Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	world_n	writer_n	year_n	155	4	4.2523	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27425	A dissertation upon the Epistles of Phalaris, Themistocles, Socrates, Euripides, and others, and the Fables of AEsop by Richard Bentley.	Bentley, Richard, 1662-1742.	1697 (1697)	Wing B1928; ESTC R14052	72,178	154

Archelaus King of Macedonia in which he refuses to go to him though invited in the most kind and obliging manner That he really denied his company to Archelaus and others we are assured from very good hands which was the ground for our Falsary to forge this Epistle But I believe none of those that mention it make so tall a Complement to Socrates as he does here to himself For he says The King offer'd him part of his Kingdom and that he should not come thither to be commanded but to command both his Subjects and Himself Can you desire a better token of a Sophist than this 'T is a fine offer indeed to a poor old Man that had nothing but his Staff and one Coat to his back But a Sophist abhorrs mediocrity he must always say the greatest thing and make a Tide and a Flood though it be but in a Bason of Water II. Well our Philosopher goes on and give a reasons of his refusal That his Daemon forbid him to go and then he falls into the long story of what happen'd to him in the Battle at Delium which was a tale of twenty years standing at the date of this Letter But the Sophist had read it in Plato and he would not miss the opportunity of an eloquent Narration I will not here insist upon the testimony of Athenaeus That the whole business is a mere fiction of Plato's let that be left in the middle But we may safely inferr thus much from it That even Athenaeus himself whose curiosity nothing escaped never met with these Epistles Which alone creates a just suspicion that they were forged since his days especially when the universal silence of all Antiquity gives a general consent to it There 's a passage indeed in Libanius which in Allatius's judgment seems plainly to declare that he had seen this very Epistle For after he had mention'd Socrates's refusal to go to Scopas and Eurylochus and Archelaus he adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now should we concede what Allatius would have this is all that can be inferred from thence in their favour That they are older than Libanius which I am willing to believe and That He believed them true which I matter not at all For so we have seen Stobaeus Suidas and others cry up Phalaris for a genuine Book and yet I fansie none of my Readers are now of their opinion But with Allatius's good leave I would draw the words of Libanius to a quite contrary purpose After he had said that many Princes had sollicited Socrates by Letter to come and live in their Courts and he answer'd them all with a denial But says he I want the Letters themselves in which you might perfectly see the Spirit of the Man This to me is an indication that the Letters he means were not extant For if he had them in his hand according to Allatius how could he want them And 't is plain he speaks here of several Letters being Replies to several Messages but in this Collection here 's but a single one I wish says he the Letters were to be had in those you might read his Character If this be the sense of those words as probably it is Libanius is so far from being Patron to our Epistles that he is a positive Witness against them III. The VII Letter is writ by Socrates to one of those that had fled to Thebes from the violence of the XXX Tyrants in which he gives him an account of the state of Athens since their departure That himself was now hated by the Tyrants because he would have no hand in the condemnation of Leon the Salaminian and then he tells the story at large Now here 's a manifest discovery that the Letters are supposititious For the business of Leon was quite over before those Fugitives left the Town For Leon was murder'd before Theramenes was and Theramenes was murder'd before Thrasybulus and his Party fled to Thebes And that Socrates means them in this Letter 't is evident from hence That he speaks here of their Conspiracy to resort privately towards Athens and set upon the Tyrants which afterwards came to pass IV. The VIII IX XII and XIII are Letters of Jest and Railery between Antisthenes and Aristippus and Simon the Shoo-maker 'T is an affront to the memory of those Men to believe they would fool and trifle in that manner especially send such impertinent stuff as far as from Sicily to Athens which could not decently be spoken even in merriment at a Table V. In the XIII Epistle among the acquaintance of Simon he names Phaedrus the same that gives the Title to the Dialogue of Plato and the XXV is writ by Phaedrus himself to Plato and both these are dated after Socrates's death I will appeal now to Athenaeus if these two Letters can be genuine He among other Errors in Chronology for which he chastises Plato brings this in for one That he introduces Phaedrus discoursing with Socrates who must certainly be dead before the days of the Philosopher How comes he then to survive him in these Epistles and discourse so passionately of his Death 'T is true for want of ancient History we cannot back this Authority with any other Testimony But I am sure all those that have a just esteem for Athenaeus can have no slight one of this Argument against the credit of the Letters VI. The XIV Epistle gives Xenophon a long Narrative of Socrates's Tryal and Death being writ presently after by one of his Scholars that was present at both Among other particulars he tells him That the Oration or Charge against Socrates was drawn up by Polycrates the Sophist But I doubt this will turn to a Charge against another Sophist for counterfeiting Letters For I think I can plainly prove That at the date of this Letter there was no such report ever mention'd that Polycrates had any hand in it and that this false Tradition which afterwards obtained in the World and gave occasion to our Writer to say it in his Letter did not begin till some years after Socrates's condemnation Diogenes Laertius brings Hermippus's testimony That Polycrates made the Charge 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But in opposition to this he presently subjoins That Favorinus in the First Book of his Commentaries says That Polycrates's Oration against Socrates is not true and real because he mentions in it the Walls built by Conon six years after Socrates's death To which Laertius subscribes his own assent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so it is I may freely say that this passage of Favorinus has not been yet rightly understood It is generally interpreted as if he denied the Oration that is attributed to Polycrates to be really his But this is very far from being his opinion For then he would be flatly confuted by Isocrates a Witness unanswerable who in a Discourse which he addresses to this very Polycrates tells him I perceive you

