{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_71277/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_71277","id":"gutenberg_71277","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/71277","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Spanish essays -- Translations into English"],"text":"ESSAYS,\n\n                          OR\n\n                     DISCOURSES,\n\n                    SELECTED FROM\n\n                 THE WORKS OF FEYJOO,\n\n                         AND\n\n             TRANSLATED FROM THE SPANISH,\n\n                          BY\n\n                   JOHN BRETT, ESQ.\n\n                  VOLUME THE FIRST.\n\n                       LONDON,\n\n         Printed for the TRANSLATOR:\n\n    Sold by H. PAYNE, Pall-Mall; C. DILLY, in the\n        Poultry; and T. EVANS, in the Strand.\n\n                      MDCCLXXX.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS\n\nOF THE FIRST VOLUME.\n\n\n    THE VOICE OF THE PEOPLE.                   Page 1\n\n    VIRTUE AND VICE.                            p. 27\n\n    EXALTED AND HUMBLE FORTUNE.                 p. 61\n\n    THE MOST REFINED POLICY.                   p. 107\n\n    THE MACHIAVELIANISM OF THE ANCIENTS.       p. 161\n\n    AMBITION IN SOVEREIGNS.                    p. 221\n\n    THE VALUE OR SUPERIOR EXCELLENCE OF\n    NOBILITY. WITH SOME REMARKS ON THE POWER\n    OR INFLUENCE OF HIGH BLOOD.                p. 257\n\n    THE SEMBLANCE OF VIRTUE; OR, VIRTUE\n    IN APPEARANCE.                             p. 291\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nTRANSLATOR\u2019s PREFACE.\n\n\nThe Author of the following Discourses was a Spaniard, and a dignified\nclergyman of the Church of Rome, high in rank, and much respected\nas an ecclesiastic; but was not less esteemed for his candour and\nliberality of sentiment, than admired for his almost universal learning\nand extensive knowledge. The Translator has it not in his power to\ngive so particular and satisfactory an account of this eminent man as\nhe could wish; but the Reader will find in the Fourth Essay of the\nSecond Volume, a summary one given of himself, in which he tells\nus where he was born, how he was educated, and where he passed the\ngreatest part of his life; how he passed it, is pretty clear from his\nWritings, which manifest, that he must have employed a very large\nportion of it in study. When I first entered upon this undertaking,\nI had no thoughts of translating so many of the Author\u2019s Essays as I\nwas afterwards tempted to do; the subject matter of them, in which I\nfound great pleasure, exciting me to proceed; and indeed, I was also\nflattered and encouraged to go on, by the expectation, that my labours\nin this respect, would afford agreeable amusement, and furnish useful\ninstruction to many of my countrymen. After I had translated as many\nEssays, as I conjectured would make Four Volumes in Octavo, I thought\nit would be necessary to prefix to them, a more enlarged Preface, than\nthat which appeared at the head of the first four; and as I have taken\nthe liberty to omit some parts of those Essays which I have translated,\nI thought it would be right to say something, by way of assigning my\nreasons and motives for so doing; which are briefly these: That the\nparts left out, appeared to me, to be either confined, or applicable\nonly to the affairs and prejudices of Spain; or else, that they were\npoints of speculation, which the world at large, might not consider\nas matters of importance. I have also ventured to omit such things,\nas were relative only to religious controversy, as in this species of\ndisputation, men are apt to lose that candour and temper, which they\nhave been remarkable for preserving in all other cases, and upon all\nother occasions. A strong example of the truth of this remark, would\nhave been manifested in father Feyjoo, had I translated that part of\nthe First Essay, where he speaks of the Protestant Writers; whom he\nmentions in such language, and with a degree of warmth and acrimony,\nwhich he afterwards in many places of his Works, reprehends as\nimproper, and illiberal. I have likewise taken the liberty to curtail\nhere and there a description which appeared to me rather superfluous,\nor too redundant; and in the Apology for Persons who have been famous\nin History, I have omitted the characters, of the queens Brunequilda\nand Fredegunda, of both whom, I imagined the Reader would find as\nmuch said as he would be desirous of knowing, in some of the other\nEssays of these Volumes. Nor have I translated from this Discourse,\nwhat is said of the empress Maria of Arragon, the marquis of Villena,\nand William le Croix de Gevres. The accusation which had been brought\nagainst the first of these three, appearing to me, only interesting to\nthe subjects of Spain: those of Magic against the second, to savour\nof spite and bigotry; and those against the last, to be the effect\nof pique and resentment, on