Speech and Ways of Writing imaginable They wrought it up into all the Majesty and Grace all the Sweetness and Smoothness that an Happy Composition of Words an Harmonious mixture of Vowels and Diphthongs or a Just Cadency of Syllables could give it The best Greek Writers had generally Skill in Music which was infus'd into 'em from their Infancy and none were reckon'd well-bred that wanted it This made their Ear just and fine and the fineness of their Ear easily slid into their Tongue model'd their Speech and made it Tuneable They brought all the Learning in the World into their Language and wrote in the best manner upon all the most useful and pleasing Subjects that could benefit or entertain Mankind The Natural Perfection of their Tongue and the distinguishing Excellency of their Authors in all Kinds of Knowledge and Ways of Writing made 'em a Compleat Standard and Model to other Nations and after-Ages upon which every one endeavour'd to form himself So that what was sure always to be lik'd could not chuse but last long Their Empire also did not a little contribute to the Stability and Prevalence of their Language They overcame a Great part of the World and extended their Tongue with their Conquests so as to make it Universal All Nations borrow'd from Them but They had that Contempt of the Barbarity of other Countries that they were shy of suffering either their Manners or their Speech to be introduc'd among ' em This Pride they preserv'd in a great measure even when the Roman Empire was at its utmost heighth and while Rome flourish'd with the Glory of Arms the Seat of Learning still continu'd at Athens This kept the Language so far entire and unmix'd that we have Greek Books writ by Authors at almost Two thousand Years distance who disagree less in their Phrase and Manner of Speech than the Books of any Two English Writers do who liv'd but Two hundred Years asunder This then was a Peculiar Happiness of the Greek Tongue No other Language that has been of known and familiar use in the World not even the Latin it self enjoy'd any thing like it An 150 or 200 Years was the utmost Length of Time that the Latin Purity continu'd And therefore to Compare the Greek the most Holding Tongue in the World with the English the most Fickle and Fleeting of any and to Inferr from the observable difference between the several Ages of English that there was as great a Difference between the several Ages of Greek is a Comparison and an Inference which No-body but Dr. Bentley would have allow'd himself to make that is to be plain with him No-body but One who has no true Relish no nice Tast of the Beauties and Proprieties of Either of these Languages or of any Other that he has yet pretended to judge of or to write in By those Marks and Moles of Novity which he has pointed out in the Paragraph we are upon the Reader is by this time satisfied how able he is to assign to every Greek Writer his proper Age and Period meerly by the Thread and Colour of his Style Indeed tho' he has the Vanity to declare this to be his Extraordinary Faculty yet he has withal the Modesty not to hope that he shall convince any body and in this I dare say he is not mistaken For 't is somewhat hard to imagine how a Man should enter into the Spirit and Delicacy and all the Various Niceties of a Dead Tongue who is so far from having any exquisite sense of these things even in that very Tongue which he was born and bred up in I shall take an occasion by and bye to give the Reader such a Specimen of his English Eloquence as will discourage any body if there be any body left who is not yet discourag'd from chusing Him for a Taster In the mean time to stay the Reader 's Longing I shall instance in One Happy Phrase newly minted by the Dr. in this very Paragraph he speaks here of the Mien of a Face which as I take it is much the same thing with the Behaviour of a Look or the Carriage of a Smile I do not know how particular the Dr's Mien or his Face may be for to my knowledge I never saw him but the Mien of the Face of his Style the Reader must allow me even from this single instance is somewhat extraordinary THE Use of the Attic Dialect was made one shrewd Objection against Phalaris the Use of the Attic Talent Dr. Bentley is resolv'd shall be another This Way of Counting recurrs pretty often in the Epistles however not so often as that an Argument built upon it should deserve to be rank'd among the General Proofs but I am so little sensible of the force of it that I am willing to allow it a place there and if Dr. Bentley can make it out I promise to renounce not those Particular Epistles only from whence 't is taken but the Whole Sett of them The Dr. upon this Article accuses his Mock-Phalaris of mistaking the Sicilian Talent and this Mistake of his he with his usual Gaiety calls a Slippery Way of telling Mony and therefore cautions us against dealing with him He explains himself thus That the Sicilian Talent was the Lowest of any that Phalaris promising in his Epistles to several of his Countrymen Talents in General must be understood to mean Sicilian Talents whereas he means nothing like it Now says the Dr. if a Bargain were made in England to pay so many Pounds or Marks and the Party should pretend at last that he meant Scots Marks or French Livres few I suppose would care to have Dealings with him And this is the very Case in so many of these Letters So far from being the Case that the Case is just contrary For if the â—icilian Talents were so very Low and Phalaris must be thought to intend them in his Promises and yet paid Attic ones Those he dealt with had certainly no reason to complain of him Would a man think himself ill us'd in Scotland who should have a General Promise made him of so many Pounds which he expected to be made good in the Pounds of the Country and receiv'd 'em afterwards in good English Sterling What could possibly give this Perverse Turn even to Dr. Bentley's Imagination What Cloudy Author had he been conversing with that could put him into this State of Perplexity and Confusion We have great hopes indeed that the Intricate Accounts of this Paragraph should be clear'd up by such an Head in such Order But it may be the Dr. did not intend this for a Remark that was to Edifie his Reader but for a pure piece of harmless Diversion Having therefore sported himself a little he resumes the Chair and thus authoritatively dictates to us We are to know that in Sicily as in most other Countries the Name and Value of their Coins and the way of reckoning by Summs