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that this was done while the Romans were at War with King Pyrrhus that is Olymp. CXXV which is above CCLXX Years after Phalaris's Death taking even the later Account of St. Hierom. A pretty Slip this of our Sophist who like the rest of his Profession was more vers'd in the Books of Orators than Historians to introduce his Tyrant borrowing Money of a City almost CCC Years before it was named or built II. In the XCII Epistle he threatens Stesichorus the Poet for raising Money and Soldiers against him at Aluntium and Alaesa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that perhaps he might be snapt before he got home again from Alaesa to Himera 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What a pity 't is again that the Sophist had not read Diodorus for he would have told him that this Alaesa was not in being in Phalaris's days It was first built by Archonides a Sicilian Olymp. XCIV 2. or as others say by the Carthaginians about Two Years before So that here are above CXX Years slipt since the latest period of Phalaris And we must add above a dozen more to the reckoning upon the Sophist's own score For this Letter is supposed to bear date before Stesichorus and Phalaris were made Friends which was a dozen Years as he tells his Tale before Stesichorus died and Phalaris he makes to survive him I am aware that the same Author says that there were other Cities in Sicily called Alaesa But it is evident from the situation that this Alaesa of Archonides is meant in the Epistles for this lies on the same Coast with Himera and Aluntium to which two the Sophist here joins it and is at a small distance from them And indeed there was no other Town of that name in the days of the Sophist the rest being ruin'd long before III. The LXX Epistle gives an account of several rich Presents to Polyclitus the Messenian Physician for doing a great cure upon Phalaris Among the rest he names 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ten couple of Thericlean cups But there is another thing besides a pretty Invention very useful to a Lyar and that is a good Memory For we will suppose our Author to have once known something of these Cups the time and the reason they were first called so but that he had unhappily forgot it when he writ this Epistle They were large Drinking-Cups of a peculiar shape so called from the first Contriver of them one Thericles a Corinthian Potter Pliny by mistaking his Author Theophrastus makes him a Turner lib. XVI cap. 40. Celebratur Thericles nomine calices ex terebintho solitus facere torno The words of Theophrastus are these Hist. Plant. I. V. cap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Turners make Thericlean Cups of the Turpentine tree which cannot be distinguished from those made by the Potters Here can nothing be gathered hence to make Thericles himself a Turner for after he had first invented them they were called Thericlean from their shape whatsoever Artificer made them and whether of Earth or of Wood or of Metal But as I said by the general consent of Writers we must call him a Potter Hesychius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lucian in Lexiphanes pag. 960. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Etymologicon M. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The words of Eubulus whom he cites are extant in Athenaeus lib. XI p. 471. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now the next thing to be enquired is the Age of this Thericles and we learn that from Athenaeus one Witness indeed but as good as a multitude in a matter of this nature pag. 470. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Cup says he was invented by Thericles the Corinthian Potter who was contemporary with Aristophanes the Comaedian And in all probability he had this indication from some Fable of that Poet 's now lost where that Corinthian was mention'd as one then alive But all the Plays that we have left of his are known to have been written and acted between the LXXXIIX and XCVII Olympiads which is an interval of XXXVI years Take now the very first year of that number and Thericles with the Cups that had their appellation from him come above CXX years after Phalaris's death But I must remove one Objection that may be made against the force of this Argument for some ancient Grammarians give a quite different account why such Cups were called Thericlean Some derive the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the skins of Beasts that were figured upon them and Pamphilus the Alexandrian would have them called so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because Beasts were scared and frightned when in Sacrifices Wine was poured upon them out of those Cups So I interpret the words of Pamphilus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For what is more ordinary in old Authors than the memory of that custom of pouring wine on the heads of the Victims Ipsa tenens dextra pateram pulcherrima Dido Candentis vaccae media inter cornua fudit Nor are wild Beasts only called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but tame too such as Bulls and Cows as the Epigrammatist calls the Minotaure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I cannot therefore comprehend why the most learned Is. Casaubon will read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this passage and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For I own I see little or no sense in it according to his Lection And as for the Authority of the ancient Epitomizer of Athenaeus who he says reads it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one may be certain 't was a fault only in that Copy of him that Casaubon used For Eustathius who appears never to have seen the true Athenaeus but only that Epitome read it in his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and took it in the same sence that I now interpret it p. 1209. Iliad H 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And now for those two derivations of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was ever any thing so forced so frigid so unworthy of refutation Does not common Analogy plainly shew that as from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and many such like so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 besides so many express Authorities for it which I have cited before To which I may add that of Iulius Pollux l. VI. c. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Plutarch in P. Aemilius pag. 273. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Clemens Alexand. II. Paed. p. 69. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For one may justly inferr that both Plutarch and Clemens believed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they join them with those other Cups all which had their names from Men that either invented or used them And so says a Manuscript note upon that passage of Clemens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that upon the whole let Pamphilus and those other