account that he, although not a native\nof Spain, had been promoted to the archbishopric of Toledo. In the\nTranslation of the Physical Paradoxes, I have likewise omitted some\narticles; for instance, such, as whether heavy bodies, if they could be\nforced in a perpendicular direction to a great distance from the earth,\nwould ever revert back to it again; and also that, of whether gold\nis produced by the sun; and another, which treats of the possibility\nof restoring by natural means, sight to a blind person; as all these\nappeared to me, things rather speculative than interesting. In the\nTranslation of the Moral and Political Paradoxes, I have also omitted\nthe following articles: that which charges the Spanish laws with being\ntoo favourable to persons of tender years; that which censures the\ngreat number of holidays which are observed in Spain; that which treats\nof whether the offspring of a human father and a brute mother, should\nbe baptized under certain conditions and restrictions; and that, which\nquestions whether Christian burial should be allowed to a person who is\nguilty of suicide. The first of these appeared to me applicable to the\nSpanish laws only; and the second, calculated to correct the abuse that\nis made of the numbers of festivals in most Roman Catholic countries,\nand particularly in Spain, and which seems intended to point out the\ngreat loss they occasion to a state. The other two I considered as\nrather abstruse points, and such as would afford very little amusement\nor instruction to those who may peruse this work. Thus much for the\nomissions; but if the reader, who understands Spanish, was to turn to\nthe Essays in their original language, he would find something added\nto them; I therefore thought it would be proper to mention, that all\nthose additions, except the one that is made to the comparison between\nancient and modern music, are taken from the ninth, or supplemental\nvolume to the Teatro Critico, and are added in such places as the\nauthor there directs. The addition to the comparison between antient\nand modern music, is taken from the Essay on the Resurrection of the\nArts; and all that is said on music in that Essay, is interwoven into\nthis discourse, it having appeared to me to be very apposite to, and\nindeed, what one might not improperly call a part of the subject of\nit. There is nothing more that occurs to me as necessary to add to\nthis preface, except it is, that I have selected these Essays from\nnearly all the volumes of the author\u2019s works, and that, to the best of\nmy judgment, those I have chosen are some of the most interesting of\nthem; and such, as I thought would be the most entertaining, and the\nmost instructive to the generality of mankind. How judiciously I have\nmade this choice, and how well I have executed the translation, must\nbe left to others to determine; and shall only observe further, that I\nhave done both the one and the other, to the best of my discernment and\nabilities; and although the translation is by no means a literal one, I\nwill venture to declare, that it contains the true sense and sentiment\nof the author, which, as well as my learning and talents would enable\nme to imitate so eminent a man as Feyjoo, I have endeavoured to express\nin nearly the same language, I imagine he would have made use of, if he\nhad been a native of this country, and had written his works originally\nin English. For the rest, the nature, scope, and design of the author\u2019s\nwritings, will be best explained by his own prologue, which follows\nnext in order.\n\n\n\n\nPROLOGUE.\n\nTO THE READER.\n\n\nMy good reader, whoever you are, I have little expectation that you\nwill be very propitious to this my undertaking, from a supposition,\nthat you probably are already preoccupied in favour of many of the\nopinions which I combat; and I ought not to have such confidence,\neither in my persuasive powers, or in your docility, as to promise\nmyself an early conquest of your prejudices, or a sudden attachment\nof your approbation. From hence it may follow, that stiff in your old\nopinions, you will condemn my sentiments, as false and injurious.\nFather Malebranche said justly, that those authors who write with an\nintention to banish common pre-possessions, should always conclude,\nthat the public will receive their works with disgust. Whenever it\nhappens that truth becomes triumphant, the victory advances by such\nslow paces, that the author while he lives, only enjoys the vain\nexpectation, that his tomb will one day be crown\u2019d with laurels.\nA striking example of this truth, was seen in the famous William\nHervey, against whom, on account of his noble discovery respecting\nthe circulation of the blood, the physicians of that time declaimed\nfuriously, though all the professors of the science at present,\nvenerate him as an oracle. In his life-time they loaded him with\ninjuries; now he is dead they would place his image on the altars.