indeed to find there that our MS. was not perus'd Could they not have ask'd for it agen then after my Return Yes I could Sir and have been deny'd it again which I was not very willing to venture I neither thought my self so little nor Dr. Bently so great nor the MS. so considerable that I should make a second Application for it after such a Repulse no not tho' I had been sure of obtaining it much less could I ever think of asking it agen when by what Mr. Bennet had told me I had all the reason in the world to think I should be agen deny'd it But there is a reason for every thing says the Dr. and the Mystery was soon reveal'd A pretty decent Phrase on so light an occasion but this is not the only instance where the Critick has got the better of the Divine Well but how was the Mystery reveal'd why He had the hard Hap it seems in some private Conversation to say that the Epistles were spurious and unworthy of a new Edition Hinc Illae Lachrymae If he said this as he intimates he did at Oxford where the Book was then printing he said a very uncivil thing and what in his Dialect he terms his Hard Hap other People would be apt to call his Ill Breeding However I seriously declare I was utterly a stranger to this Discourse of his till he told me of it in Print I might hear perhaps of his being in Oxford but I had heard too much of his Discourse with Mr. Bennet to be curious in making any Enquiries into his private Conversation The Reader will excuse this Tedious Descant on Dr. Bently's Relation of Matter of Fact The true Story of our MS. was a point of importance my Honesty was concern'd in this part of the Dispute the rest only touches my Learning Having therefore I hope justified my Conduct where it most became me to do it the Matters of pure Criticism will give me no Concern I 'm sure tho' they may put me to some little Trouble I shall enter upon 'em with the Indifference of a Gamester who plays but for a trifle which 't is much the same to him whether he wins or loses I shou'd now fall closely to my work the Authority of Phalaris's Epistles but that there is an Introduction of Dr. Bently's that lies in my way and must first have a Reflexion or two bestow'd upon it He begins it with telling us that Mr. Wotton by the power of a long Friendship between 'em engag'd him to write it I hope Mr. Wotton will let the Publick know that he neither engag'd his Friend to write upon this Subject in this manner nor approv'd of these Discourses when written which the World will presume him to have done till the contrary appears and till he has disclaim'd Dr. Bentley's attempt as publickly as he seems now to countenance and avow it 'T is a little strange that Mr. Wotton in a second Edition of his Book which he had discreetly taken care to purge of most things that look'd like ill Manners in himself shou'd be prevail'd upon to allow a place to the ill Manners of another man But I hear and I am not unwilling to think that Mr. Wotton receivâ—d this Present at a venture from Dr. Bently and let it be printed without giving himself the trouble of reading it And I the rather fall in with this account because I find Mr. Wotton in his Book zealously vindicating the Age from the Imputation of Pedantry and assuring us that tho' the Citation of Scraps of Latin and a nauseous ostentation of Reading were in fashion Fifty or Sixty Years ago yet that all that is now in a great measure disus'd Which I suppose he would never have done in some of the last Pages of his Book if he had then known of the Dissertation that immediately follows it A Gentleman of my acquaintance was observing to me what a Motly Unequal work these two Pieces made as they now lye together Mr. Wotton said he in his Reflections takes in the whole compass of Ancient and Modern Learning and endeavours to show wherein either of 'em has been defective and wherein they have excell'd A Large Design fit for the Pen of my Lord Bacon and in the well executing of which any one Man's Life would be usefully spent Dr. Bentley comes after him with a Dissertation half as big as his Book to prove that three or four small Pieces ascrib'd to some of the Ancients are not so ancient as they pretend to be a very inconsiderable Point and which a wise man would grudge the throwing away a weeks thought upon if he could gain it and what then shall we say of Him that has spent two or three years of his life to lose it Mr. W's motive to write was he tells us a piece of Publick Service that he hop'd he might do the World Dr. Bentley's plainly a private Picque and such as 't was utterly unfit for him to act upon either as a Scholar or a Christian much more as he was one in Holy Orders and that had undertaken the publick defence of Religion Mr W. continued he is modest and decent speaks generally with respect of those he differs from and with a due distrust of his own Opinions Dr. Bentley is Positive and Pert has no regard for what other men have thought or said and no suspicions that he is fallible Mr. W's Book has a Vein of Learning running through it where there is no ostentation of it Dr. Bentley's Appendix has all the Pomp and Show of Learning without the Reality In truth said he there is scarce any thing as the Book now stands in which that and the Appendix agree but in commending and admiring Dr. Bentley in which they are so very much of a Piece that one would think Dr. Bentley had writ both the one and the other But leaving these two Friends to the Pleasure of their mutual Civilities I shall go on to the rest of my remarks on Dr. Bentley's Introduction After telling us then at whose Instance he wrote this famous Piece of Criticism he begins to give us a cast of his skill in the Point Sir W. Temple had observ'd in favour of the Ancients that some of the Oldest Books we have are the best in their kinds To this Dr. Bentley replies That some of the Oldest Books are the best in their kinds the same Person having the Double Glory of Invention and Perfection is a thing observ'd even by some of the Ancients And for this he very learnedly quotes Dion Chrysostome But then says he the Authors they gave this Honour to are Homer and Archilochus one the Father of Heroic Poem and the other of Epode and Trochaic p. 7. What he means by saying that this had been observ'd even by some of the Ancients is not easie to apprehend nor why he quotes Chrysostome for it whose Authority either in this or any other case is not