need not mention the Latin Writers of the Aesopean Fables Phaedrus Iulius Titianus and Avienus the two first in Iambic the last in Elegiac but I shall proceed to examine those Greek ones now extant that assume the name of Aesop himself There are two parcels of the present Fables the one which are the more ancient CXXXVI in number were first publisht out of the Heidelberg Library by Neveletus A. D. MDCX. The Editor himself well observed That they were falsly ascribed to Aesop because they mention holy Monks To which I will add another remark That there is a sentence out of Iob 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Naked we all came and naked shall we return But because these two passages are in the Epimythion and belong not to the Fable it self they may justly be supposed to be Additions only and Interpolations of the true Book I shall therefore give some better Reasons to prove they are a re●●● Work That they cannot be Aesop's ow● the CLXXXI Fable is a demonstrative proof For that is a story of Demades the Rhetor who lived above CC years after our Phrygian's time The CXCIII is about Momus's Carping at the Works of the Gods There he finds this fault in the Bull That his Eyes were not placed in his Horns so as he might see where he pusht But Lucian speaking of the same Fable has it thus That his Horns were not placed right before his Eyes And Aristotle has it a third way That his Horns were not placed about his Shoulders where he might make the strongest push but in the tenderest part his Head Again Momus blames this in the Man That his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did not hang on the out-side of him so as his Thoughts might be seen but in Lucian the fault is That he had not a Window in his Breast I think it probable from hence that Aesop did not write a Book of his Fables for then there would not have been such a difference in the telling Or at least if these that are now extant were Aesop's I should guess from this specimen that Lucian had the better on 't and beat him at his own play VII But that they are recenter than even Babrius who is himself one of the latest Age of good Writers I discovered by this means I observed in 'em several passages that were not of a piece with the rest but had a turn and composition plainly Poetical as in the CCLXIII Fable which begins thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This I saw was a Choliambic Verse and I presently suspected that the Writer had taken it out of Babrius And I was soon confirmed in my judgment by this fragment of his that belongs to the same Fable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For in the Fable in Prose there are these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Whence it evidently appears that the Author of that Parcel which was published by Neveletus did nothing else but epitomize Babrius and put him into Prose But I will give you some further proofs of it The CCLXI begins thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which at the first reading one perceives to be part of a Scazon and thus it is in a fragment of Babrius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the CLVI about the Fox with the Firebrand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who does not discover here a Scazon of Babrius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The CCXLIII is a manifest turning out of Choliambics into Prose for the whole is made up either of Pieces or entire Verses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the CCXCIII there are these remnants of Babrius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The CLXV begins thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I suppose to have been in Babrius thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In all these passages here are most visible footsteps by which we may trace our Imitator but generally he has so disguised the Fables that no body can find they ever belong'd to Babrius In the CCXLV about the Priests of Cybele there 's nothing but a short dry Story and no reliques of a Verse But there 's a noble fragment of Babrius belonging to the same Fable which I will here set down both to correct it for he that has given it us has printed it false and to shew you how much we have lost 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 VIII Thus I have proved one Half of the Fables now extant that carry the name of Aesop to be above a Thousand Years more recent than He. And the other Half that were public before Neveletus will be found to be yet more modern and the latest of all That they are not from Aesop's own Hand we may know from the LXX Of the Serpent and the Crab-fish which is taken from a Scolion or Catch much older than Aesop that is extant in Athenaeus and must be corrected thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And there is great reason to believe that they were drawn up by Planudes one of the Later Greeks that translated into his native Tongue Ovid's Cato's Caesar's Commentaries and Macrobius For there is no Manuscript any where above CCC years old that has the Fables according to that Copy Besides that there are several passages that betray a modern Writer as in the LXXVII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Bird and XXXIX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Beast both unknown to all ancient Authors and in the CXXIX 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Crying in his heart a manifest Hebraism in imitation of Eccles. xi I. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The LXXV about the Aethiopian is taken almost word for word out of the VI of Apthonius the Rhetorician who made an Essay upon some Aesopic Fables that is yet extant The IV as appears from the last sentence of it is a Paraphrase on the CCLXXXIV of Neveletus's Parcel which Parcel as I have proved above are a Traduction of Babrius and particularly in this very Fable there are footsteps of his Verses 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Collection therefore is more recent than that Other and coming first abroad with Aesop's Life writ by Planudes 't is justly believed to be owing to the same Writer IX That Idiot of a Monk has given us a Book which he calls The Life of Aesop that perhaps cannot be match'd in any Language for Ignorance and Nonsense He had pick'd up two or three true stories That Aesop was Slave to one Xanthus carried a Burthen of Bread conversed with Craesus and was put to death at Delphi but the Circumstances of these and all his other Tales are pure Invention He makes Xanthus an ordinary Lydian or Samian to be a t Philosopher which word was not heard of in those days but invented afterwards by