\n\nI should here endeavour to win your mind to an admission of my maxims,\nand take the opportunity of shewing by various examples, how involv\u2019d\nin error, are many of the most established opinions; but this being the\nintire object of my first discourse, I must refer you thither, for the\nperusal of my arguments on this head, I having plac\u2019d that discourse\nin the front, as a necessary preliminary to this volume; but if you\nare not to be persuaded, and are obstinately bent on remaining a\nconstant partizan of the Voice of the People, in the name of goodness\npursue your course. If you are wise, I shall treat you liberally,\nand we shall not become angry with each other; for liberality will\nreprehend the sentiment, without ill using the author; but if you are\nsimple, you, together with that infirmity, will not fail to possess the\nquality of inexorable also. I know very well, there is not a more rigid\ncensurer of a book, than a man who is incapable of dictating a letter.\nSuch people may say what they please of me, and treat my opinions as\nexcentric, because they are out of the common road; but let us agree in\na preliminary, to wit, that if they are to take the liberty of calling\nme extravagant, I may be allowed to say they are ignorant.\n\nI ought, however, to remove some objections, that will naturally\noccur in reading this volume. The first is, the discourses not being\ndistributed in determin\u2019d classes, and not following in a regular\nprogression, the faculties or matters to which they belong. To this I\nanswer, that though I at first design\u2019d such an arrangement, I soon\ndiscover\u2019d the pursuing it to be impracticable; for having proposed\nto myself so vast a field in the Teatro Critico, I saw that many of\nthe matters which would be touch\u2019d upon in it, were incomprehensible\nunder a determin\u2019d faculty; either because they do not belong to any\none in particular, or because, they participate equally of many.\nBesides, there are a number, every one of which, treats solely of some\nparticular faculty, without any other having to do with the subject\nmatter. On physical subjects only, within which walk the errors of the\nvulgar are infinite, you may write as many discourses as are capable\nof making a separate volume; but I am more disposed to divide them in\nthe different volumes, because by so doing, each will afford a more\nagreeable variety. By this means, although every volume with respect to\nthe matter, will appear strictly speaking, a miscellany, the design of\nattacking common errors will be uniformly preserved. The formal object\nwill always be the same, the materials must necessarily be composed of\ngreat variety, and should be distributed.\n\nI may perhaps be blamed, for giving the name of errors to all the\nopinions I controvert. The complaint would be just, if I did not remove\nthe odium of the term by an explanation. I say then, that error in the\nsense I here take and use it, signifies no more than an opinion that I\nlook upon as false, abstracted from, and without my determining upon\nthe probability or improbability of it.\n\nNeither by the term common errors, do I mean to signify, that those I\nencounter are incident to all mankind, it is sufficient to apply this\nterm to them, if they are admitted by the generality of the vulgar,\nor lead in their train, a more than ordinary number of the literati.\nThis must be understood with a reservation, that I don\u2019t mean to\nintroduce myself as a judge in those questions, which are mooted in\nvarious schools, especially such as regard Theological points: for\nwhat advances can I make on those subjects, which have been studied\nand considered with the most intense reflection, by so many men of\neminence? or who am I, to have such confidence in my own strength, as\nto fancy that I am capable of entering the lists, where so many giants\nengage? In matters purely physical, this objection need not detain me;\nfor those of this species which are treated of in other schools are\nvery few, and those few with little or no reflection.\n\nI may be also blamed, when I am to touch upon many things which are\nmere matters of faculty, for having wrote in the Castilian Idiom: as an\nanswer to this, it will be sufficient to reply, that no other reason\nis necessary to be given for so doing, than that I know of no reason\nagainst it. I do not deny, that there are truths, which should be hid\nfrom the vulgar, whose weakness exposes them to more danger by being\ninformed, than they would be exposed to by remaining in ignorance;\nbut this argument would militate with equal strength, against those\ntruths going forth to the world in Latin, there being a great number of\nvulgar, among those who understand that language, and it passes easily\nfrom them, to those who understand no other than their mother tongue.