi’ce impressed upon it, to change its state. 2. The change of motion is proportional to the force impressed, and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impressed. 3. To every action an equal reaction is always opposed ; or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are equal, and in contrary directions. On the grounds of these laws, and certain corollaries deducible from them by the help of geometrical principles and reasonings, Newton, in the first book, demonstrates in what manner centripetal forces may be found ; what is the motion of bodies in eccentric conic sections ; how, from given foci, elliptic, parabolic, and hyperbolic orbits may be found; how the orbits are to be found when neither focus is given ; how the motions may Princip. 1. iii. Gtn. Schol. 636 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. be found in given orbits ; what are the laws of the rectilineal ascent and descent of bodies ; how the orbits of bodies revolving by means of any centripetal force may be found ; what is the motion of bodies in moveable orbits, and what the motion of the apsides ; what is the motion of bodies in given superfices, and the reciprocal motion of pendulums ; what are the motions of the bodies tending towards each other with centripetal forces ; and what the attractive forces of bodies spherical or not spherical. In the second book, Newton treats of the motion of bodies which are resisted in the ratio of their velocities; of the motion of bodies resisted in the dupli¬ cate ratio of their velocities ; of the motion of bodies resisted partly in the ratio of the velocities, and partly in the duplicate of the same ratio ; of the circular motion of bodies in resisting mediums ; of the density and com¬ pression of fluids ; of the motion and resistance of pendulums ; of the motion of fluids, and the resistance made to projected bodies ; of motion propagated through fluids ; and of the circular motion of fluids. By the propositions mathematically demonstrated in these books, chiefly those of the first three sections, the author, in the third book, derives from the celestial phenomena, the forces of gravitation with which bodies tend towards the sun and the several planets. He tlien proceeds, by other propositions, which are also mathematical, to deduce from these forces the motions of the planets, the comets, the moon, and the tides ; to ascertain the magnitude and form of the planets ; and to explain the cause of the precession of the equinoxes. To this outline of the Principia, we shall add the following miscellaneous observations, which may serve as a specimen of the opinions of Newton. The main business of natural philosophy is to argue from phenomena, without feigning hypotheses, and to deduce causes from effects till we come to the very first cause, which certainly is not mechanical. No more causes of natural things ought to be admitted, than are known to exist and are sufficient to explain their appearances. Therefore natural effects of the same kind are to be ascribed to the same cause. Those properties of bodies which do not admit of intension or re¬ mission, and which are found to belong to all bodies upon which ex¬ periments can be made, are to be regarded as properties common to all bodies. It is probable, that all the phenomena of nature depend upon certain forces, by which, from causes not yet known, the particles of bodies are either mutually impelled towards each other, and cohere according to regular figures, or mutually repel and recede from each other. Bodies and light mutually act upon one another. All 'fixed bodies, when heated beyond a certain degree, emit light and shine ; and this emission is performed by the vibrating motion of their parts. Fire is a body heated so hot as to emit light copiously ; and flame is a vapour, fume, or exhalation, heated red hot, that is, so hot as to shine. The rays of light, in falling upon the bottom of the eye, excite vibrations in the tunica retina, which, being propagated along the solid fibres of the optic nerve to the brain, cause the sense of seeing. The heat of a warm room is conveyed through a vacuum by the vibra¬ tions of a much subtiler medium than air, which, after the air is drawn out, remains in the vacuum. It is by the vibrations of this medium, that light is refracted and reflected, and heat communicated. This medium is ex¬ ceedingly more elastic and active, as well as subtle, than the air ; it readily Chap. 3. S. 3. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 637 pervades all bodies, and is by its elastic force expanded through the heavens. Its density is greater in free and open space than in compact bodies, and increases as it recedes from them. This medium, growing denser and denser perpetually as it passes from the celestial bodies, may, by its elastic force, cause the gravity of those great bodies towards one another, and of their parts towards the bodies. Vision, hearing, and ani¬ mal motion, may be performed by the vibrations of this subtle elastic fluid, or ether. The small particles of bodies have certain powers, virtues, or forces, by w'hich they act, at a distance, upon one another, for producing a great part of phenomena of nature ; as in the attractions of gravity, magnet¬ ism, and electricity. The smallest particles of matter may cohere by the strongest attractions, and compose bigger particles of weaker virtue ; and many of these may cohere and compose larger particles, whose virtue is still weaker, and so on for divers successions, until the progressions end in the biggest parti¬ cles, on which the operations in chemistry, and the colours of natural bodies, depend, and which by cohering compose bodies of a sensible mag¬ nitude. The particles of different bodies cohere with different degrees of force, whence some are volatile, easily rarefying with heat, and condensing with cold, whilst others are fixed, and not separable without a strong heat or fermentation. Those particles recede from one another with the greatest force, and are with most difficulty brought together ; which, upon contact, cohere most strongly. Nature is very conformable to herself and very simple ; performing all the great motions of the heavenly bodies by the attraction of gravity which intercedes those bodies, and almost all the small ones of their particles, by some other attractive and repelling powers which intercede the particles. Tlie vis inertioe is a passive principle, by which bodies persist in their motion or rest, receive motion in proportion to the force impressing it, and resist as much as they are resisted. By this principle alone there never could have been any motion in the world. Some other principle was necessary for putting bodies into motion ; and now they are in motion, some other principle is necessary for preserving the motion : for, from the various composition of two motions, it is very certain that there is not always the same quantity of motion in the world. Since the variety of motion which we find in the world is always de¬ creasing through resistance, there is a necessity of recruiting it by active principles ; such as are the cause of gravity and of fermentation, to which almost all the motion we meet with in the world is owing. It is probable that God in the beginning formed matter in solid, massive, hard, impenetrable, moveable particles, of such sizes and figures, and with such other properties, and in such proportion to space, as most conduced to the end for which he formed them ; and that these primary particles, being solids, are incomparably harder than any porous bodies compounded of them ; even so very hard, as never to wear, or break in pieces, or be liable to a change in their nature and texture. It is also probable that the changes of corporeal things consists only in various separations and new associations and motions of these permanent particles, produced by cer¬ tain active principles, such as that of gravity, and that which causes fer¬ mentation and the cohesion of bodies. By the help of these principles, all material things seem to have been composed of the hard and solid particles above-mentioned, variously 638 OF MODERN ATTEMPTS TO IMPROVE Book X. dated in the first creation by the counsel of an intelligent agent : for it became him who created them to set them in order ; and it is unphiloso- phical to seek for any other origin of the world, or to pretend that it might arise out of a chaos by the mere laws of nature; though, being once formed, it may continue by those laws for many ages. For while comets move in very eccentric orbs, in all manner of positions, blind fate could never make all the planets move one and the same way in orbs concentric, some incon¬ siderable irregularities excepted, which may have arisen from the mutual actions of comets and planets upon one another, and which will be apt to increase till this system wants a reformation. Such a wonderful uniformity in the planetary system must be allowed the effect of choice ; and so must the uniformity in the bodies of animals. Was the eye contrived without skill in optics, or the ear without knowledge of sounds ? The first con¬ trivance of those very artificial parts of animals, the various organs of sense and motion, and the instinct of brutes and insects, can be the effect of nothing else than the wisdom and skill of a powerful everliving agent, who, being in all places, is more able by his will to move the bodies within his boundless uniform sensorium, and thereby to form and reform the parts of the universe, than we aTe by our will to move the parts of our own bodies. And yet we are not to consider the world as the body of God; or the several parts thereof as the parts of God ; he is an uniform being, void of organs, members, or parts, and they are his creatures, subordinate to him and subservient to his will. God has no need of organs ; he being every where present to the things themselves. It appears from phenomena, that there is a being incorporeal, living, intelligent, omnipresent, who in infinite space, as it were in his sensory, sees the things themselves intimately ; and thoroughly perceives them, and comprehends them wholly by their immediate presence to himself. This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only arise from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being; and if the fixed stars be centres of similar systems, these, being all formed by like wisdom, must be subject to the dominion of one ; especially since the light of the fixed stars is of the same nature with the light of the sun, and all systems mutually give and receive light. God governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as the Lord of the universe. The Supreme Deity is an eternal, infinite, and absolutely perfect being, omnipotent and omniscient ; that is, his duration extends from eternity to eternity, and his presence from infinity to infinity : he governs all things, and knows all things which exist or can be known. He is not eternity or infinity, but eternal and infinite ; he is not duration or space, but he endures and is present ; he endures for ever, and is present everywhere. Since every portion of space is always, and every indivisible moment of duration is everywhere, certainly the Maker and Lord of all things cannot be never or nowhere. God is omnipresent, not virtually only, but substantially ; for power cannot subsist without substance. In him all things are contained and move, but without reciprocal affection : God is not affected by the motion of bodies, nor do bodies suffer resistance from the omnipresence of God. It is universally allowed that God exists necessarily ; and by the same necessity he exists always and everywhere. Whence he is throughout similar, all eye, all ear, all brain, all arm, all pow'er of perceiving, under¬ standing, and acting ; but in a manner not at all human ; in a manner not at all corporeal ; in a manner to us altogether unknown. As a blind man has no idea of colours, so we have no idea of the manner in which the Chap. 3. S. 3. NATURAL PHILOSOPHY. 639 most wise God perceives and understands all things He is entirely without body and bodily form, and therefore can neither be seen, nor heard, nor touched ; nor ought he to be worshipped under any corporeal representation. We have ideas of his attributes, but what the substance of any thing is we are wholly ignorant. We see only the figures and colours of bodies ; we hear only sounds ; we touch only external super- fices ; Ave smell only odours ; we taste only savours ; of their internal substances we have no knowledge by any sense, or by any reflex act of the mind : much less have we any idea of the substance of God. We know him only by his properties and attributes, by the most wise and excellent structure of things, and by final causes; and we reverence and worship him on account of his dominion. A God without dominion, providence, and design, is nothing else but Fate and Nature. Many learned mathematicians and celebrated writers have attempted to illustrate and explain diflFerent parts of the writings of Newton ; and, on the other hand, some have ventured to call in question the ground of his philosophy. It has been objected, that Attraction, the first principle in the Newtonian philosophy, is in reality one of those occult qualities which Newton pro¬ fesses to reject ; but to this it is satisfactorily replied, that the power of gravity is not an unknown cause, since its existence is proved from the phenomena. The Newtonian philosophy does not require that the cause of gravitation should be explained : it merely assumes an incontrovertible fact, that bodies gravitate towards each other according to a known law ; and, by the help of geometrical reasoning, deduces from this fact certain conclusions. Newton himself gives this explanation of the use which is made in his philosophy of the principle of gravitation ; and expressly asserts, that it is enough for him that gravity really exists, though its cause be not certainly known. I use the word Attraction,” says he, “ for any endea¬ vour of bodies to approach each other; whether that endeavour arises from the action of bodies mutually seeking each other, or mutually agitating each other by spirits emitted ; or whether it arises from the action of the ether, or air, or any other medium whatsoever, corporeal or incorporeal, in any manner impelling bodies floating therein towards each other. In the same general sense, I use the word Impulse ; not considering the species and physical qualities of forces, but their mathematical quantities and pro¬ portions, consequent upon any condition supposed : then, in physics, we compare these proportions with the phenomena of nature, that we may know what conditions of those forces answer to the several kinds of attrac¬ tive bodies.” In fine, no words can be more explicit than those in which’ Newton disclaims all reliance upon hypothetical principles or occult quali¬ ties, and makes experience the only foundation of his philosophy. But we are stepping beyond the province of the historian. The cursory view we have taken of the doctrine of Newton, and of what was done by his predecessors in experimental philosophy to improve the knowledge of nature, may suffice to show the vast extent and importance of this branch of philosophy, and to induce the reader to inquire what discoveries have been made, in the boundless field of nature, since the days of Newton : and further than this it is not our business to proceed ; for we undertook, not to delineate minutely the several regions of philosophy, but to draw a GENERAL MAP of the PHILOSOPHICAL WORLD. 