at a loss to find any Footsteps of him for Nine Hundred Years more down to the Age of Aventinus and yet the Criticks have receiv'd him without being so nice as to examine what Secret Cave he was conceal'd in Phoedrus as far as I can find was never mention'd by any Author since Avienus till his Fables were in this Age brought to light by Pithaeus after they had been lost above a Thousand Years Lactantius de Mortibus Persecutorum was a Book which the World had not seen since St. Ierome's time till after a Thousand Years Baluze discover'd it in the famous Library of Colebert and made it publick Now as our Dissertator learnedly argues if these Books lay untouch'd and unstirr'd they must have moulder'd away if they were us'd during these Ten Centuries Somebody would surely have spoken of ' em Either the Dr. must give up these Authors as Spurious or these Objections as Slight and Frivolous and own that the Silence of the Ancients is not a Direct but as any-body else would have thought and call'd it a very Indirect Argument against 'em tho' still not quite so indirect as another that he founds upon a Disagreement between Lucian and the Epistles in their Accounts of Phalaris This does not come properly under the head I am now speaking to however because he has thrown together here Two or Three Paultry Proofs that would make no Figure by themselves I shall take 'em as they lye before me The Different Relations concerning Phalaris given by Lucian and the Epistles I urg'd formerly as a Proof that Lucian could not write them But as He has manag'd it at second hand to shew that Lucian does as good as expresly declare he never saw 'em it either proves nothing or proves too much even that Lucian never saw Timaeus as Learned as he was and as often as he mentions him For Timaeus relates that the Agrigentines threw the Brazen Bull into the Sea but Lucian says Phalaris sent it to Delphos What I should gather from hence would be that Lucian overlook'd that and many other Authorities and did not confine himself to strict History in a Declamation but according to Dr. Bentley's manner of drawing Consequences it must follow that Timaeus no more writ his History than Phalaris did his Letters for Lucian equally contradicts Both and for that reason is a Bad Evidence against either of them Now if Lucian himself be of no Authority in this point much less are those Authors he follow'd which Dr. Bentley summons up as so many Witnesses against the Epistles I would ask him how many Witnesses these are where they liv'd what are their Names and the Names of the Books they wrote ` T is very hard to urge such Testimonies against us as are not now and probably never were in being For Lucian in this Harangue seems to tye himself up to no Authors nor to be guided by any thing but his own Invention and this the Dr. himself confesses in another place where he says Lucian feigns an Embassy from Phalaris to Delphi And if the Ground of this whole Discourse were a Fiction why does the Dr. here argue from it as seriously as if it were copy'd from the most Authentic Histories then extant how can he allow himself to put such an Air of Gravity upon what he knows to be such a Trifle We shall have him at this rate in his next Dissertation solemnly quoting Lucian's Vera Historia too and the unknown Authors which he follow'd But I suppose he resolv'd to make the best advantage he could of these Poor Colours for want of Better Authorities For the Two Historians he brings to strengthen his Proof say nothing that is inconsistent with the Epistles Jamblichus he says brings in Abaris in company with Pythagoras to Phalaris but in the Epistles Abaris refuses to come Who would not have refus'd an Invitation from Phalaris till he had good assurances that he might come with Safety Report had told him very dismal Stories of him and dress'd him up in frightful Colours Abaris perhaps did not know at first but that Phalaris might Live upon Philosophers Flesh or might have a Fancy to try which made his Bull Roar best a Scythian or a Sicilian an Experiment which Abaris by no means car'd to have made upon him for he came from a Cold Country and had a very particular Aversion to Fire These were very Important matters and if he should not have taken care to be fully satisfied in 'em before he ventur'd his Person he had not been quite so Wise a man as he was thought to be for one part of Wisdom is to be Cautious Pythagoras therefore manag'd at the very same rate he often refus'd to come and yet came at last why might not this be the case of Abaris This is a very easie way of reconciling Phalaris with Iamblichus and he does not differ so widely from Heraclides neither but that They too may be brought with Dr. Bentley's Leave and in his Carriers Phrase to set Horses together Phalaris says he was an Orphan before he came to Agrigent and yet Heraclides says his Mother was burnt there Dr. Bentley has given a Clear Solution of this Difficulty himself and frankly owns that his Mother might be burnt tho' his Father dy'd long before But how says he came the Old Woman to be roasted at Agrigent if Phalaris fled alone from Astypalaea neither Wife nor Child nor any Relation following him according to the Epistles I do not remember any such Epistle in my Edition of Phalaris but if there should be such an one in the King's MS I 'll answer this Objection to it when the Library-keeper is in so good an Humor as to favour me with a Sight of it Till then I may be excus'd from prosecuting this Point any further Only I must observe to the Dr that either he uses some Copy of Heraclides that I have not seen or else cites him for what he does not say Both Here and in the 30th Page of his Dissertation he tells us that Heraclides affirms Phalaris to have been burnt by the Agrigentines whereas he only says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 'T is true it 's all one to his purpose whether he was burnt or any other way put to Death but he has such a Facility of Misunderstanding or Misrepresenting Authors to serve a Turn that he does it even when it is of no service to him I Hope I have now so thoroughly examin'd Dr. Bentley â—s General Arguments that none of 'em can be thought to affect the whole Body of the Epistles if his Objections against some Particular Letters have no more Weight in 'em he 's the best Patron Phalaris has yet met with for the next Happiness to being very well Defended is that of being very weakly Oppos'd All his Attacks of this kind are grounded upon Chronology and therefore before he could make any Approaches he was oblig'd to