\n\nI am so far from having the least intention to communicate pernicious\nmatter to the public, that the principal design of this work, is to\nundeceive them in many points, which by being admitted as true, would\nbe very prejudicial to them; nor is it reasonable, that a benefit which\ncan be made universal, should not be enjoyed by every one.\n\nBut do not from what I have advanced, conclude, that I have great\nconfidence this work will be of eminent utility; for although my\nsole object is to propose the truth, it is possible, that in some\ninstances I may want penetration to discern it, and in others, powers\n_to persuade it_; but I can with confidence assure you, that I write\nnothing, but what is conformable to my real sentiments. I look upon\nproposing, or attempting to prove singular opinions, only with a\nview of displaying a person\u2019s ingenuity, as puerile and pedantic,\nand consider it as an employment, unworthy of every honest man. In\nconversation, these things may be tolerated by way of amusement, but\nthe introducing them into writings, is an abuse, and a deceit upon the\npublic. The noble use of reason, is to penetrate and enforce truths;\nthe knack of puzzling others with sophistries, is the meanest faculty\nof the human understanding. Spiders, which in the brute creation are\nlooked upon as vile, fabricate fine, but trifling threads; among\nmankind, none fabricate fine and firm ones, but excellent artists;\nthe first, are emblems of subtle and sophistical works, the others of\ningenious and solid ones.\n\nThe common errors which I attack, do not always occupy the whole\nof the discourse in which I treat of them, and sometimes, many\nare comprehended in one and the same; either because they relate\nimmediately to the matter of it, or because in pursuing the thread of\nthe principal subject, they are found in the way, or fall in as it\nwere by incidence. This method appeared to me the most convenient, as\nby writing a separate discourse upon every opinion I encounter, there\nbeing much to be said on some heads, and but little on others, there\nwould result a compound or mass of parts extremely unequal.\n\nI expect many attacks, especially with relation to two or three of the\ndiscourses in this book, and when some of my friends apprize me, that I\nshall be loaded with injuries and abuse; I reply, that such treatment\nwill only serve to convince me more firmly, of the truth of what I have\nwritten; it being certain, that he is doubtful of his own strength, who\nattacks with unfair weapons. If they oppose me with arguments, I will\nreply to them; if with sneers and scurrility, I shall instantly allow\nmyself vanquish\u2019d, as that is a mode of engaging, in which I never\nexercised myself. Adieu.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nVOICE of the PEOPLE.\n\n\nThat ill-understood maxim, that God explains himself in the Voice of\nthe People, authorizes the commonalty to triumph over sound judgment,\nand erect to themselves a tribunitial authority, capable of oppressing,\nand bearing down the dignity of literature. This is an error that is\npregnant with an infinity of others, because, by establishing the\nposition, that the voice of the multitude is the rule of truth, all\nthe extravagances of the vulgar, would be venerated as inspirations of\nheaven. This consideration excites me to attack this error the first,\nupon a supposition, that by exploding this, I shall subdue many enemies\nin one, or at least, that it will be more easy to expunge other errors,\nby removing the patronage, which they receive from the common voice in\nthe estimation of unwary men.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. _\u00c6stimes judicia, non numeres_, said Seneca, (Epist. 39). The value\nof opinions, should be computed by the weight, not by the number of\nvotaries. The ignorant, though numerous, are ignorant still; what\nbenefit then is to be expected from their determinations? It is rather\nprobable, that the multitude, by increasing the partizans of error,\nwould increase obstacles to the advancement of truth. If it was a\nbarbarous superstition in the Molossians, an antient people of Epirus,\nto constitute the trunk of an oak for the organ of Apollo; would it be\nless so, to concede this privilege to the whole Dodonean Wood? and if\nfrom a stone, unless modelled by the hand of an artist, you could not\nproduce the image of Minerva, the same impossibility would continue,\nalthough you add to it all the rocks of a mountain. One wise person,\nwill always discern more than a croud of simpletons, as one eagle can\nbetter see the sun, than an army of owls.\n\nII. Pope John the XXIII. being once asked what was the thing most\ndistant from truth, answered, the opinion of the vulgar. The severe\nPhocion was so firmly of this sentiment, that observing, while he was\nonce making an oration in Athens, the people with one consent raise\ntheir voices in his applause, asked his friends who were near him,\nwhat mistake he had been guilty of, as he was persuaded, the blind\npopulace were incapable of applauding any thing but absurdities.