640 APPENDIX. HINTS RELATIVE TO THE MODERN STATE OF PHILOSOPHY IN ASIA. I. The inhabitants of Asia are, in general, with respect to religion, either Mahometans or Pagans. Many traces of opinions formerly received from the Saracens are to be found among the Persian and Indian Mahometans. There are still remaining in Persia writings of Greek and Latin philoso¬ phers, translated into the Persian language.* * * § The ancient Oriental doctrines are taught among the Susians, who assert that the universe is produced from the substance of Deity, and make God the material and formal cause of all things, and creation and destruction the expansion and retraction of his substance; a doctrine more similar to the philosophy of Zoroaster than to the theology of Mahomet.f Of the Tartars, those who border upon the Turkish empire are Maho¬ metans ; the religion of those who inhabit the more remote regions is un¬ known. Their priests are called Lamse, and their high priest, Dalai Lama. They believe their Great Lama to be immortal ; and some assert that he is the great philosopher Foe returned to life. This philosopher is, through almost all Asia, said to have frequently appeared among men. It is pro¬ bable that his doctrines penetrated into Tartary. J Through the extensive regions of India, the grossest superstition and ignorance prevail. From comparing the theological tenets of different Indian nations it appears, that they commonly embrace the enianative system, which supposes innumerable Divine natures proceeding from the fountain of Deity, and presiding over different parts of the universe. This doctrine was probably disseminated by some ancient impostor, who pre¬ tended to be himself a Divine emanation of this kind, and whom his superstitious followers have worshipped as a Divinity. § If the account given of Buddas, the celebrated Indian philosopher, be compared with what is said by the modern inhabitants of Siam concerning Somonacodom, and by the Chinese and Japanese of Xekias, who after his death was called Foe, or Fotoki, little doubt will remain that these are only different names of the same philosopher, who fascinated the whole northern and eastern regions of Asia, as well as part of the southern, with his pantheistic doctrine. It is probable that he lived about 600 years * Chardin’s Travels, p. iii. p. 108. f Bernier Suite des Memoires sur I’Emp. de Mogoul, p. 202, 203. Bayle Diet. t. iv. p. 254. Art. Spinoza. Burnet, Archseol. App. X Mosheim, Hist. Eccl. Tartar. Duhalde, Hist. Chin. t. iv. p. 407. § Coni’. Locke Ess. 1. i. e. iii. sect. 15. La Croze Christ. Ind. 1. vi. p. 645. Loubere Itin. Siam. t. ii. p. 395. Bayle, Art. Rugger. Not. D. Burnet, Arch. p. 543. Univ. Hist, de Siamens. APPENDIX. 641 ♦ before Christ. There is little doubt that he first appeared in the southern part of India, among the nations situate on the borders of the Indian ocean, and thence disseminated his philosophy, by means of his disciples, to all India. It is related that he spent twelve years in solitude, where he was instructed by the Tolopoin, called by the ancients Hylobii, that is. Silvan Hermits ; and that, in his thirtieth year, he devoted himself to contemplation, and attained to the intuitive knowledge of the first princi¬ ples of all things ; from which time he took the name of Foe, which sig¬ nifies something more than human. His mystical philosophy he is said to have delivered to innumerable disciples, under the veil of allegory. The Japanese add that, in his contemplations, during which his body remained unmoved, and his senses unaffected by any external objeet, he received Divine Revelations, which he eornmunicated to his disciples.* * * § Buddas, or Xekias, in his exoteric doctrine, taught the difference between good and evil; the immortality of the souls of men and brutes; different degrees of rewards and punishments in a future world ; and the final advancement of the wicked, after various migrations, to the habita¬ tions of the blessed. Amidas, who aceording to the Chinese is Xekias himself, presides in these habitations, and is the mediator through whose intercession bad men obtain a mitigation of their punishment. These dogmas are contained in an ancient book, ealled Kio, which all the Indians beyond the Ganges, who follow the doctrine of Xekias, reeeive as sacred, and which is illustrated by innumerable commentaries. -j- Very different was the doctrine which Xekias, at the close of his life, delivered to his esoteric disciples. He instructed them that vacuum or void is the prineiple and end of all things ; simple, infinite, eternal, but destitute of power, intelligence, or any other similar attribute ; and that to be like this principle, by extinguishing all passion and affection, and re¬ maining absorbed in the most profound contemplation, without any exercise of the reasoning faculty, is the perfection of happiness. The first principle in this system cannot be pure nihility, which admits of no properties ; probably, it is first matter, without variable qualities, whence all things are supposed to arise, which is not to be perceived by the senses, but eontemplated as the latent Divinity, infinitely distant from the nature of visible things, yet the origin of all substances. The emanations from this fountain became, in the popular theology, objects of the grossest superstition and idolatry.;}; The doctrine of Foe, or Xekias, was embraced by innumerable disciples. Among these, one of his most eminent successors was Tamo, a Chinese, who was so entirely devoted to contemplative enthusiasm, that he spent nine whole years in profound meditation, and was on this aceount deified § The Bramins assert that Xekias had neither father nor mother. No Indian city claims the honour of his birth. He seems to have been a foreigner from some neighbouring maritime country. As he first appeared as a philosopher in the southern part of India, it is probable that he was a Lybian, who had been instructed in the Egyptian mysteries, and who set¬ tled in India with some Egyptian colony. It is not improbable that, at the time when Cambyses conquered Egypt, and dispei’sed almost the whole * La Croze Christianism. Ind. I. vi. Bayle, Diet. art. Bracliraans. Soramonac. Kempfer. Hist. Jap. t. i. p. 56. t. ii. p. 59. f Kempfer. Arnold, in Add. ad Roger. Jan. Gent. c. 6. p. 579. Couplet. Diss. pr. ad Confuc. p. 31. Acta Erud. 1688. p. 257. J La Croze, 1. c. p. 652. Kempfer. Couplet. 1. c. § Minorelli Obs. in Juvenci Error.de Rebus Sin. p. 145. Kempfer. &c. 1. c. Univ. Hist. V. xxi. sect. 356. p. 637. 671. Semler. Pref. Univ. Hist. v. xxiii. Guyon, Hist, des Ind. Or. Par. 1744. T T APPENDIX. nation, this impostor passed over into India ; and, propagating his doctrine among an ignorant and superstitious people, became an object of universal veneration. II. On the coasts of Coromandel and Malabar, the Brachmans, or Bra- mins, a peculiar race, who boast of a Divine descent, are the theologians and philosophers of the country. They resemble, in many particulars, the ancient Therapeutae of Egypt. It is probable that the Bramins received their institutions from the Egyptians, at the time when Egypt came under the power of Greece, especially as the leaimed language of this race abounds with Greek words. These Indian priests claim the sole charge of religion, the law of which is contained in a sacred book called the Veda, which no laic is permitted to touch.* * * § Among the Malabars is a singular sect of Bramins called the theoretical, who, laying aside all idolatrous worship, give themselves up entirely to the most rigorous mortification ; affect enthusiastic ecstasy and quietism, and hope to resemble the Divine nature by putting off all animal passion, and remaining, as long as possible, in a state of perfect inaction both of body and mind. Other sects approach, in different degrees, towards atheism. The Malabars have some practical knovvledge of astronomy ; which they appear to have derived from the Egyptians, as they call the signs of the zodiac by the ancient Egyptian names, j- The substance of the Malabaric theology is that the Essence of Essences, or the Supreme Infinite Substance, wants figure, and cannot be compre¬ hended or moved ; that it fills all things ; possesses the highest wisdom, truth, knowledge, and purity ; is infinitely good and merciful ; creates and supports all things; and desires the happiness of man, which will be at¬ tained if this Great Being be truly loved and revered ; that he cannot be represented by any image, and his attributes alone can be expressed ; that he is only to be contemplated in a state of entire abstraction and tran¬ quillity of mind; and cannot be worshipped but through the medium of inferior divinities ; that, in creating the world, God separated the active and passive virtues, which had hitherto remained absorbed within himself; that the two principles, Tschiven, the masculine or active virtue, and Tscaddi, the feminine or passive virtue, were the parents of the other subordinate gods ; that the souls of brutes and men have the same origin, and, after being confined in one body for a time, pass into another; and that, on account of their common origin, it is unlawful for men to kill in¬ ferior animals. J These and many other tenets held by the Malabarian Indians evi¬ dently coincide with the ancient Oriental doctrine of emanation. The morality which sprung from this source is deeply tinctured with fanaticism and enthusiasm.§ * La Croze Hist. Christ. Ind. 1. vi. Roger. Jan. Nat. ad Gentil. Ziegenbalg. et Soc. Mission, relat. Malab. Burnet, Archaeol. p. 541. Bayle, Brachm. Fabr. Diss. de Brachm. Syllog. Opusc. p. 333. t Lettres Curieuses et Edifiantes. Rec. x. Rel. Miss. t. i. p. 200. 1022. I La Croze, p. 586 — 611. Roger, p. 249. 283. &c. Relat. Miss. p. 354. 604. 895, &c. Birrnet, Arcli, App. § Barthrouherri, Sentfntiae Bramanse. APPENDIX. 643 111. Fohi was one of the first and most celebrated legislators of China; but little is known of the methods by which he civilized his country. An ancient book, called Yekin, w'hich is still preserved in China, is ascribed to Fohi; but it is written in hieroglyphics, and no one has been able to give a satisfactory explanation of its contents. The most probable conjec¬ ture is that of Leibnitz, that it was intended to teach the art of numeration. Several successive emperors carried forward the w'ork of civilization, par¬ ticularly by means of moral allegories, fables, and poems. The ancient Chinese wisdom is contained in two distinct collections called U-kim, “The Five Books,” and Su-cu, “The Four Books;” which, besides the enigmatical book of Fohi, contain laws, precepts, poems, memoirs of princes, and institutes of rites and ceremonies. These have been com¬ mented upon by Confucius, Memcius, and other philosophers.* To this first period of the Chinese philosophy succeeded another, in which it assumed a more artificial form, under Li Lao Kuin, or Laotan, who flourished six hundred years before Christ. He delivered many useful precepts of morality, and obtained great authority both among the Chinese and Japanese. The most celebrated ancient philosopher of China is Con-fu-cu, or Confucius. He was born of an illustrious family, in the reign of the Emperor Lu, about five hundred and fifty years before Christ. At fifteen years of age he engaged in the study of the ancient learning of his country, and discovered such uncommon wisdom, that he was early advanced to the office of minister of state. Finding all his endeavours to reform the cor¬ rupt manners of the court ineffectual, he retired from his public station, and instituted a school, in which he is said to have had several thousand disciples, to whom he taught morals, the art of reasoning, and the principles of policy. His life is said to have been in every respect woi’thy of the character of a philosopher. He lived to the age of seventy-three. j- By his sage counsels, his moral doctrine, and his exemplary conduct, he obtained an immortal name as the reformer of his country. After his death, his name was held in the highest veneration ; and his doctrine is still regarded among the Chinese as the basis of all moral and political wisdom. His family enjoys, by inheritance, the honourable title and office of Man¬ darins ; and religious honours are paid to his memory. It is nevertheless asserted by the missionaries of the Franciscan and Dominican orders that Confucius was either wholly unacquainted with, or purposely neglected the doctrine of a future life, and that in his moral system he paid little regard to religion. Confucius was followed by Mem-ko, or Memcius, (who flourished about three hundred j’^ears before Christ,) and other philosophers, who * Fouquet. Tab. Chron. Sin. Kortholt. de Phil. Sin. Leibn. App. advers. Germ. Theodic. Reimann. Sciagraph. Phil. Sin. Spizelius de Re liter. Sin. Bulfinger Specim. Doct. Vet. Sin. Grap. de Theol. Sin. Navarett. de Regno Sin. Renaud. et Minorell. Observ. ad Errores Juvencii de Reb. Sin. t Couplet. Diss. pr. ad Confuc. S. Bayer. Mus. Sin. t. ii. p. 214. 246. kempfer. t. ii. 1. iii. c. 6. p. 67. .. „ jj j J Spizel. de Pebus lit. Sin. p. 31. 119. Ep. Leibnitz, v. ii. p. 283. Bimdaeus de Superstit. de Mort. apud Sin. Anal. Phil. p. 287. Hist. Cultus Sinen. Col. 1700. Ant. de S. Maria, v. ii. Ep. Leibn. p. 275. Arnold. Prax. Mor. Jesuit, t. 3. 6. /. I.eibnitz. Praef. noviss. Sin. Clerici Silv. Phil. c. ii. sect. 7. T T 2 644 APPENDIX. wrote books of popular and useful learning. But in the third age after Con¬ fucius the Emperor Chi-hoam-ti, or Ching, ordered all philosophical books to be burned, and inflicted death upon many philosophers. A few remains of Chinese wisdom were, however, preserved ; and in the more enlightened dynasty of Han were brought to light. The destruction of ancient writings under Chi-hoam-ti renders all Chinese records doubtful which O are of earlier date than two hundred years before Christ.