Dr. BENTLEY'S DISSERTATIONS ON THE Epistles of PHALARIS AND THE Fables of AESOP EXAMIN'D By the Honourable Charles Boyle Esq Remember Milo's End Wedg'd in that Timber which he strove to rend Roscom Ess. of Transl. Vers. LONDON Printed for Tho. Bennet at the Half-moon in St. Paul's Church-yard 1698. THE PREFACE SOON after Dr. Bentley's Dissertation came out I was call'd away into Ireland to attend the Parliament there The Publick Business and my own private affairs detain'd me a great while in that Kingdom else the World should have had a much Earlier account of Him and his Performance For tho' He took above two Years to make his Learned Reflections on Phalaris yet Two Months would have been enough to have shown him that he is but a weak Champion in a very frivolous Cause I speak not this one of any vain design of setting up for a Quick Writer but meerly to avoid being thought to have thrown away any considerable part of my life upon so triflng a subject which as Idle a man as I am is an Imputation I would not willingly lye under I little imagin'd ever to have been engag'd in a Dispute of this nature I am not very fond of Controversies even where the Points debated are of some importance but in trivial matters and such as Mankind is not at all concern'd in methinks they are unpardonable This ever since I came to have any Opinions of my own has been one of 'em and is still tho' I am unluckily at present brought to act contrary to it But the Case is this Dr. Bentley has been pleas'd with some warmth to fall foul on an Edition and Version of Phalaris's Epistles that I some years since offer'd to the World He has taken a great deal of Good-natur'd pains to prove that I had been very foolishly busying my self upon a Contemptible and Spurious Author and had made a bad book much worse by a very ill Edition of it I was very Young when I appear'd on that occasion and I appear'd rather as one that wish'd well to Learning than profess'd it and for both these reasons promis'd my self good usage from the men of more profound Skill in such matters Dr. Bentley was sensible that his Criticisms would lye under some disadvantage on this account and therefore to excuse his making so free with the Edition was pleas'd to make yet freer with Me and according to His Breeding to tell Me and all the World that I had set my name to a Book which did not belong to me The first of these Reflections had it come single I could easily have neglected had he stop'd there I would have left the Book to shift for it self and Him to the good opinion he has of his own performances without endeavouring to lessen it But when he carried his Criticisms so far as to assert not only of Phalaris but his Editor too that they neither of 'em wrote what was ascrib'd to 'em he gave me so plain and so publick an Affront that I could not with any tolerable regard to my reputation quietly put it up Thus was I much against my inclinations brought into the Lists It was necessary for me to say something in defence of my self and when I did so I thought it would be judg'd proper for me to say something too in defence of my Author and to enquire into the justness of those Criticisms which Dr. Bentley has advanc'd on this occasion and which I foresaw wou'd be look'd upon as in some measure aim'd at Me tho' they did not really belong to me I have not any where in my Book asserted that the Epistles which carry Phalaris's name are Genuine and I am not therefore engag'd to defend their Reputation against the Attacks of Dr. Bentley or any other person who by the help of Leisure and Lexicons shall set up for a Critic in this point But as I have not undertaken for their being Genuine so neither have I with a decisive and assuming air pronounc'd 'em Spurious I express'd my self with that Caution and Reserve in this matter which I thought became a Young Writer who was sensible that the best and ablest Iudges were divided in their opinions about it and I thought it would be a very Indecent part in Me to make my self a Iudge between ' em But I was chiefly induc'd to observe these measures by the Regard I had for the most Accomplish'd Writer of the Age whom I never think of without calling to mind those happy Lines of Lucretius Qnem Tu Dea Tempore in omni Omnibus ornatum voluisti excellere rebus a Character which I dare say Memmius did not better deserve than Sir William Temple He had openly declar'd in favour of the Epistles and the Nicety of his Taste was never I think disputed by Such as had any themselves I quoted his Words with that respect which is due to ev'ry thing that comes from him but must now beg his pardon for it for I have by this means I find drawn him into a share of Dr. Bentley's displeasure who has hereupon given himself the trouble of writing almost fourscore pages solemnly to disprove that One of Sir William's which he has prefix'd to his Dissertation and which to give him my opinion of his whole Book at once is the only good Page there I am therefore the rather inclin'd to give Dr. Bentley's Reflections a Due Examination on Sir William Temple's account upon whom I so unhappily occasion'd this Storm of Criticism to fall In truth for a Man who has been so great an Ornament to Learning he has had strange usage from Some who are Retainers to it He had set the world a Pattern of mixing Wit with Reason Sound Knowledge with Good Manners and of making the one serve to recommend and set off the other but his Copy has not been at all follow'd by those that have writ against him in a very rough way and without that Respect which was due both to His Character and their Own I will not pretend to determine on which side in those Disputes the Truth lies only thus much I will venture to say of 'em that let Sir W. T. be as much out in some of his Opinions as he 's represented to be yet They who read both sides will be apt to fall in with Tully's Opinion of Plato and say Cum Illo Ego meherclè errare malim quà m cum istis Scriptoribus vera sentire I had rather be so Handsomly mistaken as He is if he be mistaken than be so Rudely and Dully in the right as Some of his Opposers allowing 'em to be in the right are There was also another Consideration that determin'd me to write Dr. Bentley's Reflections were understood to go further than either Sir William Temple or my Self and to be levell'd at a Learned Society in which I had the happiness to be educated and which Dr. Bentley is suppos'd to attack under those General Terms of Our