\nI don\u2019t approve these rigorous decisions, nor can I consider the\npopulace, as the precise antipodes to the hemisphere of truth; they are\nsometimes right, but this generally speaking, is either the result of\nchance, or the effect of borrowed reflection. Some wise man, I don\u2019t\nremember who, compared the vulgar to the moon, on account of their\ninconstancy: the comparison however was just, as they never shine by\nthe power of their own lights. _Non consilium in vulgo, non ratio, non\ndiscrimen, non diligentia_, said Tully. (Orat. pro Planc.) There is not\nin this vast body, any native illumination, wherewith can be discerned\nthe true from the false; the light is all borrowed, and reflected\nsuperficially; for by reason of its opacity, the rays cannot penetrate\nthrough it.\n\nIII. The public is an instrument of various sounds, which (unless it\nhappens by some rare accident) till adjusted by a skilful hand, is\nhardly ever in tune. Epicurus was dreaming, when he imagined, that\ninfinite atoms impelled by chance, and wandering through the air,\ncould, without the interposition of a supreme will, form this admirable\nsystem of the globe. Peter Gassendi, and the other modern refiners\nupon Epicurus, added to this vulgar confusion, a disposition and\nregulation, executed by the divine hand; but even supposing this, it\nwill be difficult for us to comprehend, by what means, the rudeness\nof matter was polished, and the earth rendered capable of producing\nthe most trifling plant. The vulgar of mankind, differ but little\nfrom the vulgarity of the atoms; and as from the casual concurrence\nof our sentiments, there would hardly ever result a regular series of\nestablished truths, it becomes necessary, that the Supreme Being should\nsuperintend the business. But how must this be done? Why by employing\nlearned and wise men as his subalterns, and using them as a secondary\nmeans, to dispose and organize such material entities.\n\nIV. Those who ascribe so great authority to the common voice, don\u2019t\nforesee a dangerous consequence, that treads close on the heels of\ntheir tenet; for if the decision of what is truth, was to be confided\nto the plurality of voices, you should look for sound doctrine in the\nAlcoran of Mahomed, and not in the Gospel of Christ; it being certain,\nthat the Alcoran would have more votes in its favour than the Gospel. I\nam so far from being of opinion, that such a question should be decided\nby numbers, that I think it ought to be determined the reverse, because\nin the nature of things, error occupies a much larger field than\ntruth, and the vulgar of mankind, as the lowest and most humble portion\nof the rational world, may be compared to the element of earth, whose\nbowels contain little gold, but much iron.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nV. Whoever considers, that there is but one path which leads to\ntruth, and that those which lead to error are infinite, will not\nbe surprised, that mankind who travel by so dim a light, should in\nthe bulk go astray. The conception which the understanding forms of\nthings, may be compared to squares, which can only be regular one\nway, but may be irregular in an infinite number of ways. Every body,\naccording to its species, can, by but one mode, be produced rightly\norganized, but may be produced a monster by an infinite number. Even in\nthe heavens, there are but two fixed points to direct the navigator;\nall the others are changeable. There are likewise two fixed points\nin the sphere of the human understanding, to wit, revelation, and\ndemonstration: the rest is a group of opinions, that dance about, and\nare made to follow one another, according to the caprice of doubtful\nand inferior comprehensions. Whoever does not observe attentively these\ntwo points, or at least one of them, according to the hemisphere in\nwhich he navigates; that is, the first in the hemisphere of grace,\nand the second in the hemisphere of nature, will never arrive at the\nport of truth: for as in very few parts of the terraqueous globe,\nthe magnetic needle points true to the poles; but in most places has\nmore or less degrees of variation; even so in very few parts of the\nworld, does the human understanding attain the pole of its direction;\nthe pole of revelation, is perceived directly, in only two places,\nEurope, and America; in all other parts, it has more or less degrees\nof declination: in the heretical countries, the needle is much warped,\nmore in the Mahometan countries, and more still in the idolatrous ones.\nThe pole of demonstration, is observed only by the small community of\nmathematicians, and even within that small circle, is affected with\ndeclination.