* * * § The third period of the ancient Chinese philosophy commences from the time when the doctrines of Foe, already dispersed through India, passed over to China. This happened about sixty years after the birth of Christ, when the idol Foe, under which the memory of Xekias is wor¬ shipped, was brought among the Chinese. This new superstition was accompanied with doctrines of morality, and with mystical precepts, which inculcated fanatical quietism as the only way to perfection. This fanaticism of Foe overspread the whole country like a deluge, and continues to this day. In the third century a peculiar sect arose, who gave themselves up entirely to the contemplation of the First Principle of Nature, and who thought that the nearer they approached to the perfect inaction of in¬ animate bodies, the more they resembled the Deity.f About the tenth century, two philosophers, Chem-cu and Chimci, appeared, who introduced metaphysical doctrines nearly resembling those of the Stoics; whence a new sect arose, called Ju-Kiao, or the Sect of the Learned. :|; This was the state of the Chinese philosophy when the Jesuit mission¬ aries, French mathematicians, and other Europeans, in the sixteenth cen¬ tury, visited China ; and for a long time obtained much attention and respect. The Emperor Kam-hy encouraged the study of European learning, particularly mathematics, anatomy, medicine, and astronomy. He himself, for several months, received daily instruction in astronomy from the mathematician Verbiest. European philosophers had free access to his empire and court ; but since his time little indulgence has been shown to Christian travellers. § The obscurity of the ancient Chinese books, the dubious credit of the reports brought to Europe by the Jesuit missionaries, and the imperfect acquaintance of Europeans with the Chinese language and writings, render it difficult to ascertain the present state of opinions in China. Their notion of Deity has been a subject of much dispute. Some assert that their Xang-ti signifies a supreme creator and ruler of the world; others ascribe to the Chinese a system of nature nearly approaching to atheism ; whilst others maintain their doctrine to be, that there is in the visible heavens a living and powerful nature, (like the soul in the body,) who has produced other secondary divinities, the rulers of the world, through whom the Supreme Deity is to be worshipped. Leibnitz is of opinion that the Li of the Chinese is the chaotic soul of the world, and their Taikie the soul of the formed universe ; in fine, the Deity of the Stoics. |1 The moral and political philosophy of the Chinese, as derived from Confucius, consists of detached maxims and precepts for the conduct of life. * Carpzov. de Memcio. Sin. Lips. 1743. Martinii, Hist. Sin. 1. vi. p. 240. Spizel. ]. c. p. 40. f Couplet, l. c. Minorelli, p. 147. % Leibn. Ep. ad Remond. Ep. t. ii. § Leibn. noviss. Sinica. Dentrecolles, Lettres edifiantes, Rec. 17. 23. II Martin. Hist. Sin. 1. i. c. 9. p. 16. Wolf, de Sapientia Sinica. Rcnaudot, Diss. Act. Pliil. V. ii. p, 785. Minorell. conir. Jiiv. p. 126. Piortbolt. Prcef. DuHalde, Hist. Chin. APPENDIX. 645 IV. The Japanese nation appears to be of equal antiquity with the Chinese. The first period of the history of both is equally fabulous. Fohi, the Chiuese legislator, is also celebrated by the Japanese as one of the founders of their monarchy. They honour the memory of Confucius. At the time when the doctrine of Xekias was introduced into China, the book Kio, containing the institutes of his philosophy, was brought out of India into Japan by a Xekian priest. The Jesuit Vilela, in 1562, writes from Japan that the Japanese superstitions are the same with those of the In¬ dian Bramins, and were received from an Indian teacher of the kingdom of Siam ; and that their temples are similar to those which he had seen in the island of Ceylon; which confirms what was before observed concerning the origin of Xekias.* If the Japanese superstitions be compared with those of Egypt, it will appear exceedingly probable that they originated with the Egyptian priests, and passed over from Egypt to India, and thence to China and Japan. * Acosta de Rebus a Soc. Jes. in Oriente Gest. Dilling. 1571, 8vo. Epist. Japan, a Maffeioedit. Crasseti, Hist. Eccl. Jap. Kempfer. Hist. Jap. Bayle, art. Japan. FINIS. 4 . f 1/ ’ «i'9 fjK'vj '^.r- /. .-t‘ , - . .' ,;■ 'VV' ,' ■‘••il ■ ; ■’ ,5V' I !' s /. .- . /’■•■ • • .■' ■ ‘’’‘M *■ ' ' ■ ■ '■'■ ■ ' ' ‘ 4‘',\ r ;•. n ■r'.A'«/.> > >' 1 ■ '.i/ ^vfrnl^ , \ MV. I ;4'./ tvf , (,»».; , . '■•' ' ■ ‘ ‘.i’-O , 'V J' ^ S? ’ ..Vlflvn.iK'i.-ri ^ • . • ;, .f,-! // | J.tfiiil 1 > ’ i ^ ’ V' aA :■! ;ij '•: f-:^ 'h I ■,•! . '.< ., > ')<' ; ,' ' jjJii < ■ yjUtk.i ,i i/'i if' i 'l_ ■■ .( vv i*- K ■ ; H'M.vi ,• -..i, jjyii, K ••'t -*^| w* **!• r ; , 'V ■ ■ ■ ‘V .AjiIm;. , { 1 lit' ■ ► I, I, ; • ' , , ' • ... t ‘*‘ ■ * a ■-' ' . »' • ■'■'■•■•■ .' ■ ' r -■wif.'l i ■■{n».'j«.' ', . .f ,J ■•K'Wi Jixi- :■- .A 1 ■' t-- -... i.. ■■ - ■•■• . •*' •v ‘^^r^ « ' j ' V 'It'’ '!’>,• t . ■ . I . SV- ' ' . ' , ' ' i .’ . ffr}, , . ■: i«ri ■:•■•'.'! '' -I'** , ^’' ' ■ t •• • X* 'A. ><*»<' . tf * »*. '» ■t ■ . . . ^ ■ -‘A .< » / < INDEX. A Page Abaris, a Sc3'thian philosopher . . 59 whether a disciple of Pytha¬ goras . 59 Abbo, a learned monk of the tenth century . 487 Abelard, a Scholastic, his life and writings .... 496 — 499 a popular preceptor . . 497 his amour with Heloise . 497 persecuted for heresy . 497 Aben Esra, a Spanish J ew of profound erudition^ . 407 Abstinence of the Pythagorean fra¬ ternity . 218 Academy, whence the name derived 118 the Old, its character 118 — 137 the Middle, its origin and doctrine . . . 140 — 142 the New, its origin and doctrine . . . 143 — 146 difference between it and the "Sceptic sect . . . 289 Old, had many followers in Rome . 297 Middle, its advocates in Rome . 298 Adam Kadman, the first emanation in the Cabbalistic system .... 415 Adelard, an English monk who stu¬ died Arabic . 491 TEdesius, an Eclectic philosopher . 334 jEgidius de Columna, a Scholastic, the most profound doctor . . . 505 iEons of the Gnostic system, male and female . 379 — 383 jEschines, a disciple of Socrates . . 103 author of Socratic dialogues 104 iEsop, his life . 78 his fables . 79 Agla, a Hebrew name of God, applied to superstitious uses . 411 Agobard, a philosopher of the ninth century . 485 Agrippa, amystical Platonist, his life, character and writings . . 543 — 545 Air, according to Anaximenes, the first principle . 84 Akibha, a Jewish doctor, author of the Cabbalistic book J ezirah 405 his superstition .... 405 Al-Ashari, an Arabian philosopher and theologian . 427 Albert the Great, a Scholastic monk, famous for his knowledge in mechanics and chemistry . 501 the Great, his voluminous writings . 501 Albert, a Scriptural philosopher . . 564 Al-Calam, the philosophical theology of the Mahometans . 424 Alchymy, unknown to the Egyptians 41 Alcinous, author of an introduction to Plato . 321 Alcmseon, a Pythagorean, his tenets . 232 said to have first dissected a dead body .... 232 Alcuin, a learned Englishman in the seventh century . 481 Alexander contemned by Diogenes . 176 the influence of his fortune upon philosophy . . . 291 flattered by Anaxarchus . 253 jEgeus, a preceptor to Nero, a Peripatetic . . 351 Aphrodisasus, a famous commentator on Aristotle 351 Alexandria, the Grecian philosophy transferred thither . 291 Alexandrian library burned by the Saracens . . 4 burned by order of the Caliph Omar 419 Al-Farabi, an Arabian philosopher, of a gloomy temper . 426 Alfred, a learned king, and a patron of learning and philosophy 482 a Scholastic ... . . 501 Al-Gazel, an Arabian theologian, his character and writings .... 429 Al- Hasan, an Arabian astronomer . 423 Allegorical method of teaching among the Chaldeans . 16 Egyptians . 39 Druids . . 50 Greeks . . 62 interpretation introduced among the Jews . . . 385 its effect in corrupting Christianity .... 444 method of teaching admit¬ ted by Plato .... 125 648 INDEX. Page Allegorical method of teaching em¬ ployed by Pythagoras .... 220 Al-Kendi, an Arabian philosopher . 425 instance of his moderation 426 Al- Mamon, an enlightened and liberal Caliph . 421 Al-Mansor, a Saracen Caliph, a patron of learning . 420 Almaric, an heretical Parisian precep¬ tor, censured for studying Aristotle 491 Al-Rasi, an Arabian philosopher and physician . . 427 Alsted, H. a Scriptural philosopher . 564 Amelius, a pupil of Plotinus . . . 331 Ammonius, the Peripatetic . . . 351 Ammonius Sacca, the founder of the Eclectic system . . 327 Sacca, probable that he re¬ nounced the Christian faith 327 Sacca, many mysteries taught by him to his select disciples . . . 328 Amphion, the fable concerning him explained . 67 Anacharsis, a Scythian philosopher . 59 his interview with Solon at Athens .... 60 his return to his own country . 60 his maxims .... 60 Anatolius, a Christian father, head of a Peripatetic school . . 464 a mathematician . . . 464 Anatomical dissection practised by Democritus . 247 Anaxagoras, an Ionic philosopher, his life . 84 persecuted for new opinions 85 his apophthegms .... 85 his doctrine concerning mind and matter . . 86, 87 preceptor to Socrates . . 89 Anaxarchus, an Eleatic philosopher 253 A naxilaus, a follower of Pythagoras . 314 Anaximander, the first public teacher of philosophy inGreece 83 his doctrine .... 83 mathematics and astro¬ nomy improved by him 83 Anaximenes, an Ionic philosopher, his doctrine . 84 Angels, doctrineofthe Jews concern¬ ing them . 416 Anicerris, a Cyrenaic philosopher . 108 Animals, according to Dos Cartes, automata . 603 how produced, according to Epicurus . 272 Annius, a monk, the author of the Chaldaic history ascribed to Berosus 1 9 Anselm, a subtle metaphysician of the eleventh century . 489 Antichthon of Pythagoras .... 225 Antigonus Sochceus, the parent ofthe .Sadducean doctrine . 388 Antiochus, the^ast preceptor of the Platonic school in Greece . . . 146 Page Antipater, a Stoic . . 207 Antipodes admitted by Pythagoras 225 denied by Epicurus . . 272 Antisthenes, founder ofthe Cynic sect, his life . 171 his school instituted . . 172 his maxims .... 174 Antoninus, M. A. the Emperor, his philosophical character 367—369 his respect for his pre¬ ceptors . 367 causes of his persecution of the Christians . . 368 his meditations, a valu¬ able work .... 368 to be explained only upon Stoic principles . . 368 Apathy of the Stoics, its foundation. 184 ApollinarisOlfred, a commentator on Aristotle . 521 Apollonius Tyanaeus, his life . 316 — 319 an imitator of Pythagoras . 316 his travels 317, 318 his school at Ephesus. . 318 marvellous tales of him 318 his character . 318 therespectpaid to his memory 319 his writings and doctrines . 319 his doctrine partly Pythagoric, partly Heraclitan 320 x\pono (D’), a Scholastic .... 506 Apostles, Christian, improperly ranked among philosophers . . 442 Apostolic men, their writings . . 443 Apuleius, author of a summary ofthe Platonic doctrine . . . 322 the origin of his Apology and Golden Ass . . . 322 Aquinas, Thomas, the angelic doctor. his life . 501 Arabian writers, doubtful authorities 21 philosophers, their writings of little value . 438 Arabians, their ignorance before the time ofMahomet . 419 Arcesilaus, of the Middle Academy . 140 his generosity . . . . 141 his inebriety .... 141 his doctrine .... 142 Archelaus, an Ionic philosopher, his doctrine . 88 Archytas, a Pythagorean .... 237 the author of the Categories 238 his moral doctrine . . . 238 Arete, daughter of Aristippus. . . 108 Argyropulus, a Constantinopolitan, who fled to Italy . 520 Arimanius, a Persia* divinity, the cause of evil . 25 Aristobulus, an Alexandrian Jew, a corrupter of Jewish wisdom . . 386 INDEX. 649 Page Aristseus, successor of Pythagoras . 232 Aristippus, founder of the Cyrenaic sect . 105 causes of jealousy against him . 105 his attention to dress and elegant manners . . 106 his travels . 106 his apophthegms and re¬ partees . . . 107, 108 his doctrine .... 108 Aristophanes, his allusion to the Theogonies .... 68 his ridicule of Socrates . 96 Aristotle, and his philosophy, history of . 147 his birth and education under Plato . . 147, 148 preceptor to Alexander 148 furnished by Alexander with articles of natural history . 149 institution of his school,^ the Lyceum . . . 149 his method of instruction 150 accused of impiety . . 150 his death . 150 his character .... 151 his writings, their charac¬ ter and fate . . 152, 153 causes of uncertainty re¬ specting his philosophy 154 leading design of his phi¬ losophy . 154 his doctrine of logic 155 — 158 physics . 157 — 160 metaphysics 160, 161 theology 162 — 165 morals . 165,’ 166 his works brought to Rome 307 his obscurity acknow¬ ledged by Cicero . . 307 his writings translated from Arabic into Hebrew . 407 his first matter found by Maimonides in the Pentateuch .... 408 translated in Arabicunder Almamon .... 422 known to the Arabians only in translations . 436 his works studied among Christians in translations 471 studied in the original at Paris in the eleventh century ..... 491 his authority established in the schools . . . 492 the reverence paid him by the Scholastics . . . 511 not understood by them 511 Aristotelian philosophy,its revival 532—540 causes of it 532, 533 Arithmetic, particular and universal, improved by the Arabians . . • 437 Arnaud, author of the Port Royal Logic . 622 Page Arnaud, de Ville Neuf, an astrologer . 506 Arnobius, a Christian father . . . 464 Art, Great, of Lully . 518 Ascetic life of the Indian Gymnoso- phists . 28 of the Pythagoreans . . 219 Asia, hints relative to its modern state 640 Aslach, a Scriptural philosopher . . 564 Astrology of the Chaldeans . . 15 — 20 Egyptians ... 41 Stoics . 194 practised by the Arabians 437 Astronomy, its state among the Chal¬ deans .... its state among the Egyp¬ tians . its state among theEthi- 15 40 47 opians .... introduced among the Greeks by Thales . taught by Pythagoras notions of the Stoics con¬ cerning it . . . cultivated by the Arabians Athanasian creed, required to be un¬ derstood and explained in the ninth century . 486 Athenagoras, a Platonising Christian father . his tenets . Athenodorus, a Stoic, tutor to Claudius Athens, its schools revived under Aurelius . how long they flourished Atlas, an astronomer . Atomic doctrine, whether known to Moschus . . . taught by Leusippus taught by Democri¬ tus . tauffht by Epicurus 269, 270 Atoms admitted by Newton . . . 637 Atticus, an Epicurean . 308 Atticus, a Platonist . 323 Attractions, Newton’s idea of them 638, 639 Augury invented by the Etrurians . 56 Augustine, a Christian father, his life and writings . . 466 — 468 attached to the Platonic system . a spurious logic under his name used in the schools Avenpace, a Spanish Saracen . . . Avenzoar, a Spanish Saracen, the preceptor of Averroes .... Averroes, an eminent Arabian philo¬ sopher, his life and cha¬ racter .... 430- 82 225 194 437 458 458 358 337 337 47 34 245 248 467 477 429 245 chief magistrate ofCorduba persecuted for heresy . makes a recantation of his errors . restored to his honours . . his virtues . his veneration for the writings of Aristotle . . -432 430 430 431 431 431 432 650 INDEX. Page Averroes, his writings . 432 Avicenna, an eminent Arabian philo¬ sopher, his life . . . 427 his fanaticism .... 428 his reserve nearly fatal to him . 428 his works, character of them 428 B Bacon, Lord, his life, writings, and philosophy . 584 — 589 his political conduct and character . 