very considerable and who besides does not say that for which he 's produc'd especially when there is an approved Writer more ancient than Dion that has directly said that for which Dion is improperly brought Dion in the Oration quoted after a tedious insipid Exordium about the different talents of praising and dispraising takes occasion from thence to mention Homer as the famous Parent of Panegyrick as Archilochus was of Satyr and prefers 'em to all others in their way But he has not a word there about the Oldest Books being the best in their kind or of the Double Glory of inventing and perfecting for which Dr. Bentley gravely produces him But tho' Dion says nothing of this Velleius Paterculus does Non quenquam alium says he cujus operis primus Auctor fuerit in eo perfectissimum reperiemus praeter Homerum Archilochum Lib. 1. Cap. 5. 'T is a little odd methinks that Dr. Bentley who professes in this Piece of his to give Battel to Sophists and Sophistry and to decry 'em as a company of illiterate Scriblers should yet think fit to grace the very Entrance of his Work with vouchng the Authority of as errant a Sophist and Declaimer as ever was and with vouching him for what he really did not say and for what had been said by a much better hand before him But great Scholars have very particular ways with ' em Dr. Bentley goes on But the choice of Phalaris and Aesop as they are now extant for the two great and inimitable Originals is a piece of Criticism of a Peculiar Complexion and must proceed from a singularity of Palate and Iudgment For Aesop it will be time enough to account when I come to the entire Dissertation that concerns him But as to Phalaris's Epistles many learned men of different Ages and Countries have been profess'd admirers of 'em never any man till the Judicious Dr. Bentley arose pretended to despise 'em even those Criticks of late days who suspected their being Genuine yet allow'd 'em to be finish'd things in their way and excellently well counterfeited And therefore the value which Sir W. Temple professes for 'em cannot be said to proceed from a Singularity of Palate and Iudgment at least this ought not to be said by him who but four Pages afterwards lets us know that Stobaeus esteem'd 'em so highly as to insert some of 'em into his Judicious Collections and that Suidas terms 'em 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most admirable Letters Sir W. Temple one would have thought might have been secured from the imputation of Singularity by the concurring Judgments of two such men for whom we may be sure Dr. Bentley on any other occasion would have had a particular regard the one an eminent Commonplacer and the other a no less eminent Dictionary-writer 'T is a pleasant Reflexion to consider that Dr. Bentley at the same time that he is passing this free Censure on Sir W. Temple's Palate is himself advancing an Opinion contrary to the sense of all Mankind that had ever written before him Will not a modest Reader on this occasion be apt to say that both the Criticism and the Critic too are of a Peculiar Complexion He forgets I believe when and where a certain Critic of our times maintain'd that Ovid and Manilius were the only two Poets that had wit among the Ancients A very extraordinary piece of Criticism and which doubtless proceeded not from any singularity of Palate and Iudgment 'T is just as if I should say that Sir W. Temple and Dr. Bentley are the two best-bred Writers living or to put it into the Dr's more learned and polite way That Nireus and Thersites were the only two formose men that repair'd to the Siege of Ilium Manilius writes with just as much wit as Dr. Bentley does with modesty only the difference is that Manilius's subject would not admit of wit and therefore he might have it for ought we know tho' he did not show it whereas Dr. Bentley's subject which is generally Himself does not only admit of modesly but require it The rest of Dr. Bentley's Preamble is taken up in giving us an account how spurious Books came to prevail upon the World He says This was a practice almost as old as Letters but that i◠chiefly prevail'd when the Kings of Pergamus and Alexandria rivalling one another in the Magnificence and Copiousness of their Libraries gave great Rates for any Treatises that carried the names of Celebrated Authors and this he proves out of Galen upon Hippocrates de Naturâ Hominis There are other Old Writers that tell this Story and tell it more truly than Galen did tho' a Native of Pergamus He positively affirms in favour of the Point he is proving that till the time of these Rival Princes there was no such thing as a spurious Book in the World which is neither true nor agreeable to what Dr. Bentley tells us in the case that the Practice of forging Books was almost as Old as Letters Here therefore as before in the case of Paterculus Dr. Bentley should have contented himself with vouching apposite tho' common Authorities and not have gone out of his way to have fetch'd in a witness that after all speaks against him But he loves to surprize and dazle his Reader for who would expect to see a point of History setl'd out of a Physician I thought indeed Quotation had been the Dr's peculiar Province and that either he could manage that to advantage or nothing But these two awkward Proofs out of Dion Chrysostome and Galen the very first he has produc'd have shook my opinion of him even in this Respect As we go further we shall see clearlier what to judge of him I will detain the Reader no longer in the Approaches to our Argument than till I have desir'd him to joyn with me in his thanks to Dr. Bentley for the Intimation he has given us of a certain Supplement to Petronius found at Buda He does not I suppose mean that from Alba Graeca which any of his Dictionaries would have told him was Latin not for Buda but Belgrade and therefore I conclude that this must be some new discovery which Dr. Bentley has had earlier notice of than the rest of the Learned World and that in time he will oblige us with a further account of it DR Bentley having declar'd open War against Phalaris and all his Party and having in his own Opinion gain'd the Victory thought that the more Captive Criticks there were to follow his Chariot-wheels the more glorious would his Triumph be He begins therefore with giving us an account of the Number and Strength of the Enemy he engages He tells us that the Epistles have been admitted as Genuine ever since Stobaeus's time that He has quoted 'em thrice that Suidas speaks of 'em with honour and that Tzetzes has made large Extracts out of ' em These three I think says he are the only Men among the Ancients