\n\nBut what necessity is there for beating round the world, to discover,\nthat in various regions, the common opinion is the reverse of truth;\neven among the people who were called God\u2019s people, so far many times\nwas the voice of the people from being the voice of God, that there was\nnot the least semblance between them: no sooner was the voice of the\npeople in unison with the divine voice, than it immediately changed\nto the greatest dissonance. Moses propounded to them the laws which\nGod had given him; and all the people cried with one consent, \u201cWhat\nthe Lord has commanded let us do:\u201d how beautiful was the sound of\nconsonance between the two voices! but no sooner did the chapel-master\nMoses, who had put them in tune, turn his back, than the same\ncongregation, after obliging Aaron to make two idols, lifted up their\nvoice, and said, \u201cThese are the true Gods to whom we owe our liberty:\u201d\nwhat horrible dissonance!\n\nVII. Circumstances of this sort occurred often; but the case of their\npetitioning Samuel to give them a king, has something particular in it.\nThe voice of God promulged by the mouth of the Prophet, dissuaded them\nfrom desiring a king; but how distant was the voice of the people from\nconcording with the divine organ, for they once and again, repeat their\nintreaties to have a king; and on what do they found their request? Why\nupon other nations having kings. In this instance, there are two things\nwhich are striking and remarkable; the one is, that though this request\nwas made by the voice of the whole people, it was erroneous; the other\nis, that it\u2019s being qualified by the authority of all other people,\ndoes not amend, or exempt it from error. To sum up the whole, the voice\nof the people of Israel, concorded with the voices of all other people,\nand it\u2019s being in consonance with that of all those other people,\nmade it dissonant to the divine voice. Away with those then, who would\ngovern us by common cries, upon the foundation, that the voice of the\npeople is the voice of God.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nVIII. I was once of opinion, that in one special instance, the\npublic voice was infallible, that is to say, in the approbation, or\nreprobation, of particular people. It appeared to me, that he of whom\nthe public at large entertained a good opinion, was certainly a good\nman, and that he was certainly wise, who was generally allowed to be\nso, and so on the contrary; but upon reflection, I found that in this\ninstance also, the popular opinion is liable to mistake. Phocion, as\nhe was once reprehending the people of Athens with some asperity, was\naccosted by his enemy Democritus in these words, \u201cHave a care what you\nsay, for they will murder you for talking to them in this manner:\u201d \u201cAnd\ndo you take care, answered Phocion, or they will murder you likewise,\nfor pretending to pass your judgment.\u201d This sentence shewed, that he\nthought the populace hardly ever right in their decisions, with regard\nto people\u2019s qualities or characters. The hard fate of Phocion himself,\nconfirmed in a great measure this sentiment, because he was afterwards\nput to death as an enemy to his country, by the furious populace of\nAthens, though he was the best man, which at that time could be found\nin all Greece.\n\nIX. An ignorant man having passed for a wise one, and a wise one\nbeing reputed a fool, are things which have been frequent in many\nplaces; and applicable to this, is the pleasant event which happened\nto Democritus with his countrymen the Abderites. This philosopher,\nwho had long meditated on the follies and vanities of mankind, was\naccustomed, when any occurrence brought these reflections to his mind,\nto burst out into immoderate fits of laughter. The Abderites having\nremarked this, although they before esteemed him a very wise man,\nconcluded that he was gone mad; and they wrote to Hippocrates who\nflourished at that time, and earnestly intreated that he would come\nand cure him. The good old man suspected how the matter stood, to wit,\nthat the people were disordered, and not Democritus, and concluded,\nthat what they mistook for madness, was rather a symptom of great\nwisdom. In a letter to his friend Dionysius, informing him of his\nbeing sent for by the Abderites, and the account they had given him of\nDemocritus\u2019s madness, he expresses himself to this effect, _Ego vero\nneque morbum ipsum esse puto, sed immodicam doctrinam, qu\u00e6 revera non\nest immodica, sed ab idiotis putatur_; and writing to Philopemnes, he\nsays, _Cum non insaniam, sed quandam excellente mentis sanitatem vir\nille declaret_. Afterwards, Hippocrates visited Democritus, and from\na long conversation which he had with him, was satisfied, that his\nlaughter was founded in wise and solid morality, the justness of which,\nhe was convinced of and admired. Hippocrates, in a letter he wrote to\nDamagetus, gives a particular account of this conversation, and there\nmay be seen his encomiums upon Democritus; among other things, he says,\nDemocritus so far from being mad, is the wisest man I ever met with; I\nwas