585, 586 a summary of his ad¬ vancement of learn¬ ing . 587 his method of philoso¬ phizing . . 587, 588 the value of his works . 588 Bacon, Roger, called the wonderful doctor, his extensive learning and acquaintance with nature . 504, 505 Baithosus, one of the early leaders of the Sadducean sect . ... 388 Balbus, a follower of the Stoic philo¬ sophy . 304 Bar Cochbas, a pretended Messiah . 405 Barbarian, origin of the appellation . 9 Barbaric philosophy, its nature . . 9, 10 Bayer, a subtle Scripturalist . . . 566 Bayle, a modern Sceptic, his life and writings .... 560 — 562 literary journal undertaken by him . 561 his character . 562 Bede, Venerable, a learned monk, author of an ecclesiastical history 480 Being, doctrine of, taught by Aristotle 161 Bel us, a Chaldean astronomer . . 19 Benedictine monks, how far friends to learning . 479 Berenger, a learned writer of the eleventh century . 489 Berigard, the restorer of the Ionic philosophy, his life and doctrine . . . 550, 551 opposed the doctrines of . Aristotle . 550 Bernier, a modern Epicurean . . . 555 Berosus, account of him and his writings . 19 spurious Chaldaic history under his name ... 19 Bessario, a Greek Platonist . . . 522 Bias, one of the seven wise men of Greece . 77 his maxims . 77 Bion, ofBorysthenes, aCyrenaic phi¬ losopher . 109 Boccace, one of the first revivers of letters . 519 Boccalini, a political writer . . . 626 Bodies, all changes in them, according to Epicurus, caused by local motion 270 Bodin, a writer on Government . . 626 Body of Divinity, the first .... 472 Boehmen, a Theosophist, his life 570, 571 Page Boehmen, persecuted . 571 his writings inexplicably mysterious . 571 Boerhaeve, an eminent chemical phi¬ losopher . 629 Boethius, an elegant writer . ' . . 468 of Sidon, a Peripatetic . 350 Bonaventure, the seraphic doctor . 503 honours of his funeral 503 his method of philoso¬ phising .... 503 Bourignon, Madame, a French mystic 573 Boyle, eminentin natural philosophy, his character . 629 Brachmans, Indian philosophers . . 28 severities practised by them . 29 impostors . 29 account of them . . . 622 Bridforth, awriter of the tenth century 487 Britons, ancient, their philosophy . 48 Broughton, a writer on the soul . . 619 Bruno, a learned monk of the eleventh century . 489 Jordano, an innovator in phi¬ losophy, his life and writings 580 — 582 a contemner of Aris¬ totle . . . . 581 condemned to the flames by the inquisition 581 his opinions extrava¬ gant, not atheistical 582 Brutus, M. an admirer of the Platonic doctrine . 297 his character . 298 Buddas, an Indian philosopher . . 30 Burley, a Scholastic, called the per¬ spicuous doctor . 508 Burnet, Thomas, a Scriptural philoso¬ pher, his life and writings . 565 Thomas, his theory of the earth . 565 C Cabbala, Jewish, its pretended anti¬ quity . 404 its books . 404 origin of the name . . . 411 its fabulous history . . . 411 not derived from Divine Revelation . 412 derived from the Alexan¬ drian philosophy . . 412, 413 Cabbalistic doctrine of the Jews first arose in Alexandria . 386 doctrine,chiefheads of it 41 4, 4 1 7 system, its character . . 417 Ctesalpinus, a modern Peripatetic . 534 Cadmus, not to be ranked among phi¬ losophers . 34 Calanus, an Indian philosopher . . 30 Calvisius Taurus, a Platonist . . . 321 his philosophical enter¬ tainments . 322 Camerarius, an editor of ancient phi¬ losophical writings . 529 INDEX. 651 Page Cainpanella, Thomas, an innovator in philosophy, his life and writings . . . 589 — 592 Thomas, a contemner of Aristotle . 590 Thomas, his credulity . 590 Thomas, his opinions . 591 Canon law, how a hinderance to the revival of knowledge . 493 Capella, a writer of the middle age . 478 Capnio, or lleuchlin, a modern mysti¬ cal Platonist . 542 his writings . . 542 Cardan, Jerom, an innovator in philo¬ sophy, his life and writings . . 583, 584 a famous astrologer . 583 his opinions . . . 584 Carneades, founder of the New Aca¬ demy, his life and doc¬ trine .... 143 — 145 sent on an embassy to Rome . 143 wherein his doctrine dif¬ fered from that of Arce- silaus . 145 Carpenter, a writer who attempted to improve natural philosophy . . . 628 Categories of Aristotle . 155 hy whom in¬ vented . 238 Cartes (Des), an improver of philo¬ sophy, his life and writings . . 596 — 600 his thirst after know¬ ledge . 597 his retreat into Holland 598 his investigation of first principles . . 598 success of his doctrine 599 his visit to Christina Q. of Sweden . . 599 his philosophical cha¬ racter . 599 his doctrine on logic . 600 metaphysics 600 physics . . 601 morals . . 602 the soul . . 603 general character of his philosophy . . . 604 Casman, Otto, a Scriptural philoso¬ pher . 563 Cassiodorus, a writer of the middle age 478 Cato, the Censor, an enemy to Grecian philosophy . 293 Cato of Utica, a Stoic, his life and character , . 304 — 307 his firm adherence to the cause of liberty 305, 306 his death . 306 Causes, according to Aristotle, diffe¬ rent kinds of . 159 Cebes, the author of the Picture of Human Life . 104 Celts, their worship . 51 Page Celts, their philosophy .... 48 — 55 probably derived from an Asiatic stock . 50 Celsus, an Epicurean, his opposition to Christianity .... 372 an Epicurean, refuted by Origen . 372 Chseremon, a Stoic . 359 Chalcidius, doubtful whether a Chris¬ tian . 466 a commentator upon Plato 466 Chaldeans, their philosophy . . 14 — 21 uncertainty of its history 14 antiquity of their astro¬ nomy . 14' priests, the authors of their philosophy .... 14 their philosophy taught by symbols .... 16 their sects, of what kind. 17 their doctrine .... 20 Champeaux, William de, the vener- , able doctor . 496 Chaos, what it denotes in the ancient theogonies . 68 Characters, Egyptian, of three kinds 39 Charleton, W. a modern Epicurean . 555 Charmidas, of the New Academy . . 146 Charron, a misanthropic moralist . 623 Chemcu, a Chinese philosopher . . 626 Chemistry, improved by the Arabians 437 Chilo, one of the seven wise men of Greece . 76 his maxims . 76 Chimci, a Chinese philosopher . . 626 China, heads of its ancient philosophy 624 Christ, and his apostles, their philo¬ sophy . 441, 442 Christian faith, causes of its early cor¬ ruption . 444 Chrysanthius, anEclecticphilosopher 335 Chrysippus, a Stoic, his life and opin¬ ions . 205, 206 Chrysoloras, a learned Constantino- politan, who fied to Italy . . . 520 Cicero, M. T. his life . . . 299—301 his political conduct . 300 his character . . . 301 philosophical writings 302 his opinions . . 302, 303 afollowerofthe Middle Academy .... 302 Circumcision, submitted to by Py¬ thagoras in Egypt . 212 Claudianus Mamertus, a Christian writer, versed in Aristotelian dia¬ lectics . 4'68 Cleanthes, a Stoic, his life . . . 204, 205 his thirst after knowledge 204 his apophthegms . . . 205 Clemens Rom. an Apostolic father . 443 Clemens Alexandrinus, a learned Christian father, his his¬ tory . 459 Alexandrinus, a corrupter of Christianity . . . 460 Alexandrinus, his doctrines 461 652 INDEX. Page Clerc (Le) an eminent writer on logic, metaphysics, &c. . ' . . 622 Ciitomachus, of the New Academy . 146 Cloak, philosopher’s, worn by the Cynics . 171 Cluverius, a Scriptural philosopher . 566 Cneph, God worshipped under that name by the Egyptians .... 43 College of Pythagoreans described 217-220 Columns of Hermes . 38 Comenius, a Scriptural philosopher . 566 Comestor, Peter, a Scholastic . . . 499 Comets, opinions concerning, of Anaxagoras . 87 opinions concerning, of Py¬ thagoras ... . . 230 opinions concerning, of De¬ mocritus . 249 Community of goods in the Pythago¬ rean fraternity . 218 Conflagration universal, held by the Chaldeans . . . 21 universal, held by the Celts . 51 universal, held by the Etrurians. ... 56 universal, held by the Stoics .... 195, 196 universal, held by the Pythagoreans . . 238 Confucius, the most celebrated Chi¬ nese philosopher . 625 Conringius, H. an eminent scholar and philosopher, attached to the Aristotelian system 537 his political character 538 Constantine, a learned monk of the tenth century . 487 Constantine Afer, a learned monk . 491 Contemplative wisdom, its value 127 — 226 Copernicus, an eminent astronomer . 629 Cornutus, An. a Stoic, preceptor to Perseus . . . . 358 his honest freedom of speech . 359 Cosmogony. (See World.) Cosri, a book of Jewish philosophy in the middle age . 407 Coward, a writer on the soul . . . 619 Crantor, of the Old Academy, cele¬ brated for his moral doctrine . . 140 Crates, of the Old Academy . . . 140 a Cynic . 179 Creation from nothing, not admitted by the ancients . 129 Cremoninus, a follower of Aristotle . 534 Crescens, a Cynic, the accuser of Justin Martyr . 356 Crete, visited by Pythagoras . . . 214 Criterion of truth, what . 187 Critolaus, a Peripatetic . 169 Crotona, reformed by Pythagoras . 215 Crousaz, author of a treatise on logic 622 Cudworth, a modern Platonist, author of The Intellectual System . . . 546 Cynic Sect, its history . . . 171 — 180 Page Cynic Sect,character and doctrine 172 — 174 its singularities at first the effectof rigid virtue . 173 Cynic philosophy, its state under the Roman emperors .... 353 — 356 Cynics, their infamous excesses . . 354 forbidden to hold public schools . 354 Cynosargum, the Cynic school . . 172 Cyprius, a learned Christian philoso¬ pher . 474 Cyrenaic sect, its origin and history 105-109 D Demons, opinions concerning, of the Chaldeans . . . 18, 19 Egyptians .... 44 Celts . 51 Stoics . 193 Eenocrates . 139 Pythagoras . 229 Empedocles . 234 Ocellus . 237 Damascenus, a Christian Peripatetic 471 Damascius, the last Platonic preceptor in Alexandria . 340 Danaeus, a Scriptural philosopher . 564 Dandamis, an Indian philosopher . 30 Daniel, the prophet, whether to be considered as a philosopher ... 12 Dante, an Italian poet, a reviver of learning . 519 Death, despised by the Indian Gym- nosophists ... 31 by the Celtic nations 54 according to Hegesias, to be preferred to life .... 108 what it is, according to Epi¬ curus . 274 Demetrius Phalareus, a Peripatetic, his history . 170 Phalareus, whether libra¬ rian to Ptolemy Phil. . 170 of Corinth, an eloquent and virtuous Cynic . . 354 Democritus, an Eleatic philosopher, his life and character . 246 his travels . 246 his school at Abdera . 246 honoured by Abderites . 246 devoted himself to soli¬ tude . 247 his conversation with Hippocrates, spurious 247 why called the Laughing Philosopher . . . 248 his doctrine on Truth . 248 physics 248 — 250 morals . . 251 maxims . 251 Demonax, a Cynic, celebrated by Lucian, his excellent character . 355 anecdotes of him . . . 356 Des Cartes. (See Cartes.) Dcxippus, a defender of Aristotle . 351 INDEX. 653 Page Diagoras, an Eleatic philosopher, his impiety . 252 condemned by the Athe¬ nians . . .... 253 Dialectic philosophy, why the chief study of the Scholastics . 490 trifling, example of . . . 425 Dialectics, connected with theology by the Scholastics . . 495 modern attempts to im¬ prove them . . 614 — 622 opinion of Plato concern¬ ing them . 127 of the Stoics . . . . 186 rejected by Epicurus . . 267 of Aristotle. (See Logic.) Dicearchus, a Peripatetic .... 169 Dickinson, a scriptural philosopher, author of a cosmogony .... 564 Didymus, a Christian father . . . 466 Digby, an experimental philosopher 628 Dinanto, censured as a heretic for studying Aristotle . 491 Dio of Prusa, a Stoic, author of ora¬ tions . 364 Diodorus, a Megaric philosopher, his logical subtleties . . Ill a Megaric philosopher, not an Atomic philosopher . Ill a Peripatetic . 169 Diogenes Appolloniates, an Ionic phi¬ losopher . 87 Laertius, author of lives of philosophers, his predi¬ lection for Epicureanism 373 Laertius, his character as a biographer . 373 the Cjmic, his life . 174 — 179 his tub . . . 175 sold for a slave at Corinth . 175 the Cynic, his conversation with Alexander >. . . 176 the Cynic,his philosophical pride . 178 the Cynic, his moral doc¬ trine and maxims . . 178 the Stoic . 198 Dionysius, falsely called the Areopa- gite . 468 Disciples of Pythagoras, their history 232—249 Divination practised by the Chaldeans 20 Arabians . 32 Celts . . 51 Divine natures, inferior .... 346 Divinities, inferior, opinion concern¬ ing them of Socrates . . 101 of Aristotle . 163 of Democritus . 250 of Epicurus . 275 Dodwell, a writer on the soul . . . 619 Dogmatists, opposedby the Sceptics . 288 Donatus, a commentator on Aristotle 521 Dositheus, a Jewish impostor who went over to the Samaritans . . 383 Draco, a severe Athenian legislator. 72 Page Drierus, Chr. a modern Aristotelian . 538 Druids, their name, antiquity, and character . 49 Dualistic system, wherein it differs from that of Emanation . . . . 190 Dualistic system of Plato exchanged by the later Platonists for the Einanative . 343 Duns Scotus, a famous Scholastic, the most subtle doctor . 505 Dunstan, archbishop of Canterbury . 487 Durand, a celebrated Scholastic, the most resolute doctor . 506 E Earth (Hertha) worshipped by the Germans . 52 opinions concerning it of Thales . 81 opinions . concerning it of Anaximander . 83 opinions concerning it of Anaximenes . 84 opinions concerning it of the Stoics . 195 opinions concerning it of Pythagoras .... 225 — 229 opinions concerning it of Xenophanes . 241 opinions concerning it of Parmenides . 243 opinions concerning it of Democritus . ; . . . 249 opinions concerning it of Epicurus ...... 271 Earthquakes, according to Epicurus, how caused . . 272 Eclectic sect, its origin, history, and doctrines . . 325 — 349 its rise in Alexandria325,326 not known among an¬ cient writers by a distinct name . . 326 causes which contri¬ buted to its esta¬ blishment. . . . 342 example of its corrup¬ tion of ancient sys¬ tems . 343 its enthusiastic charac¬ ter . 343 its hostility against Christianity . . . 344 its pernicious influence upon the state of philosophy . . . 344 its tenets respecting metaphysics . . . 345 its tenets respecting theology .... 347 its tenets respecting morals . 347 wherein it receded from the doctrine of Plato . . . 343—348 philosophy, modern, its na¬ ture and origin . . . 578,579 654 INDEX. Page Eclectic philosophy, different from the Alexandrian Eclectic phi¬ losophy . 578 method, why not sooner adopted . 579 philosophers who have at¬ tempted to improve phi¬ losophy in general . 580 — 613 Eclipses, notions concerning them of the Chaldeans .... 20 notions concerning them of Pythagoras . 229 notions concerning them of Ecphantus . 232 Edda, two hooks of this name extant 51 Eddin Sadi, author of the Persian Ro¬ sary . 439 Edicts, Roman, against philosophers and rhetoricians . 294 Egg, an Orphic symbol of the forma¬ tion of the world . 66 Eginhart, a philosopher of the ninth 'century . 485 Egyptians, their philosophy . . 36 — 46 their philosophy, its un¬ certainty .... 36,37 their philosophy, Thoth, its first author ... 37 their exoteric doctrine . 42, 43 their Theology . . . 43 — 45 their doctrine concerning the soul .... 45, 46 their moral doctrine . . 46 their superstitions . , 42 — 46 Egyptian divinities, their origin ac¬ cording to Jablonski . 