Perictyone and Aristoxenus two Pythagoreans and who very probably wrote Doric because they were Pythagoreans and yet in Stobaeus's time it is plain that some part of the Writings of the One were in Ionic and those of the Other if I remember right for I have not Stobaeus now by me in the Common Dialect Let Dr. Bentley then take which side he pleases either that Perictyone and Aristoxenus and I will add Zaleucus too who we are sure was a Pythagorean also from very good Authority either I say that these did write originally in Doric or that they did not If they did then we have Instances in 'em of Ancient Authors transdialected very early long before the days of Stobaeus if they did not then here is a plain Proof that Authors probably of Doric Countries to be sure One of 'em was might nevertheless not write Doric and either of these being granted me the Reader sees there will be no difficulty in justifying the Dialect of Phalaris Indeed if the Last be granted me it will be pretty difficult to justifie Dr. Bentley's hardy assertion that the Pythagoreans would sooner have lost their Lives than have written out of Doric and that if they had done it it is most certain they would have been banish'd the Society And therefore Dr. Bentley I suppose to make himself Consistent a very hard Task will choose rather to grant that these Writers were originally in Doric and if they were he will please to consider how they got out of it and shew us why Phalaris might not get out the very same way And here I should take my leave of this tedious Article but that I hear Dr. Bentley crying out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and calling loudly on the Learned World to listen to a mighty Discovery He undertakes to prove that Ocellus Lucanus did not repudiate his Vernacular Idiom nor compose his Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Dress that it now wears but in his own Country fashion that is in plain English that he did not write it in the Common Dialect as 't is now extant but in Doric Upon this the Dr. spreads his Plumes and swells beyond his usual pitch I dare engage to make out and If I may expect Thanks for the Discovery are Expressions that carry in 'em an Extraordinary Air of Satisfaction and seem a little too Pompous for the Matter they introduce were it entirely New and his Own but they much less become it considering it is all taken Word for Word out of a Preface to an Edition of Ocellus as I shall now shew the Reader Vizzanius above fifty Years ago put out Ocellus and in his Prolegomena to that Piece has said every thing that Dr. Bentley has produc'd on this Subject to a Tittle and which is a little unlucky has said it almost in the very same Words too only Dr. Bentley is in English I compliment him when I say so and Vizzanius is in Latin The Dr. has condescended to translate that Honest Editor's Preface without making the least Improvement of a single Argument there but not without worsting several and has the Modesty after that to take it All to Himself as the First Inventor and to talk higher of this Petty Larciny of his than Vizzanius did of the Original Discovery which he thought too Obvious to value himself upon Perhaps some who have not the Opportunity of comparing this Editor with Dr. Bentley may be glad to have a Particular Account of the Dr's Ingenuity in the matter and therefore I shall take the trouble of going through all he says on this point and plainly shew whence he had his Intelligence I find says the Dr. it was agreed and covenanted among the Scholars of that Italian Sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Jambl. Vit. Pyth. I can tell him where he found it it was in Vizzanius who says the same thing and quotes the very same Authority for it Id certè asserendum crediderim Ocellum Doricâ Dialecto suum Opus conscripsisse tùm quia Pythagoraeos quoslibet illi studuisse comperio tùm quia id Pythagorae suadeant Instituta cui semper Idiomatum Graecorum Doricum maximè voluit sectari tùm antiquius tùm etiam praestantius illud arbitratus teste Iamblicho in Vitâ Pythag. Indeed he makes no such Inference as Dr. Bentley does that the Pythagoreans would sooner have lost their Lives than have broken this Agreement and that 't is most certain if any body had publish'd a Book against that Injunction he would have been banish'd the Society because he knew this was not observ'd by Empedocles nor by the Author of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor even by Iamblichus while he is writing this Account of the Pâ—thagoreans no nor by Pythagoras himself if Diogenes Laertius may be credited 'T is true Vizzanius speaks a little unwarily and may be understood to intimate that the Use of this Dialect among the Italian Sect was from the institution of Pythagoras himself a Mistake which if he were in he was probably led into by too slight a perusal of Iamblichus Dr. Bentley took all he found there for his Own and this Mistake among the rest and when he had it to make it look the more like his Own gave it the Confident Turn Immediately these Instituta Pythagorae grew a solemn Injunction of Pythagoras which the Dr. talks as familiarly of as if he had seen a Copy of it But methinks he might have inferr'd that there was no Injunction of this kind from what he himself had told us out of Iamblichus but Three Lines before that this Use of the Dialect proceeded from a Covenant and agreement among the Scholars themselves For they who know what an Implicit Regard was paid to Pythagoras's Orders by all his Scholars will easily agree that there could be no need of their entring into a Compact to do any thing that He had commanded Dr. Bentley's Adversaries may be as severe upon him on the account of his Criticisms as they please but they needs must allow him to have a Particular Talent at Reasoning and to have thus much at least of a Good Disputant that he is sure to make the most of his Argument Dr. Bentley's next Suggestion is this We are assur'd that the other Pieces of this Author were made in Doric as one of Law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cited by Stobaeus Vizzanius too cites this Fragment of Ocellus's Piece 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Stobaeus and makes the same Use of it Ocellum scil Lucanum scimus Librum de Legibus scripsisse hujus fragmentum exhibet Stobaeus Doricâ Dialecto expressum c. Dr. Bentley goes on But which is plain Demonstration Four Citations are brought by the same Writer out of this very Book 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all which are in Doric and not as they are now extant in the Common Dialect Vizzanius referrs us to these four very places as they lye in