39 Eleatic sect, history of . . . 240 — 254 its two methods of phi¬ losophizing meta¬ physical . . 240 — 244 physical . . 244 — 254 Elements, doctrine of Aristotle con- eerningthem. . . . 160 doctrine of the Stoics . . 194 Xenophanes . 241 Epicurus . . 270 Elenchus of Aristotle . 157 Eliac school, its history . . . .113,114 Emanation, system of, taught by Zo¬ roaster . 27 system of, known to the Indians . 31 system of, probably em¬ braced by the Egyptians 44 system of, taught by Orpheus . 66 system of, received by the writers of theogonies . 67 system of, wherein it dif¬ fers from the Dualistic 190 system of, held by Pytha¬ goras . 229 system, the doctrine of the East . 375 taught by Zoroaster, and continued to later times 376 Page Emanation, doctrine of, taught by Simon Magus . . . 383 from the divine fountain, according to the J ewish Cabbala . 414 Emanative system briefiy stated . . 417 andatomic systems united by Bruno .... 582 Embassy from Athens to Rome . . 293 Empedocles, a Pythagorean, his life and character . . . 233 his impostures . . . 233 the accounts of his death fabulous .... 234 Empire, Roman, state of philosophy in . 309—375 Ennius embraced Pythagoric doctrines 297 Ensophic world, in the Cabbalistic system . 415 Entelechia of Aristotle . 164 Enthusiasm of the later Platonists . 347 Epicharmus, a Pythagorean . . . 235 Epictetus, a Stoic, his life and cha¬ racter . 365 his doctrine preserved by his disciples .... 366 sum of his moral system 366 Epicurean philosophy, its state in the Roman republic . . . 308 inveighed against by Cicero 308 followed by many Romans 308 described by Lucretius . . 308 its state under the Roman emperors . . . 369 — 373 causes of its long con¬ tinuance . 369 its revival .... 553 — 555 sect, its history . . 259 — 281 Epicureans, their fraternity . . . 261 Epicurus, his life . 259 — 261 his preceptors .... 260 his school or garden . . 260 his design in opening it . 260 his writings lost . . . . 261 his character . . . 262 — 264 causes of the obloquy cast upon him . . . 264, 265 honours paid to his memory 266 his doctrine concerning philosophy .... 266 his doctrine concerning canons of judgment . . 268 his doctrine concerning physics .... 268 — 276 his morals. . . . 276 — 281 Epimenides, a Cretan philosopher . 69 Erasmus, his services to philosophy 526 Eretriac sect, or Eliac school . . . 113 Eric, a learned monk of the ninth century . 485 Erigena, Scotus, a subtle metaphysi¬ cian of the ninth century 483, 484 his tenets . 484 Eristic, or Megaric, sect .... 109 Esdras, not a philosopher, nor the author of the Cabbalistic doctrine . 380 INDEX. 655 Page Esoteric and exoteric method of in¬ struction of the Egyptians ... 42 Esoteric and exoteric method of in¬ struction adopted by Pythagoras . 217 Essens, a Jewish sect, their history 394 — 396 formed after the example of the Pythagorean in Egypt 394 their fraternity . . . 394, 395 not pagans as some suppose . 396 Esseriph, an Arabian philosopher and geographer . 429 Ether, elastic, Newton’s opinion con¬ cerning it . 636 Ethics, or moral doctrine of Socrates 101 of Aristippus . 107 of Plato . 136 of Aristotle .... 165, 166 of Antisthenes . 174 of Diogenes . 178 of the Stoics, founded on their physics . 198 general principles and pre¬ cepts . 200—202 its character ..*... 202 of Democritus . 250 of Heraclitus . 257 of Epicurus .... 276 — 281 of the later Platonists founded in enthusiasm . 347 studied among the Jews . . 409 Hobbes’s notions concerning 595, 596 principles of, according to Des Cartes . 602 Thomas’s tenets concerning . 612 Ethiopians, their philosophy . 46 — 48 Etrurians, their philosophy . . 55 — 57 probably of Celtic origin 56 Evil, doctrine of the Persians con¬ cerning its origin ... 27 to be destroyed . 27 doctrine of Plato . 130 doctrine of the Stoics . . . 194 Eubages, a class of Druids ... 49 Eubulides, a Megaric philosopher . Ill his logical subtleties . . Ill Euclid ofMegara, founder of the Me- 110 garic sect . 110 a great disputant . . . . 110 instance of his self-command 110 translated into Hebrew . . 407 Eudemus, a Peripatetic .... 170 Eudoxus, a Pythagorean, an eminent astronomer . 240 Eumolpus, a follower of Orpheus . 67 Eunapius, character of his Lives . 336 Euphrates, a Stoic, highly commend¬ ed by Pliny . 364 Eusebius of Myndus, an Eclectic phi¬ losopher who discouraged imposture . 334 Pamphilius, a Christian fa¬ ther, accountofhis writings 465 Eustathius, an Eclectic philosopher 334 Eustratius, a commentator on Aristotle 47 8 Exoteric and esoteric, or acroamatic doctrine of Aristotle . 149 Page F Faber, Hon. an eminent Romish pre¬ ceptor in philosophy .... 531 Faber, J. an enemy to the Scholastic philosophy . 527 Fabulous philosophy of the Greeks, histoiy of . 62 — 71 its origin . . 62 clothed in poet¬ ical language 63 Fate, or necessity, doctrine of Car- neades concerning it 145 doctrine of the Stoics 192 Pythagoras 227 Democritus 250 Fate, doctrine of Heraclitus . . . 256 Fathers, Christian, their philosophy 443—454 Pagan philosophy studied by them . 446 supposed Pagan wisdom de¬ rived from the Hebrew scriptures . 447 chiefty averse to the Peripa¬ tetic and Epicurean sects 448 favour Platonism . . . 448 their defective manner of reasoning . 450 their credulity .... 451 their ignorance of nature . 451 defects of their moral doc¬ trine ...... 452 causes of these defects . . 452 Favorinus, a Platonist . 321 Ficinus, his character as a translator of Plato . 522 Fire, worshipped by the Persians . 25 the first principle according to Zoroaster . 22 the first principle according to the Stoics . 193 the first principle according to Pythagoras . 225 the first principle according to Empedocles . 234 the first principle according to Democritus . 250 the first principle according to Heraclitus . 255 Firmicus Maternus, a mathematician of the middle age . 478 Fludd, Rob. a profound theosophist and chemist . 569,570 Fohi, an ancient Chinese legislator . Form, according to Aristotle, a first principle . Fossils, according to Epicurus, how produced . Fouchier, a modern Sceptic . . . Fulbert, a learned man of the eleventh century . G Gale, a modern follower of Plato, an enemy to the Cartesian system Galen, a Platonist, author of many medical and philosophical writings 643 158 272 558 488 546 324 I 656 INDEX. Page Galileo, an eminent astronomer . 631 his discoveries with the teles¬ cope . 631 imprisoned for heresy by the court of inquisition . . 632 Gamaliel, Jewish doctor in the school of Jaffna . 403 Garden of Epicurus . 260 Gassendi, the restorer of the doctrine of Epicurus, his life and writings 554, 555 admits a Divine mind into his system .... 554 an opponent of Des Cartes 555 Gataker, an admirer of the Stoic system . 553 Gauls, their philosophy .... 48 Gaza, a Christian philosopher . . 469 Gaza Theodore, a translator of Aris¬ totle . 523 Gemara, the second Jewish Talmud, or completion of the Mishna . . 403 Genius of Socrates . 95 Geographical sphere first made by Anaximander . 84 Geometry, imperfectly known by the . Egyptians .... 40 taught, and improved by Thales . 82 taught, and improved by Anaximander ... 83 taught, and highly valued by Plato . 118 taught, and improved by Pythagoras .... 224 not improved by the Ara¬ bians . 436 attempt to correct, by Hobbes . 594 Gerbert, Pope Sylvester II. skilledin natural philosophy . 487 Germans, their philosophy . . 48 — 55 Gilbert, an eminent experimental phi¬ losopher . 628 Gimle, the heaven of the Celts . . 55 Gnostics, origin of the name . . 378 their doctrine concerning the Divine nature 378, 379 heresies derived from the oriental philosophy 376,378 heresies, account of . . 445 borrowed from the oriental philosophy .... 445 God, actual vision of, pretended to by Plotinus . . 331 Porphyry . . 333 notion of the later Platonists concerning his nature 345 — 348 popular doctrine of the Jews concerning him .... 409 his names, superstitious use of them among the Jews . . 411 the notion of Hobbes con¬ cerning . 595 Des Cartes’ proof of his exist¬ ence and notion of his na¬ ture . 601 Campanella’s notion of him . 592 Page 574 opinions 638 10 . 19 24—27 28—31 43 47 51 56 58 66 87 101 129 162 172 190 227 God, his motive for creation accord¬ ing to Poiret . Leibnitz’s proof of his being, and notion of his nature . 608 notion of Thomas concerning him . 611,612 seeing all things in him, Mal- lebranche’s doctrine of . 618 his existence, according to Newton, necessary to ac¬ count for phenomena . 638 Newton’s ideas concerning him . 638, 639 the Chinese notion of him un¬ certain . one Supreme, acknowledged by the Plebrews the Chaldeans . the Persians the Indians the Egyptians . the Ethiopians the Celtic nations the Etrurians the Scythians Orpheus Anaxagoras Socrates . Plato . . , Aristotle Antisthenes Zeno . . Pythagoras concerning his nature of Anaxagoras Socrates . Plato . . Aristotle Strato Antisthenes the Stoics Pythagoras Empedocles Timseus Xenophanes Leusippus Democritus Heraclitus Epicurus the Sceptics Golden verses of Pythagoras thigh of Pythagoras crown of Pythagoras Gratian, a political writer . Gravity, according to Epicur sential to atoms . . . Greathead, a learned and Scholastic . Greece visited by Pythagoras Grecian philosophy, its origin . . its fate out of Greece 291, 292 learning prohibited in Judea 386 Gregory, Pope, bis enmity to profane learning . 476 his book of Morals, its character . 477 87 101 129—132 162, 163 . . 169 . . 171 190—193 227—229 . . 234 . . 237 . . 242 . . 245 . . 248 . . 256 . . 275 . . 286 217—233 . . 214 . . 217 . . 626 us, es- liberal 269 501 214 62 NDEX. G57 Page Grimbald, a learned monk of the ninth century . 485 Grotius, a celebrated writer on theo- logy, jurisprudence, and morals, his life . . 623 — 625 his imprisonment and re¬ lease . 623, 624 account of his treatise De Jure Belli et Pacis . . 624 Grynseus, a translator of Plato, Aris¬ totle, &c . 529 Gymnosophists, Indian .... 28 Ethiopian ... 46 H Haen Soph, the fountain of light in the Cabbalistic system .... 414 Hai Ebn Yockdan, an Arabian tale 430 Hai, a Jewish rabbi . 406 Hales, Alexander, a Scholastic, the irrefragable doctor . 500 Happiness, according to the Stoics, how to be attained 199 Epicurus 288, 289 Harmony musical, its proportions, whether discovered by Pythagoras 223 Harmony pre-established, Leibnitz’s doctrine of . 609 Harpocrates, his image worn by the Egyptians . 41 Heat and cold, incorporeal principles, according to Telesius, 549 according to Campanel- la, material principles 591 Hebrews, their philosophy . . . 10, 13 their ancient wisdom seen in their scriptures . . 10 their ancient wisdom de¬ rived from revelation . 10 Hegesais, a Cyrenaic philosopher . 108 Heinsius, a modern advocate for Stoicism . 553 Helmont, Van, a Theosophist, his contempt of science 572 his skill in medicine and chemistry . . 573 his character as a Mystic 573 Fr. a Theosophist and Cab- balist * . 573 Heraclitean sect, its history . 254 — 258 Heraclitus, his life and character 254, 255 his doctrine imperfectly known . 255 Heraclitus, his doctrine on truth . 255 physics 256, 257 morals . 257 the father of a sect . . 257 Herennlus, and Origenes, pupils of Ammonius Sacca . 328 Herlllus, a Stoic . 204 Hermachus, a disciple of Epicurus . 266 Hermannus, a learned German of the eleventh century . 489 Hermes, Egyptian, two .... 38 the columns of the first . 38 the books of the second . 38 Hermias’s Ridicule of Gentile Philo¬ sophers . 458 Hermolaus, a translator of Aristotle 521 Hernhaym, a modern Sceptic . . 557 Heroines, stoical . 357 flierocles, an Eclectic philosopher, his fortitude . . . . 337 his writings .... 337 Hieroglyphics, Egyptian .... 39 Hillel, an eminent Jewish doctor, his history . 398 Hincmar, a philosopher of the ninth century . 485 Hipparchia, wife of Crates the Cynic 179 Hippasus, a Pythagorean .... 238 Hippo, a Pythagorean, his tenets . 233 Hippocrates, his opinions . . . 258 Historians, Roman, indebted to phi¬ losophy . 514 History of philosophy defined ... 2 method of writ¬ ing it . . 3 its uses . . 4 — 6 its division into three periods 6 philosophers, its uses . 6 the first authors of civiliza¬ tion uncertain . . . 17 Hobbes, Thomas, an innovator in phi¬ losophy, his life and writings 592 — 596 Thomas, his aversion to the Peripatetic philosophy . 592 Thomas, his character . . 594 Thomas, specimen of his opinions . 595 Hoffman, D. an avowed enemy to philosophy . 577 Homffiomerise of Anaxagoras . • . 86 Homer, whether to be ranked among philosophers .... 70 his fame . 70 Honain, a Christian physician at Bagdat, his noble spirit .... 422 Horace, writes in the Epicurean spirit 311 Horus Apollo, his Hieroglyphics a spurious work . 37 Hostanes, whether a Persian philo¬ sopher . 24 Huet, a modern Sceptic, his life and writings . 558 — 560 Husein Esophi, an Arabian astronomer 427 Hyde gives too much credit to Ara¬ bian writers . 22 Hylobaei, a sect of Indians ... 29 Hypatia, her life and character . 341, 342 sacrificed to the resentment of Cyril . 342 Hystaspes, a Persian king, whether a philosopher . 24 I Ice, according to Epicurus, how pro¬ duced . 272 Ideas, doctrine of Plato concerning them . 131, 132 of Plato, the same with the numbers of Pythagoras . 222 U U 658 INDEX. Page Ideas, how understood by the later Platonists . 348, 349 Idolatry, Egyptian, its origin . . 43 Idols not admitted by the Persians . 26 Ignatius, an Apostolic father . . 443 Images, flowing from bodies, accord¬ ing to Democritus, the cause of perception . 250 Images, flowing from bodies, accord¬ ing to Epicurus . 273 Immortality ofthe human soul in what manner conceived by the Indians 30 Immortality ofthe human soul believ¬ ed by the Egyptians . 45 of the human soul believ¬ ed by the Celts . . 53 of the human soul believ¬ ed by the Scythians . 58 of the human soul taught by Zamolxis ... 60 of the human soul taught by Orpheus .... 66 of the human soul taught by Socrates . . 99 — 101 of the human soul taught by Plato .... 134 whether admitted by Aristotle . . . . 164 denied by Dicsearcbus . 169 of the human soul in what manner conceived by the Stoics 197 Immortality of the human soul taught by Pherecydes . . . 210 of the human soul taught by Pythagoras . . . 230 denied by Ocellus . . 236 Indians, their philosophy, history of 28 — 31 their tenets . 30 Indifference of the Stoics .... 199 Indolence of the Epicureans . . . 277 Infinity, notion of Anaximander con¬ cerning it . . 83 Archelaus ... 88 Xenophanes . . 241 Ingulphus, a learned writer of the eleventh century . 488 Inscription on a temple at Sais in Egypt 44 Intelligibles, what, according to Plato . 128, 131 Intelligibles, what, according to Pythagoras . 225 Ionic school, its history .... 79 sect . 79 — 88 philosophy, its revival . . . 550 Ireland, state of its schools in the seventh century . 480 Irenaeus, a Christian father, his writ¬ ings tinctured with Platonism . 450 Isaac Ben Said, a Jewish astronomer 487 Isiac marble, an obscure remnant of Egyptian hieroglyphics ... 37 Isidore of Saville, a learned writer in the seventh century . 479 Isodorus, a pupil of Proclus , . . 340 Islamism, corrected by philosophy . 424 origin of its sects . . . 424 philosophy employed as its auxiliary .... 434 Page Islamism, little favourable to morality 439 its fundamental precepts 439 Israel Toletanus, a Jewish astronomer 407 Italic school, its history . . . 208 — 291 J Jafna, a Jewish school there under Jochanan . 403 Jamblichus, his life and writings . 333 his pretensions to super¬ natural powers . . . 333 Japanese, their superstitions probably of Egyptian origin . 628 Jehuda Hakkadosh, a Jewish doctor in the school of Tiberias . . . 403 Jeshua ben Sirach, a Jewish moralist 396 Jesus Christ, his divine doctrine true philosophy . 441 Jews, history of their philosophy from the Babylonish captivity 380 — 418 few philosophers among them 380 their schools, after the de¬ struction of Jerusalem, in Palestine . 403 their schools, after the de¬ struction of Jerusalem, in Babylon . 403 their schools in Spain . . . 406 J ewish colony settled in Egypt during the Babylonish captivity . 384 colony second, under Alex¬ ander and his successors . 384 colony treated liberally by several of the Ptolemies . 384 books ordered by the Empe- ror of Germany to be burned 542 books, the sentence reversed . 543 philosophy, exoteric, wherein it consisted . 409 philosophy, exoteric, its lead¬ ing tenets . 409 theology, how corrupted by Pagan philosophy . . . 385 Jezirah, a Jewish cabbalistic book . 405 Jochanan ben Eliezer, the compiler of the second Talmud .... 404 Josephus, a Jewish historian, his life 401 Journal, literary, of Thomas . . . 611 ofBayle .... 561 Judea, its sacred wisdom corrupted by Alexandrian philosophy . . 386 Julian, the Emperor, his life and phi¬ losophical character . 335, 336 studied at Nicomedia and Athens . 335 restored the heathen super¬ stitions . 336 his writings . 336 Justinian, philosophers persecuted by him . 340 — 510 Justin Martyr, his life and philoso¬ phical doctrine . . 454 his predilection for Platonism . . . 456 derives all truewisdom from the logos . 455 his notion ofthe logos 456 INDEX. 6.‘)9 Page K Karceites, a. Jewish sect, its character and history .... 390 wherein distinguished from the Scribes .... 390 revived in the eighth cen¬ tury, and still remaining 391 their tenets . 391 Kepler, an eminent astronomer . . 630 Klippoth, the material world, or dregs of emanation, in the Cabbalistic system . 416 Knowledge, according to Plato, where¬ in it consists . . . 128 the pursuit of it a branch of virtue . 186 according to the Sceptics, not attainable . . . 284 its powerto subdue bigotry 426 state of it in the eighth century . 479 state of it in the ninth century . 485 state of it in the tenth century . 486 state of it in the eleventh century . 487 its origin, according to Hobbes . 595 its rise and progress, ac¬ cording to Des Cartes 600 human, itg principles, according to Leibnitz. 608 how acquired, according to Thomas . . . . 611 Koran, long the only object of study among the Arabians . 419 L Lactantius, a Christian father, an ele¬ gant writer .... 465 his ignorance of physics 465 his love of truth . . . 465 Lacydes, of the Middle Academy . 143 Lais, accompanied to Corinth by Aristippus . 105 Lanfranc, a learned writer of the eleventh century . 489 Langton, a Scholastic . 500 Lapitha, a Christian philosopher . 474 Leibnitz, an improver of philosophy, his life and writings 604 — 610 his visit to England . _. 606 his mathematical and phi¬ losophical discoveries . 606 his philosophical character 607 his metaphysical tenets 607 — 610 his philosophy, remarks on 650 Leo, the Emperor, his cruelty . • 472 a philosopher of Constantinople 472 Leucippus, an Eleatic philosopher, author of the Atomic doctrine . . 244 Leucippus, rejected metaphysical principles .... 245 his doctrine . 245 Libraries, ancient . 4 Library, philosophical, of Lucullus . 295 Page Jjibrary, Alexandrian, burned by or¬ der of Omar . 419 ofthe Palatine Apollo burned by order of Pope Gregory 477 Li Lao Kuin, an ancient Chinese philosopher . 625 Lipsius, the restorer of the Stoic philosophy, his life 551 — 553 an enemy to toleration . . 552 his literary character . . 553 Lobkowitz, Caramuelde, a pretended improver of science . 531 Locke, an eminent metaphysician, politician, and theologian, his life and writings . 619 — 621 his character . 621 general account of his Essay on the Human Understanding . . 621 Logic of the Megaric sect . . Ill, 112 Aristotle .... 155 — 157 the Stoics .... 186 — 189 opinions of the Sceptics concerning it . . . . 286 Logos of Plato . 133,134 Lokmann, his fables . 32 Lombard, Peter, a Scholastic theolo¬ gian . 499 Longinus, D. an Eclectic philosopher and eminent critic . 328 his fate . 328 Lucan introduces the doctrines of the Stoic school . 312 Lucian, the satirist, favours the Epicurean system . . . 372 unreasonably severe against philosophers .... 373 Lucretius, his account of the doc¬ trine of Epicurus . 308 Lucullus, a patron of philosophy . . 295 Lully, Baymund, the most enlighten¬ ed doctor, his life 517 his great art. . . 518 Luther, an enemy both to the Scho¬ lastic and Peripatetic philosophy . 528 Lyceum, the school of Aristotle . . 149 Lycon, a Peripatetic . 169 Lycurgus, the legislator of Sparta . 72 M Machiavel, a political writer . . . 626 his Prince, a satirical work 627 Macrobius, a Platonist . 342 Magentinus, a commentator on Aris¬ totle . 474 Magi, of the Persians, their classes, offices, and customs . . 25, 26 of the Arabians . 32 of the Egyptians .... 41 Magic, of Zoroaster . 1*^ of the Chaldeans .... 20 of the Egyptians .... 41 Magnenus, a modern Epicurean . . 554 Magnet, according to Epicurus, why it attracts iron .... 272 philosophy of it investigated by Gilbert . 628 Mahomet, the illiterate prophet . . 418 V V 2 1 660 INDEX. Page Mahomet, discouraged the pursuit of knowledge . . . 419 an enemy to philosophy 434 Maimonides, a learned Jew . . . 407 addicted to the Aristo¬ telian doctrine . . 408 Malabaric theology, coincident with the doctrine of emanation . . . 642 Mallebranche, a metaphysician, his life and doctrine . 618, 619 Manettus, a writer of the fifteenth century . 521 Manilius favours the Stoic doctrine . 312 Marinus, an Eclectic philosopher who wrote the life of Proclus . . 340 Mathematicians, under that name philosophers banished from Rome 476 Mathematics improved by Thales . 82 a part of the discipline of Plato .... 119 of Pythagoras . . 224 Matter, doctrine concerning it of Zoroaster ... 27 of the Egyptians . 43 of Thales ... 81 of Plato ... 129 of the Stoics 191 — 193 of Empedocles . 234 of Aristotle . . . 258 of Epicurus . . 268 notion of the later Platonists concerning it . . 346 — 349 first of Aristotle, how ex¬ plained by the Scholastics 513 according to Campanella, sentient . 591 Des Cartes’ notion ofit . . 601 and spirit, Thomas’s notion concerning them . . . 612 Maxims, moral and prudential of Anacharsis . . 60 Solon ... 76 Chilo ... 76 Pittacus . . 76 Bias .... 77 Cleobulus . . 77 Theophrastus . 168 Antisthenes . 174 Diogenes . . 178 Pythagoras . . 226 Epicharmus . 235 Democritus . 251 Maxims, moral, from the Persian rosary . 439, 440 Maximus Tyrius, author of disserta¬ tions, a Platonist 323 preceptor to Julian . . . 334 Mayro (De) a Scholastic .... 506 Medicine, its state among the Egyptians 40 how practised by the Druids 55 practised by Orpheus . . 64 by Empedocles . 233 studied, but little improved, by the Arabians . . . 437 Mediocrity, its meaning in the ethics of Aristotle . 165 Megaric sect, its history . . .109 — 112 Page Melampus, one of the early instruc¬ tors of the Greeks . 67 Melancthon’s opinion of the Scho¬ lastic philosophy . . 5i9 his life and character 534 — 536 his labours in the ser¬ vice of philosophy . 535 his attachment to Aris¬ totle . 536 Melissus, an Eleatic philosopher . 244 Memcius, an ancient Chinese philo¬ sopher . 643 Memory, according to Des' Cartes, how produced . 603 Menander, a Samaritan impostor . 384 Menedemus, founder of the Eretrian school . 113 his thirst after learning 113 his history and character 114 Menedemus, a mad Cynic .... 180 Menippus, a Cynic . 180 Messue, a Christian physician, his school at Bagdat . 422 Metachita, a commentator on Aris¬ totle . 474 Metaphysical branch of the Eleatic sect . 240 — 244 Metaphysics of Aristotle .... 160 modern attempts to im¬ prove them . . 614 — 621 Metempsychosis, doctrine of, believed by the Egyptians 45 doctrine of, taught by Pythagoras . 230 by Empedocles . 406 Metrocles, a Cynic . 180 Metrodorus, a friend of Epicurus . 265 Michael, a commentator on Aristotle 474 Migration of souls held by the Phari¬ sees . 393 Mind, according to Cardan, but one in nature . 584 according to Campanella, one 591 Des Cartes’ notion ofit . . 601 Mishna, Jewish, or first Talmud, compiled by Jehuda . 403 Mithras, the first Persian divinity . 24 whether the sun, or the Su¬ preme Being .... 24 mediator between Oromas- des and Arimanius . . 27 Mnesarchus, son of Pythagoras . . 232 Mobile primum of Aristotle . . . 159 Moderatus, a collector of Pythagoric remains . 316 Monads of Pythagoras . . . .222 — 229 Leibnitz’s doctrine of . 607, 608 Monimus, a Cynic . 179 Montaigne, an ethical writer, his life and works . 622 Moon, opinions concerning it of Anaxagoras . . 87 of the Stoics . 195 of Pythagoras . . 230 ofAlcmseon . . 232 of Empedocles . . 235 of Xenophanes . 241 INDEX. 661 Page Moral philosophy, modern attempts to improve it . 622 — 626 doctrine. (See Ethics.) Morals, according to Archelaus, founded on arbitrary law ... 88 More, H. a learned advocate for Pla¬ tonic doctrines as of di¬ vine original .... 547 his notions of the Jewish Cabbala . 547 Morley, a learned Englishman who studied Arabic . 491 Moschus, a Phoenician, not the author of the Atomie system .... 33 Moses, whether to be considered as a philosopher . 11 Mot, the chaos of the Phoenician system 35 Motion, caused, according to Epicu¬ rus, by the gravity of atoms 27 0 essential to atoms . . . 270 Mover, First, of Aristotle . . . 161 Musseus, a teacher of the Orphic doc¬ trine . 67 Music of the Egyptians .... 40 of Orpheus . 64 its effect on the Pythagorean fraternity . 220 improved by Pythagoras . . 223 of the spheres, doctrine of Py¬ thagoras concerning it . . 223 attention to it contributed to establish barbarism . 479 — 487 new scale of, invented by Guido Aretine . . *b . 488 Musonius, a virtuous Cynic . . . 354 Musonius, R. a Stoic, excepted from the sentence of exile .... 359 Mysteries, Chaldaic . 20 Egyptian . 39 Druidical . 50 Greek, introduced by Or¬ pheus . 65 Mystic theology, its origin . 475 — 484 Mythology of the Greeks, enigmatical 63 probably founded on the doctrine of emanation 69 N Nanno, a commentator on Aristotle and Plato . 487 Natural history well understood by Aristotle . 165 philosophy, modern attempts to improve it . . 614 — 639 Nature, doctrine concerning it. (See Physics and World.) how the term was understood by Aristotle .... 158 following it, the Stoic idea of virtue . 198 Necessity, all nature, according to the Stoics, subject to it 193, 194 doctrine of, how understood by Democritus . . . 250 doctrine of, maintained by Hobbes . 593 Wolfe persecuted for pro¬ fessing . 613 Page Neitha, the Supreme Deity, a temple dedicated to him at Sais .... 44 Nemesius, a Christian philosopher . 460 Newton, an illustrious improver of natural philosophy, his life and writings . 633 — 639 his epitaph . 634 plan of his Principia . 635, 636 hisopinions, specimen of 637, 638 Nicephorus, a Christian philosopher 474 a commentator on Aris¬ totle . 474 Nicetas, a Christian philosopher . 474 Nicolaus, a Peripatetic, preceptor to Herod the Great . 350 Nicomachus, a favourer of Pytha- goric tenets . 320 Nile, cause of its overff owing, accord¬ ing to Epicurus . 272 Night, worshipped by the Egyptians 43 its meaning in the theogonies 43 — 66 Nigidius, a follower of Pythagoras . 297 Nizolius, an enemy to the Scholastic philosophy . 527 Nominalists and Realists, Scholastic sects, their histoi'y . 515 Numa, whether a disciple of Pytha¬ goras . 57 whether a philosopher ... 57 Numenius, a Platonist . 323 O Occam, a celebrated Scholastic, the invincible doctor . 507 Ocean, according to Epicurus, sur¬ rounds the habitable earth . . 272 Ocellus Lucanus, a Pythagorean . 235 summary of his doc¬ trine .... 236 Odin, a God of the Celtic nations . 55 QHnomaus, a Cynic . 354 Oliver of Malinsbury acquainted with natural philosophy in the eleventh century . 488 Olympiodorus, an Alexandrian philo¬ sopher . 352 Onesicritus, a Cynic . 178 Opinion, wherein, according to Plato, it differs from science . . . . 127 Oracles of Zoroaster, the Persian . 25 Oriental philosophy, its history 375 — 379 known to the Greeks . . 375 the fountain of Gnosticism . 375 its existence con¬ firmed by au¬ thorities 376, 377 causesofits union with the Grecian 378 Origen, a Christian father, a disciple ofAmmonius .... 461 his life and character 461 — 463 his doctrine . . . 463, 464 Origin of things. (See World.) Oromasdes, a Persian divinity, the good principle . 27 662 INDEX. Page Orpheus, his history and doctrine 63 — 66 author of Grecian mysteries 64 his poetic talents ... 63 fragments of verses ascribed to him . 64, 65 his doctrine concerning God and nature . 66 concerning hu¬ man soul . 66 not to be con¬ founded with Spinozism 66 Orphic verses probably interpolated by Aristobulus . 386 Ovid, allusions in his writings to phi¬ losophical tenets . 312 P Pachymerus, a commentator on Aris¬ totle . 474 Panastius, a Stoic, an eminent mo¬ ralist . 207 Pantaenus, a Christian father . . . 460 Paracelsus, aTheosophist,hislife 568 — 570 his diligence in studying nature . 568 his empirical practice in medicine . 568 a man of little learning or science, but a great master of imposture . 569 chemistry improved by him 569 his writings of little value . 569 had many followers . . 569 Paradoxes of the Stoics . . . . 199 Parmenides, an Eleatic philosopher, his life . 242 his doctrine, explained by Plato .... 243 revival of his doctrine . 548 Passions, their nature and government according to Des Cartes . 602, 603 Patricius, a Platonist, a zealous oppo¬ nent of the Aristotelian system . 545 Pentateuch, the story of an ancient Greek version of it fabulous . . 385 Peregrinus, a Cynic, who voluntarily committed himself to the flames . 357 Periander, one of the seven wise men of Greece . 78 his maxims . 78 Peripatetic sect, founded by Aristotle 147 whence so called .150 philosophy, its state in the Roman republic . . 307 philosophy, its state under the Roman emperors 349 — 353 philosophy, causes of its corruption .... 353 philosophy, studied by the Jews . 406 philosophy, causes of its revival .... 539, 540 philosophy, effects of its revival .... 540, 541 Perseus, a Stoic . 203 Persian history of their philosophy imperfectly known . 21 Page Persians, history of their philosophy 21 worshipped the sun under the name of Mithras . 24 their gods Oromasdes and Arimanius, the good and evil principles ... 95 their doctrine .... 26 Persius, an advocate for the doctrine of Stoicism . 313 Peter the Dane, an astronomer . . 