thing that looks like Order or Method he postpones 'em to intermix some Proofs of a different Nature I have already excus'd my self from following him in his Rambles and shall consider Tauromenium here in its proper place The only Authority he has brought to prove Tauromenium so nam'd since the time of Phalaris is that of Diodorus which I mention'd in my Preface and own'd to be a clear Proof against Phalaris if it might be rely'd on But Diodorus is in two Stories which as Dr. Bentley after his way of citing Authors has put 'em together look plausibly enough but as Diodorus himself tells 'em are utterly inconsistent In his 14th Book he says that some Sicilians planted themselves upon Taurus and from their Settlement there call'd the place they built Tauromenium In the 16th Book he says that about 40 Years after this Andromachus planted some of the Old Naxians upon Taurus and from his long stay there call'd the place where he planted 'em Tauromenium Thus Diodorus plainly gives us Two different accounts of the Time when the Place was nam'd either of which I confess would serve Dr. Bentley's purpose but since they contradict one-another neither of them is to be depended on If Dr. Bentley pleads that they do not contradict one-another because the Place might be twice call'd so for One and the Same Reason why will not the Same Reason equally hold for its being call'd so long before Phalaris liv'd Doubtless the Sicilians had often before his time resorted to the Strong Holds of that Mountain Nay Thucydides expresly tells us that there were of old People that inhabited the Hilly parts about Naxos and 't is not improbable that These might be call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before they were form'd into any Politick Body and afterwards when they were collected together and a City was built tho' we don't know when that was that City might be call'd Tauromenium 'T is observable that Phalaris tho' he has very often occasion to mention these People yet never names any such Town as Tauromenium never calls 'em Citizens nor uses any such Expression as implys they belong'd to any City This could scarce have happen'd if a Sophist had writ these Letters but 't is no wonder that Phalaris should write so because there might be Tauromenites as there was a River Tauromenius if Vibius Sequester be to be credited who says the Town had its Name from thence before there was a Tauromenium So that Dr. Bentley would have no reason to triumph over the Defenders of Phalaris if he could prove Tauromenium of a Later Date much less since he cannot prove it ought he so insultingly to call upon 'em Where are those that cry up Phalaris for the florid Author of these Letters who was burnt in his Own Bull above 150 Years before Tauromenium was ever thought of E're I answer this Question I desire to ask Him one Where does he find that Phalaris was burnt in his Bull Does this Great Historian take up with the Trifling Author of the Verses upon Ibis when so many Grave Writers have given us a different account of Phalaris's Death In another place indeed he cites Heraclides for this Story but as I have already observ'd falsly However Phalaris's being burnt in his Bull before Tauromenium was thought on was so refreshing a Quibble that he would rather venture upon False History than lose it The Witticism is something remote as it stands here but when he is at leisure to put this Dissertation into Latin 't will receive a Great Advantage T Was not to be hop'd that these Obscure Points concerning the Building and Peopling Ancient Towns should be so far clear'd and settl'd as to make 'em amount to a Plain and Direct Proof against the Epistles However it was a piece of Learning not unworthy of a Scholar's Pains and by a Skilful Hand might have been made useful to some Other purpose I would not therefore be thought to disparage Dr. Bentley for enquiring into this matter tho' he has happen'd to leave it more obscure than he found it His Attempt was Commendable whatever his Success has been but Now methinks he stoops very low from the Rise and Aera's of Cities to the Chronology of Old Sayings and Proverbs This would make a much more suitable Appendix to a Vocabulary than to an History of Ancient and Modern Learning 'T is so dry and fruitless and so little to the purpose that I am almost tempted to break my promise and leave this part of his Dissertation unexamin'd While Men of Different Times have a Like Frame of Soul and meet with Like Accidents of Life i. e. while they have the same Faculties and the same Occasions of thinking what Wonder is it that they should happen upon the same Reflection or that Authors who write in the same Language and upon the same Subject should put the same Two Words together Yet this is what astonishes Dr. Bentley he cannot believe that there should be so strange a Iumping of Good Wits without some silching and therefore concludes these Letters must be writ not by Phalaris himself but by a Secretary of his who is not so Dutiful as a Secretary should be in attending his Master for he comes a Thousand Years after him The Dr. takes this Secretary tripping in his use of the Proverb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which the Dr. can prove Croesus to be the Author because when he sent a Message to the Lampsaceni that if they did not set Miltiades free he would extirpate 'em 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the men of Lampsacus understood not the meaning of that Expression The Phrase he says puzzl'd the whole City What if it did must an Expression needs be New and Vnheard of because the Mayor and Aldermen of Lampsacus and perhaps the Recorder too did not apprehend it But how does he prove it puzzl'd the WHOLE City plainly because One of the Eldest Citizens hit upon 't and told the meaning of it This is very Nice Reasoning but he goes on to refine upon it and suspects that Herodotus himself was the first Broacher of that Expression for says he those first Historians made every-bodys Speeches for ' em Therefore Herodotus made this which is no Speech but only a Message However let Herodotus have worded this Message does the same Herodotus tell us that the Lampsacenes were puzzl'd with an Expression invented by Herodotus Were the Men of Lampsacus in Croesus's time at a Loss to understand a Phrase that was not thought of till Herodotus an Hundred Years afterwards coin'd it 'T is wonderful to Me how such a Piece of Reasoning as this could ever enter into an Head that has Brains in it All the Dr. has to countenance it is the Title of a Lost Chapter in Gellius from whence he takes occasion to guess at what 's Lost there and to give us a wrong translation of what 's Left Caesam which in Herodotus's Greek