506 Petrarch, an Italian poet, a reviver of learning . 519 his moral writings excellent 519 Phsedo, of Ellis, his Socratic school. 113 Phantasy, doctrine of Carneades con¬ cerning it . 144 the Stoics . 187 Pharisees, a Jewish sect, their history 391 a Jewish sect, their tenets 391 a Jewish sect, their cha¬ racter . 392 a Jewish sect, not to be classed with the Stoics . 393 a Jewish sect, distinct clas¬ ses of, truncated, mortar, striking 393 Pherecydes, probably instructed in Egypt . 209 preceptor ofPythagoras, ^ his life . 209 taught the doctrine of immortality . . , 210 a fragment of his writings explained .... 210 Philelphus, a writer of the flfteenth century . 521 Philo, of Larissa, of the New Aca¬ demy . 146 an Alexandrian Jew . . . 398 adopted Platonic notions . 398 his visit to Rome .... 399 his notions concerning ideas. 399 his notions concerning matter 400 his notions concerning the divine nature . . . 400, 401 Philolaus, a Pythagorean, who di¬ vulged his master’s mys¬ teries . 239 his tenets . 239 Philoponus, a Christian philosopher. 469 Philosophers, the name first assumed by Pythagoras . . 1 few professional ones among the Romans. 296 under the name of ma¬ thematicians, banished from Rome 350 Philosophical writings destroyed under the Chinese emperor, Ching . . 645 Philosophy defined . 1 its end, and offices . . 2 whether derivedfrom bar¬ baric nations ... 9 fabulous among the Greeks 62 political . 71 sectarian . 79 theoretical. (See God — World — Nature — &c.) first discouraged in Rome 293 INDEX. 6G3 Page Philosophy, no new sect of, formed in Rome . 296 patronised among the Ro¬ mans . 310 — 313 gentile, prohibited among the Jews . 407 pagan, not of Hebrew ex¬ traction . 412, 413 its light dreaded by a bigot¬ ed Mahometan . . . 423 among the Saracens, allied with superstition . . . 435 consequences ofthis alliance 435 despised and persecuted 475, 476 view of its state in the mid¬ dle age . 489 from the twelfth to the fourteenth century . . 492 dispute at Hall concerning its utility . 576 enemies of^ their history 576,577 Phocylides, a moral poet of Greece . 79 Phoenicians, a history of their philo¬ sophy . 33 — 35 their knowledge of science small . 33 their doctrine notborrowed from Moses .... 35 Photius, a learned patriarch of Con¬ stantinople . 473 Phthas, God worshipped under that name by the Egyptians .... 43 Physics, doctrine of among the Chal¬ deans . 19 of the Ionic sect . . . 81—87 ofPlato . 133, 134 of Aristotle ...... 164 of the Stoics . . . 194, 195 of Pythagoras . . . 225 — 227 ofAlcmseon . 232 of Empedocles . 234 of Xenophanes .... 241 of Parmenides . 242 of Democritus . 249 of Heraclitus . 256 of Epicurus .... 271 — 274 Physicians, Christian, the first precep¬ tors of the Arabians . 421 Picus, Mir. a zealous advocate for Platonism, his history .... 523 Pilpay’s fables, not an ancient relic of Indian philosophy . 31 Piso, M. a follower of the Old Academy 298 Pittacus, one of the seven wise men of Greece . 76 his maxims . 77 Placcius, a writer on Ethics . . . 623 Planetarium constructed by Posidonius 208 Planets. (See Stars.) Plato, and his philosophy . . 115 — 136 wrote poems in his youth . . 115 his travels . 116 — 119 whether he borrowed his opin¬ ion from the Hebrews 117, 118 Plato, sources of his philosophy . . 118 the academy founded by him 1 1 8 his visits to Dionysius. . 120,121 Plato, his return to Athens . . . . 122 his character, and anecdotes concerning him . . .122, 123 his writings . 123 his doctrine, its origin and genera] character 125 concerning philosophy 127 dialectics . 127 theology . 128 physics . 133 the soul . 134 policy . . 135 morals . . 135 Platonic philosophy, its state under the Roman emperors . 320 — 324 philosophy, causes of its re¬ vival . 541 theology, supposed by the Christian fathers to be de¬ rived from Moses . . . 449 doctrines adopted byChristian fathers . 449 Platonism, how revived in the western world . 484 modern, its origin and cha¬ racter . 547 Platonists and Aristotelians, dispute between them . 524 Platonopolis, a city projected by Plo¬ tinus, on the model of Plato’s re¬ public . 330 Pleasure, doctrine of Aristippus, con¬ cerning it . 107 Epicurus . . 277 Pletho, a Greek, who revived Platon¬ ism . 522 Pliny the Elder, his life and charac¬ ter ... . 370,372 his indefatigable in¬ dustry . . . . 370 his Natural History, its character . . 371 his Natural History, his apology for its defects . . . . 371 his opinion of differ¬ ent sects . . . 371 the manner of his death .... 372 Plotinus, the chief of the Alexandrian Platonists, his life . . 329, 330 his school at Rome . . . 329 his writings confused and obscure, why .... 330 proofs ofhis fanatical spirit 330, 331 Plutarch, his life, writings, and philo¬ sophical character . 323, 324 son of Nestorius, an Eclec¬ tic philosopher .... 337 Poetry, Roman, tinctured with philo¬ sophy . 310 Poiret, P., a Theosophist, his life and writings . 573 his notions . 574 Polemo, of the Old Academy, re¬ formed by Xenocrates .... 139 Policy', civil, Hobbes’s doctrine of 593 — 595 66i INDEX. Page Politian, a learned writer of tlie fif¬ teenth century . 520 Political philosophy of the Greeks 71—79 taught by Plato . 135 Aristotle 166 modern attempts to improve it 623 — 627 Polysenus, a friend of Epicurus . . 266 Polycarp, an Apostolic father . . . 443 Pomponatius, a follower of Aristotle 533 Porch, the school of the Stoics . . 181 Porphyry, an Eclectic philosopher, his life and writings . 331 — 333 his melancholy and fanatic¬ ism . 332, 333 his enmity to Christianity 332 his school at Rome . . . 332 Porretan, a subtle Scholastic . . . 499 Porta, S. a modern Peripatetic . . 533 Posidonius, a Stoic, visited by Ponipey 208 Potamo, the first unsuccessful projec¬ tor of the Eclectic system . . . 326 Pre-existent state of human souls held by Plato . 134 Predicables of Aristotle . 155 Principle, first, according to the later Platonists, simple essence, the source of all others . 345 Principles, first of all things, accord¬ ing to the Persians 25 Indians ... 30 Egyptians . 43, 44 Orpheus . . 66 Thales ... 81 Anaximander . 83 Anaximenes . 84 Anaxagoras 84 — 86 Archelaus . . 88 Plato ... 129 Aristotle 157 — 160 Strato . . . 169 the Stoics . . 190 Pythagoras 228, 229 Hippo . . . 233 Empedocles . 234 Ocellus . . . 236 Timaeus . . 237 Philolaus . . 239 Xenophanes . 24 1 Parmenides . 243 Leucippus . . 245 Democritus . 248 Heraclitus . . 255 Epicurus 268 — 270 the Sceptics . 287 Principles ofnature, according to Car¬ dan . 584 Prisons, an Eclectic philosopher . . 335 Proclus, his life and character . 338, 339 a great master of magical arts 339 his celebrity as a preceptor . 339 his superstition and enthu¬ siasm ... ... 339 account of his writings . . 339 Prometheus, probable origin of his fable . . . . . 63 Prophets, Hebrew, whence their wis¬ dom derived . 11 — 13 Page Protagoras, an Eleatic philosopher, his life and opinions 251, 252 suffered banishment for his opinions. . . . 252 Providence of God, maintained by Socrates . 101 doctrine of the Stoics concerning it . . . 192 acknowledged by Pytha¬ goras . 227 denied by Epicurus . . 275 Psellus, senior, an eminent scholar in the ninth century . 472 Psellus, junior, a learned philosopher of Constantinople . 474 Ptolemies of Egypt, philosophy pa¬ tronized by them . 292 Pufiendorf, an eminent writer in juris¬ prudence, his life and writings 625, 626 Pulleyn, a Scholastic theologian . . 499 Pyrrho, his life and character . 281 — 283 in what manner he fell into Scepticism . 282 his doctrine . 283, 284 topics of argument . . . 285 his doubts respecting logic . 286 his doubts respecting deity . 287 matter 287 motion 287 morals 288 Pyrrhonic sect, its history . . 281 — 293 Pyrrhonism, not openly followed among the Romans . 309 Pythagoras and his philosophy, history of . 211—239 causes of the uncertainty of his history . . . 211 — 222 inquiry concerning the time of his birth . 211 his life . 211—216 his journey into Egypt, and residence there . .212,213 whether he visited the East, Judea, Babylon, &c. 213, 214 instituted a school at Samos 214 assumed the name of philo¬ sopher . 215 instituted and presided in his Italian schools . . 215 his political influence . . 215 his school broken up by violence . 216 his death . 216 marvellous tales related of him . 216 his arts of imposture . 214 — 217 whether he left any writ¬ ings . 217 his method of instruction . 217 his doctrine, on the end of philosophy . 221 his doctrine, of numbers . 221 music 223, 224 astronomy . 225 physics 225 — 229 ethics 225 — 227 theology 227—229 INDEX. G65 Page Pythagoras, his doctrine of the human soul . 230 his symbols . 231 Pythagoric philosophy, its fate in the Koman republic 296, 297 philosophy, its state under the Roman Emperors 314—320 Q Quadriviura and Trivium, the circle of the sciences in the 7tb century 481 Quibbles logical, of the Megarie sect 111, 112 rules for them laid down by Aristotle 157 practised by the Stoics . . 183 — 189 R Rabanus Maurus, a learned monk of the ninth century . 483 Ramus, Peter, a logician, his life, and tragical end 615, 616 persecuted for op¬ posing Aristotle 615 his attempt to im¬ prove the science of logic . . . 616 Rainbow, opinion of Anaxagoras con¬ cerning it . 87 Rashid, a patron of learning among the Arabians . 421 Rationalists, a sect of Mahometans 435 Realists, and Nominalists, Scholastic sects, their history . 515 Reasoning, syllogistic method, ac¬ cording to Aristotle . 156 the Stoics 188 Reformation, its influence on the state of philosophy . . . 525 — 530 Remigius, a learned monk of the tenth century . 487 Reminiscence, according to Plato . 128 Republic of Plato, chimerical . . 135 Republic, Roman, state of philosophy in . 293—309 Restitution, periodical, of all things. (See World, its destruction.) Resurrection of the body, denied by Simon Magus . . 383 of the body, believed by the Jews . 393 — 410 Retin, a Spanish scholar, who trans¬ lated the Koran . 491 Rcuchlin, or Capnio, a modern Platonist . 542 Revival of letters, its influence on philosophy . 517 — 524 Rhetoric, Clitomachusanenemyto it 146 Ricciolus, a preceptor in mathematics 531 Romans, their philosophy ... 55 Rosacrusians, history of the society of 574 Rosary, Persian, a compendium of oriental ethics . 439 Rosceline, the founder of the sect of the Nominalists . Saadias Gaon, a'Jewish rabbi, in the school of Sora . 406 Sacrifices, human, practised by the Druids . 51 Sadder, a Persian sacred book . . 23 Sadducees, history of the sect . . 387 their authority .... 388 their tenets . 388 their regard to all the He¬ brew scriptures . . . 389 not to be classed with the Epicureans .... 389 Sadoc, a Jewish teacher, from whom the Sadduceaii sect takes its name 388 Sadolet, an elegant writer on philo¬ sophy . 529 Sais, in Egypt, its temple and in¬ scription . 44 Salisbury, John of, a learned writer of the twelfth century .... 499 Salustius, a Cynic, one of the latest of that sect . 357 Samanaeans, Indian philosophers . 28 Samaritans, original grounds of the enmity between them and the Jews ... 381 probably superstitious worshippers of the true God .... 382 the oriental doctrine of emanation received among them 382 Sanchez, a modern Sceptic . . . 557 Sanchoniathon, his cosmogony pro¬ bably fabricated by Philo-Biblius 35 Saracenic philosophy, its nature and spirit . 433—440 SaracenSjhistoryoftheir philosophy 41 8-440 Scaldi, poets of the Celts .... 50 Sceptic sect. (See Pyrrhonic.) founded in opposition to the Dogmatists . . 288 revived by Ptolomeus and iEnesidemus . 284 difference between it and the Academy . 289 its state under the Ro¬ man emperors . . 374 causes of its speedy de¬ cline . 374 later followers chiefly of the medicalprofession 374 its deliberations explain¬ ed by Sextus Empiricus 374 Sceptics, modern, history of . 556 — 562 ^Scepticism, modern,its different forms 556 Scepticism, its gradual progress in tire Grecian philosophy .... 289 Schegkius, an Aristotelian philosopher 537 Scherbius, an Aristotelian preceptor 537 Scholarius, G., a commentator on Aristotle . 524 Scholastic age, its character . . . 495 philosophy, general view of its rise and progress 490 — 493 its origin . . 495 496 666 INDEX. Page Scholastic philosophy, its nature and character 509 — 516 its metaphysi¬ cal world . 510 its inutility . 510 its alliance with theology . 512 its effects on learning, reli¬ gion, science, manners 512, 513 its logic and metaphysics 513 its physics . 513 its ethics . . 514 its sects . . 515 its remains af¬ ter the revival of letters 530,531 pleas in its fa¬ vour . . . 530 retained in the schools of the Romish church 531 theology, its origin . . 475 Scholastics, their history , . 493 — 530 origin of the name . , 493 doctors, their character 493 Schools of the prophets, what they were . 13 Schools of philosophers, the Academy of the Platonists 118 Cynosargum of the Cynics . 172 Garden of Epi¬ curus . . . 260 Lyceum of the Peripatetics . 149 Porch of the Stoics . . . 181 of the Saracens .... 423 of the Stoics . 358 of the Jews . 403 Schultet, a writer on ethics . . . 623 Science, state ofitamongthe Arabians 436 Scioppius, a modern Stoic .... 553 Scipio Africanus, fond of philoso¬ phical studies . 294 Scribanus, a scriptural philosopher . 564 Scripturalphilosophers,theirhistory563-566 whence sprung 563 the effects of their method of philosophising 566 Scythians, their philosophy, history of 58-61 manners ...... 58 Sea, according to Epicurus, why salt 272 Sectarian philosophy, its origin and character . 79 Sects of the Jews, their history . . 387 their origin uncertain 387 Secundus, an imitator of the Pytha¬ gorean discipline . 320 Selden, an eminent writer in political philosophy . 625 Seneca, the tragic poet, writes on Stoic principles . 313 Seneca, a Stoic philosopher, his life 360-363 his exile in Corsica . . . 361 Page Seneca, preceptor to Nero . . . 361 his wealth . 361 his death . 363 his character and writings 363, 364 Sennert, the first restorer of the Epi¬ curean philosophy . . 553 a natural philosopher . . 628 Senses, doctrine concerning them, of Plato ... 127 Aristotle . 163 Arcesilaus . 143 Carneades . 144 the Stoics . 187 Epicurus . 268 the Sceptics 284 Sephiree, or Splendors, ten, in the Jewish cabbala . 414 Septuagint version of the Hebrew scriptures, when and by whom made 384 Sextius, Q. imitated the Pythagorean discipline . 315 Seneca’s character of his moral writings . . . 315 uncertain whether any of his works remain . . 315 Sextus,a Stoic, preceptor toAntoninus 367 Sextus Empiricus, author of works in defence of Pyrrhonism .... 374 Shammai, an eminent Jewish doctor 398 Shepherd of Hennas, not of Apo¬ stolic origin . 443 Sherira Gaon, a Jewish Rabbi j . 406 Silence required by Pythagoras from his disciples . 219 Silli, a satire by Timon the Sceptic . 283 Simeon Ben Jochai, a Jewish Cab- balist author of the book Sohar . 405 Simon, a disciple of Socrates . . . 104 Magus, a Samaritan impostor, his pretensions . 382 his doctrines . . 