perhaps here as in Other cases he has his accounts at Second Hand not so neither he is purely upon the Conjecture and can guess from the great Learning of the Author known to him by his Other Works that he has in a manner exhausted the Subject That is by his Mathematical Notes upon Diophantus he can guess what he says upon Aesop's Fables But methinks 't is a little nicely guess'd that Meziriac has in a manner exhausted the Subject why should not a Man that had written so well upon Diophantus have quite exhausted it I begin now to guess something too and may be able to make out my Guess e're I am a Month Older I am going into a Country where Meziriac is I suppose to be had and when I have seen him perhaps I shall find that Dr. Bentley has seen him too tho' he has forgotten it For he pretends to present us here only with such Things as have escap'd the Observation of Others and I now know him so well that I suspect him a Course whenever he sets up for Discoveries The Business of Ocellus has given us One Remarkable Instance of this kind and this small Piece we are upon will presently even without the help of Meziriac afford us Another The first of his few loose Things which he fancies have escap'd the Observation of Others is that 't is very uncertain if he would say whether Aesop himself left any Fables behind him in Writing This Hint has I believe escap'd the Observation of Others for they that have observ'd any thing about it have observ'd the contrary The Phrase of Antiquity is the same when they mention any thing of Aesop's as it would have been had they thought Aesop really to have wrote it the Ancients quote him just as they do Other Authors When Plato Aristotle Plutarch Galen Themistius Gellius cite any thing from him 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inquit c and how would they have express'd themselves otherwise if Aesop's Writings had confessedly lain before them Dr. Bentley sure will not be so Captious as to say that these Forms of Speech are not express enough among all Authors that quote from others 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are Equivalent and us'd indifferently Bishop Pearson has largely prov'd this in his Vindiciae Ignatianae against Dailleé who laid hold of this Câ—â—â—l to disparage the Epistles of Ignatius And I the rather referr the Dr. to that Incomparable Work because he confesses with some Shame that he had either never read it or utterly forgot it A good account of his Acquaintance with One of the First Books in the World in the Way of his Profession They that read Books at this rate will be sure to write Books that will be so read But not to forget our business The Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it self is apply'd to Aesop as an Author by Suidas Aphthonius and others What Suidas says deserves a Reflection his Words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he wrote Two Books of what befel him at Delphos but Others are rather of Opinion that he wrote nothing but Fables So that tho' some doubted whether he wrote any account of what happen'd to him at Delphos yet according to Suidas no-body doubted but that he wrote Fables Eustathius calls him expresly not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 expounding the one by the other The Words too of the Old Scholiast on Aristophanes are so full I think as not easily to be eluded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 says he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That Few say in Terms he was a Writer is because No-body had any Suspicions to the contrary and when the Doubt was not started nor thought of there was no need to guard against it I have produc'd some Ancients that say he did write Dr. Bentley does not pretend to instance in any that say he did not instead of that his best Arguments for this New Point are These that follow The Old Man in Aristophanes says he learnt his Fables in Conversation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In which of his Dictionaries does 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie Conversation Or is it necessary that what was learnt at a Feast must be learnt in Conversation might it not be a part of their Festival Entertainments to have some agreeable Book read to them and might not Aesop sometimes be that Book If this might be the Case then the Old man might learn his Fables at a Feast and yet learn 'em out of a Book too But suppose he did not allowing that he learnt 'em in Conversation what follows from thence that because the Fables of Aesop were in every-bodys Mouth and told at their Meals by way of entertainment therefore there was no written Collection of 'em they were preserv'd all by Memory If this be Criticising I am sure Criticising has nothing to do with Reasoning By the same way of Deduction will I prove that we have not a Written Creed now nor ever had one for have not all People from the Rise of Christianity down to this Time learnt it without the help of a Book and is it not plain therefore that the Creed is preserv'd by Memory only and has never been committed to Writing The Dr. produces a Second Passage in Aristophanes where one man reproaches anothers Ignorance thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You have not read so much as Aesop for so he himself translates it from whence he says one might conclude that Aesop wrote his Own Fables If they were his Own Fables one might pretty safely conclude that he wrote 'em for those Writings are the most properly a man 's Own which he writes But Dr. Bentley it seems concludes from this very Passage I cannot imagine How that Aesop did not write ' em Till he tells us by what Wonderful Means he got to this Conclusion I can say nothing to it But as for his Occasional and Weighty Debate whether or no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be a Proverbial Saying spoken of Illiterates I can see no manner of reason why it was brought in here but meerly for the pleasure of contradicting Erasmus and Scaliger Proverb or no Proverb I think it equally proves that there were Fables at that time which went under the Name of Aesop and what advantage can be made of this must be against Dr. Bentley The Closing Argument that winds these Proofs up into a Demonstration is a Passage in Plato's Phoedo where Socrates says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among the Fables of Aesop I had at hand and remember'd I put those into Verse that first occurr'd to me from whence the Dr. shrewdly observes that Socrates does not say he made use of a Book of Fables and from his not saying so would have us believe that there was no such thing as a Book of Aesop's Fables in Socrates's time Socrates was now in Prison and in obedience to a