383 Ben Shetach, Alexandrian phi¬ losophy brought by him into Judea 386 Simon, S. a commentator onAristotle, persecuted for heresy .... 536 Simon of Tournay, a Scholastic . . 506 Simplicius Cilix, a Platonist who commented upon Aristotle . . . 352 Sleep of Epimenides . 69 according to Epicurus, how produced . 274 Society, Royal, its establishment . 629 Socrates, his life and death . . 89 — 99 military conduct ... 90 political integrity ... 90 method of instruction . . 91 moderation . 92 domestic virtues .... 92 vindicated . 93 natural temper .... 94 piety . 95 opposition to the Sophists 95 ridiculed by Aristophanes 96 trial and sentence . . 97, 98 behaviour afer his condem¬ nation . 99 death . 911 honours paid to his memory 1 00 INDEX. 667 Page Socrates, philosophy of . . . 100 — 102 Socratic school, its history . . .89 — 104 Sohar, a Jewish Cabbalistic hook . 404 Solar system, the true, supposed to have been known to Pythagoras . 225 Solomon, extravagant assertions con¬ cerning him .... 12 his wisdom chiefly of the moral kind . 12 Solon, his life . 74 — 76 interview with Croesus . . 75 maxims . 76 Solstitial and equinoctial points ob¬ served by Thales . 82 Sonerus, an Aristotelian preceptor . 537 Sopater, an Eclectic pliilosopher . . 334 Sophists, their character .... 95 enmity to Socrates . 95 Sophisms. (See Quibbles, logical.) Sorbiere, a modern Sceptic . . . 558 Sosigenes, a mathematician, employed by J. Caesar in correcting the calendar 350 Sotion, Al. favoured the doctrine of Pythagoras . 316 Soul, human, opinions concerning it, of the Indians . 30 Egyptians 45 Celts . 53 Socrates . . 101 Plato . . . 134 Aristotle. . 163 Strato . . 169 Dicearchus . 169 the Stoics . 197 Pythagoras . 230 Empedocles 235 Democritus . 249 Heraclitus . 256 Epicurus 272, 273 Soul of Man, notions of the later Pla- tonists concerning it 347 popular doctrine of the Jews concerning it . 410 according to theCabba- listic doctrine . . 416 doctrine of the Arabians concerning it . . 438 its nature and felicity according to Poiret 574 Leibnitz’s doctrine con¬ cerning it. . .608,609 its connexion with the body, how explained by Leibnitz 609 Soul of the world, according to Plato 133 the Stoics . 192 Pherecydes 210 Species, their nature, according to Epicurus . 273 Speusippus, successor of Plato . . 137 Spheres, celestial, doctrine of, accord¬ ing to Aristotle . 159 Pythagoras 223 Sphjerus, a Stoic . 204 Spinoza, an atheistical innovator in philosophy, his life and writings . 61 7, 618 an optician . 617 Page Spinoza, convicted of blasphemy and banished . 617 his doctrine . 617 difference between it and the doctrine of emanation . . 618 his followers and refuters . 618 Spirit. (See Demon. Soul.) Spirits, animal, of Des Cartes . . . 602 Stars, worshipped by the Arabians . 32 opinions concerning them, of Thales . . 82 Anaximander 83 Anaximenes . 84 Anaxagoras . 87 the Stoics. . 194 Pythagoras . 229 Alcmaeon . 232 Empedocles . 235 Xenophanes . 241 Democritus . 249 Epicurus . . 274 Stilpo, a Megaric philosopher, his character and opinions . . . . 112 Stoa, the porch of the Stoics, whence their name . 181 Stoic sect, its rise, history, and cha¬ racter . 183 cautions to be observed in judging of it. . . . 185 its doctrines concerning philosophy in general . 186 logic . 186 principles of nature . 1 89 wherein its system differs from the Dualistic and the Emanative . . . 190 God . . . 191—193 inferior divinities . 193 origin of evil . . 194 physics . . 194 — 196 soul of man . 197, 198 morals . . 198 — 202 its state in the Roman re¬ public .... 304 — 306 its state under the Roman Emperors . . 357 — 368 causes of its flourishing state till after the Antonines 357 Stoic philosophy, its revival . 551—553 Strabo, a follower of the Stoic sect . 3 14 Strato, a Peripatetic, hispeculiar tenets 169 Substance, only one in nature, accoi fl¬ ing to Spinoza . 617 Successors of Aristotle . . . 167 170 Zeno .... 205 — 208 Sun, opinions concerning it, of the Ionic philosophers 84 — 87 of the Stoics. . . . 194 Pythagoras . . . 229 Empedocles . . . 235 Xenophanes . . . 241 Democritus . . . 249 Heraclitus . . . 256 Superstitions of the Chaldeans . . 19 the Egyptians . . 74 the Celts .... 51 the Etrurians . . 56 G68 INDEX. Page Swinshead, Richard of, a Scholastic and mathematician . 507 Syllogistic method of reasoning taught by Aristotle 156 the Stoics 188 Sylvester II. (See Gerbert.) Symbols of Pythagoras . 231 Synesius, a pupil of Hypatia . . . 467 Syrian, preceptor to Proclus, his me¬ mory honoured . 338 T Table of Cehes . . 104 Talismans, whence derived .... 42 Talmud, first, or Mishna, its history . 403 second, or Gemari . . . 4 14 Tamo, a Chinese contemplative en¬ thusiast . 641 Tatian, a Christian father, his writings tinctured with oriental philosophy . 456 Taurus, a Platonist . 321 Taurellus, an Aristotelian philosopher 537 Telesius, the reviver of the doctrine of Parmenides, his life . . 548 his school at Naples . . . 548 his opposition to the autho¬ rity of Aristotle . . . 548 summary of his doctrine . 549 Temples of the Persians .... 25 Tertullian, a Christian father, an ene¬ my to philosophy . 459 Tetractys of Pythagoras . 222 Thabet Ebn Korra, an Arabian phi¬ losopher . 426 Thales, the founder of the Ionic sect, his life . 80 his maxims . 80 his doctrines and discoveries 81 — 83 rvhether he admitted an intel¬ ligent cause . 81 Thamyris, a follower of Orpheus . . 67 Themistius, a rhetorician, honoured by several emperors . . 351 proofs of his liberality . 352 Theodore Cilix, a learned monk in the ninth century . 480 Theodorus, a Cyrenaic philosopher, who suffered death for his opinions . 108 Theogonies, observations on them 67 — 69 Theognis, a moral poet . 79 Theogony of Hesiod, its character . 67 Theology. (See God, Nature, World.) Theon, a mathematician, a follower of Plato .......... 321 Theophilus of Antioch, a Platonising Christian father . 457 Theophrastus, successor of Aristotle, his life, writings, and doctrine 167, 168 Theosophists, theirhistory . . 567 — 576 their character . . . 567 the tendency of their method ofjfirilosophising 575, 576 Theraputre, a branch of the Essene sect 396 devoted to contemplation 396 their religious assemblies 396 neither Judaizing gentiles nor Christian converts 397 Theurgy, or magic, of Zoroaster . . 18 Theut,Thoth,or Hermes, the father of the Egyptian philosophy . 37 supposed by some to be a divinity 38 Thograi, a commentator upon Plato . 428 Thhmffius, a teacher of the Aristote¬ lian philosophy . 533 Thomas, Christian, a modern inno¬ vator in philosophy, his life and writings . 610 — 612 author of a monthly journal 610 his satirical humour . . . 611 his tenets . 611 character of his philosophy 612 Thomasius, a modern Aristotelian . 538 Thophail, a Spanish Saracen, author of Hai Ebn Yockdan . 430 Thrasyllus, a Platonist . 321 Timaeus, the Locrian, a Pythagorean, his tenets . 237 Timon, of Athens, a Misanthrope . 1 04 Timon, a Pyrrhonist . 283 Toletus, a learned writer of the six¬ teenth century . 531 Toxaris, a Scythian philosopher . . 60 Traditionary, the character of the Ear- baric philosophy . . 9 law, respect paid to it among the Jews . . 381 Tranquillity, the end of moral wisdom, according to Epicurus .... 274 Trapezuntius, G. a translator of Aris¬ totle . 523 Trebatius, a celebrated lawyer . . . 307 Trinity of Plato . 132 Tripod, destined to the wisest . , . 73 Triptolemus, the first Athenian legis¬ lator . 72 Trismegistus, the second Egyptian Hermes . 38 Trivium and Quadrivium, the circle of sciences in the seventh century . 481 Truth, doctrine concerning it, of Plato 127 Arcesilaus . 143 Carneades . 144 the Stoics . 187 Empedocles 234 Democritus 248 Protagoras . 252 Epicurus . 267 the Sceptics 284 Tschirn Hausen, author of a mathe¬ matical logic . 619 Tubero, a follower of the Stoic sect . 295 his moderation . 295 Twilight of the gods, the Celtic de¬ scription of the renovation of nature 55 Tycho Brahe, an eminent astronomer 630 Typhon, the evil principle,worshipped by the Egyptians . 44 U Unity, Pythagorean. (See Monad.) Universe. (See World.) Universal preconceptions of the Stoics 1 87 Universals, their e.xistence denied by Stilpo . 112 INDEX. G6'9 Page V Vacuum, opinion of Democritus con¬ cerning it . 250 Epicurus . . . 209 or void, according to Xe- kias, the first principle . Gil according to Des Cartes, none in nature .... 601 Valentine, founder of the Gnostic sect 445 Valhalla(the hall of Odin) ofthe Celts 55 Valla, L. an elegant writer of the fif¬ teenth century . 521 Varro, T. a follower of the Old Aca¬ demy, his character . 298 Vayer de la Mothe, a modern Sceptic 557 Venet, G. a modern Cabbalistic Pla- tonist . 543 Venus, the material or passive princi¬ ple, worshipped under the emblem of a cow . 43 Verger, a writer of the fifteenth cen¬ tury . * . . . . 521 Vincent, a Scholastic . 500 Virgil, allusions in his writings to phi¬ losophical tenets . 310 Virtue, doctrine of Aristippus con¬ cerning it .107 Plato . . . . 136 Aristotle . . 165 Antisthenes . 174 the Stoics . . 198 Pythagoras . . 226 Epicurus . . 277 Virtues, defined and classed by Aris¬ totle 165, 166 by the Stoics . 201 by Pythagoras . 226 by Epicurus 277 — 280 Vives, an enemy to the Scholastic philosophy, his character and writ¬ ings . 526 Vortices of Des Cartes . 601 W Wacic, a Saracen caliph, a patron of learning . 423 Water, the first principle in nature, according to Thales . 81 Werdenhagen, a scurrilous lampooner of philosophy . 578 Wessel, a Scholastic, who merited the appellation of the wise doctor . . 508 Whiston, author of a theory of the earth . 566 Winifrid, a learned monk of the pinth century . 485 Wisdom, the extent of the term . . 1 what, according to the Stoics 186 of Solomon, abounds with Platonic language . . 385 Wise men of the Stoics . . . 199, 200 Wise men, seven, of Greece, their his¬ tory . 73 Wolfe, Christian, an improver of phi¬ losophy, his life and character 613 accused of heresy, and banished . . 613 Page World, its origin, opinions concerning it, of the Chaldeans 21 the Persians . 26 the Egyptians 43, 44 the Celts . . 53 Orpheus . . 66 Socrates . . 101 Pherecydes . 210 Plato . . 133, 134 Aristotle . . 159 the Stoics 194, 195 Pythagoras . 229 Empedocles . 235 Philolaus . . 239 Ocellus . . . 236 Xenophanes . 241 Zeno, Eleat. . 244 Leucippus . 245 Democritus . 248 Heraclitus. . 256 Hippocrates . 258 Epicurus . . 271 its destruction and renovation, opinions concerning, of the Chaldeans . 21 , Indians . . SJ Egyptians . . 45 Celts ... 55 Etrurians . . 56 Plato ... 133 Stoics . 195, 196 Hippasus . . 238 according to the later Platon- ists, eternal . 346 according to Campanella, sen¬ tient . 591 how formed, according to Des Cartes . 602 the best possible, how pro¬ duced, according to Leibnitz 609 X Xantippe, wife of Socrates, her cha¬ racter . 93, 99 Xekias, an ancient Indian impostor, known under various names 640, 641 his popular doctrine . . . 641 his esoteric doctrine . . . 641 Xenocrates, a disciple of Plato . . 137 his integrity .... 138 his doctrine .... 139 Xenophanes, an Eleatic philosopher, his life . • . 240 his doctrine . . 241, 242 Xenophcn, a disciple of Socrates, his life . 102, 103 Y Year, Grecian, settled by Thales . . 82 Year, great, of Plato . 134 of the Stoics .... 197 Z Zabii, an Arabian sect . 403 their age and doctrines ... 32 670 INDEX. Page Zabli, worshippers of the stars . . . 434 Zaleucus, a Grecian legislator . . . 72 Zamolxis, a Scythian philosopher, who taught the doctrine of immortality . 60 Zardusht, or Zoroaster, the Persian reformer . 22 sources of his knowledge uncertain . 22 his doctrines . 22 still professed in Persia . 23 whether any of his writings are extant . 23 Zecharias, a Christian philosopher . 469 Zend, a Persian sacred book ... 23 Zeno, the founder of the Stoic sect, and his philosophy . 180 — 202 his life . 181—183 instructed by Crates the Cynic, and others . 181 his school, the Porch, instituted 181 his subtlety in reasoning . . 182 his moderation . 182 the origin and character of his school . 183 of Tarsus, a Stoic .... 207 the Eleatic philosopher, his life and tenets .... 243, 244 Page Zeno, denied the reality of external objects . 244 Zenodotus, an Eclectic preceptor . 340 | Zeidler, a modern Aristotelian . . 538 Zodiac, its signs known to the Egyp¬ tians . 40 signs of, known among the Malabars by the ancient Egyptian names . . . 642 Zoroaster, the Chaldean philosopher, his history uncertain 17, 18 to be distinguished from the Persian Zoroaster . 18 the writings ascribed to him spurious . 19 his magic, w'herein it con¬ sisted . 18 ADDENDA. Aristo, the Peripatetic . 169 Basilides, a successor of Epicurus . 281 Cleobulus, one of the seven wise men of Greece . 77 Egesinus, of the Middle Academy . 143 Evander, of the Middle Academy . 143 Polystratus, a follower of Epicurus . 281 HICHAIID CLAY, PRINTER, BREAD STREET HILI,. 1 ' i ' '^. vtC i' - 't '" .:S- py'ir-y ' >-A rS',; ;' ;' ^- ;' ! T~-- : ■ ' '::■ ’Vl' X- V •: •;';; v:,j, .rl' <'>:., •* 'v4'' •:' •'• V ,?•• / V *•. '.rc •<:>' ■^ -X . ” r'HyV-' - f ••; .r- ^ ■•^ .■■•If ^ V,:,'XV:: ;||^;ll |'V ^ Sfe'litf ^ - ':' t: ' : ’5x> -fS''-^ / ■ lx ^<1 ■ Jxn ; ., ^ / v^ X ■;/ '■■ ':I- X , ,;^( C: Xx X «r-';- '. Xv;, x>^: ".X: x ;' ..V' W'KX‘'‘'>. ■■ ' ■ ; xX>X‘;X,; ^X;.V ' X, •:. l;DxX\xvx’l;xX?x' v;: - . ;: x;,^ \ X'XXY:\'^,:X^XX>::p'‘X;XxX= ah'J.v-v .■y.’:y.’-,->: ■■'-X',,.-v-^/-''. , ■^■y.\:‘-'>- ^T'. :^-c<' m ■ '-A'- '.px-' ,v^. , ,' ',:v.-.'i-' .■.■■% S$X5X'*''P^XC.y^^:fe.XyXa: ■ :Ayy-.jy 'PXX*4-',V8M’’PPPP^ •v.'ra.?x •',’ ;; ■’. “T- • - r ■ V y x.v, 'M.*-' :’ -• -j?^, ' 'i / c .'•■^> ■^, ••>■: ■■'^x;‘-' '. , , ‘ . , jr • '/• ' ■ ■^' ■, '.>4^, / y:/ ; ....-Xp' 'ri,'; .' ,> ■ Uy'J-'X/'-^XvX yr.A. ■-'^' >'^,.fX;.' X-'' ■'■,-:/% : .XX;iAX,;A XV/ :'v y.p, ;y\ •'p.-t/lV ,y-,,;i:^,/;;V^^ ;:;C;X v,-; 5-;v> /•'SV.' Vyy? «X;#5iV -vysy -Py;;- 'V.XyX.yfc/iy ;,,,,. ;:y^,^ /yX |xvxv>:x v-q . ' V'Vy Xy , . •; ' ■,> Ay ■; , , y y ,s^;;y ;• , :S,oyvX yvi yy,:. Xy-y, xyh- y?-/^y^t‘x/yxx;x:::x '/X -v y x4xv^vXvX^''%vr:-XyX;y j,;r:‘XV XX^y^xxxXvXy X:y%XyVyV;;^y^::y:.:y;y te:Xyy. ;;yC:yV\ XXyy.V^xXyX X.y, ' XvXUliiXVXy-^-y- X X>:;X f X X,,X: r.yV.:y. 'y,, .y/x- yXvxyxvy- ,x-,i xy' , v: ■ 3vx:: " V,XXy,VyV- Xi; yty.y w Xyy.:/-;yy. yX, ;■,;■•.•/ I- ," vX xVy, Xy,. L y- ,y. 'y..', X '-Wt,,,-, -.. ■;;X-;' y ;- . , ;j ‘a'/X'X: or, XX-'.^XX i"'/X;X;'; ///y: V / ;;■■ y vyVyf’X. .:XXX X-’’ '■'■/. 'V XxX ■y-X'v’'- , IXX'XX V XX-:' :! t/ros ..-y ,:, -:■; - py a " yy^ .,x V- ;vXo>yy^' Ay y y'^y. 'X ,rv:v , x-vA y- y . frV'.X'.X- ••XX^X 'cX XCy;vX'f ,X;X*rv:,,;'y5;A,^^y VV ’ y;y .,y 'X'yXx A^t"X, X^M:\Xh^%t'tXxXxX:'k.X: 'it: K ...... .... . ..yvXt:ylrXyXX;XX-Jo0yx'^;XX,;:X.3.|;'J'X-;^:,X^f|i^yV,^^g^^ ■K:yyx^l#:xXyy'-..yt;xX3?;:;-X'"X;v^ U:'Xk'k"^SXXXBM^^&^ yyyg.'v ■ x; y/y.-Xfiyays';,-;..' y. yXVX, , '■ ''..py-r' /o'yr'y"ry!y«;..j./yxSA. . yyxl- f' ■ ■ X X^^^^ '■' ■ llxv3^S.3’'X?;|yP3^y. t ', ^ : ; .y'-v^’ijyX '3|'vxHX?..yyf‘ 'X:^' XX ■p?'^Sxi.::vXX'^;-Xy;,^|vX^^ ''- ■x.;,il^vfexXy;Xa^^M:i'eV¥'iX:y /: y-XiPy '.Cy: t£f # The history of philosophy, from the Theological Seminary-Speer Library Princeton 1 1012 00158 4491