much instructed by his conversation, and rendered more capable of\ninstructing others: _Hoc erat illud, Damagete, quod conjectabamus. Non\ninsanit Democritus, sed super omnia sanit, et nos sapientiores effecit,\net per nos omnes homines._\n\nX. These letters are to be found in the works of Hippocrates, and are\nwell deserving of being read, especially that to Damagetus; and from\nthem may be inferred, not only how much the public at large are capable\nof being mistaken in their opinion of an individual; but also, with how\nlittle reason, many authors paint Democritus as a half-mad ridiculous\nperson; for nobody disputes the judgment and wisdom of Hippocrates,\nwho, after treating seriously and at large on the subject, gives so\nopposite a testimony in his discussion of the matter; for he declares,\nthat in his judgment, Democritus was the most learned and wise man in\nthe world; and in a letter of Hippocrates to Democritus, he recognizes\nhim for the greatest natural philosopher upon earth: _Optimum natur\u00e6,\nac mundi interpretem te judicavi_. Hippocrates was then grown old, for\nin the same letter he says, _Ego enim ad finem medicin\u00e6 perveni, etiam\nsi jam senex sim_; and consequently, capable of forming a good judgment\nof the abilities of Democritus.\n\nI am disposed to think, that the accusation which some authors bring\nagainst Aristotle is a probable one, that is, that he did not fairly\nlay open to the world the opinions of other philosophers who preceded\nhim, to the end, that by discrediting all those, he might establish the\nsovereignty of his own doctrine, and that he did by them, as the great\nLord Bacon says the Ottoman Emperors do by their brothers, put them all\nto death, that they may reign in security.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nWith regard to virtue and vice, the instances of the one of them\nhaving been mistaken by the public for the other in particular people,\nare so numerous, that history stumbles upon them, at almost every\nstep; nothing can illustrate this more evidently, than the greatest\nimpostors the world has produced, having passed for repositories of\nthe secrets of heaven. Numa Pompilius, introduced among the Romans,\nwhatever policy and religion he thought fit, by means of the fiction,\nthat all he proposed was dictated to him by the nymph Egeria. The\nSpaniards fought blindly against the Romans, under the banners of\nSertorius, he having made them believe, that through a white doe, which\nhe artfully made use of, and had trained for his purpose, he received\nby occult means, all sorts of information, which was communicated to\nthe doe by the goddess Diana. Mahomed persuaded a great part of Asia,\nthat Heaven had sent the Angel Gabriel to him as a Nuncio in the shape\nof a dove, which he had taught to put its bill into his ear. Most\nheretical opinions, although stained with manifest impurities, were\nreputed in many places, to proceed from the venerable archives of the\ndivine mysteries.\n\nXII. We have even seen such monsters, engendered in the bosom of the\nRoman church. In the eleventh century, Tranquilenus, a man given openly\nto all kinds of debauchery, was venerated as a saint by the people\nof Antwerp, and to such a pitch did they carry their adoration, that\nthey preserved as a relic the water in which he had washed himself. In\nthe republic of Florence, where the people were never thought rude,\nor uncultivated, Francis Jeronimo Savonarola, a man of prodigious\ngenius, and great sagacity, was many years respected as a saint, and a\nperson endued with the spirit of prophecy; he made the people believe,\nthat his political predictions were divine revelations, though they\nwere founded on secret advices which he received from France, and\nnotwithstanding many of those predictions were proved false, such as\nthe second coming of Charles the Eighth into Italy, the recovery of\nJohn Pico de Mirandola from a fit of sickness, of which he died two\ndays afterwards, &c. And although he was publicly burnt on the parade\nat Florence for an impostor, still, all was not sufficient to eradicate\nhis deceptions from the minds of many people; for not only the heretics\nvenerate him as a heavenly man, and consider him as a forerunner of\nLuther, on account of his vehement declamations against the court of\nRome, but some Catholics were his panegyrists likewise, among whom\nMarcus Antonius Flaminius excelled all the others, by the following\nbeautiful though false epigram.\n\n    _Dum fera flamma tuos, Hieronyme, pascitur artus,_\n      _Religio sacras dilaniata comas_\n    _Flevit, et O, dixit, crudeles, parcite, flamm\u00e6,_\n      _Parcite; sunt isto viscera nostra rogo._\n\nXIII. But what has been the most monstrous in these sort of cases is,\nthat some churches have celebrated, and even worshiped as saints,\nperverse men, who died separated from the Roman communion. The church\nof Limogines, addressed for a long time in a direct prayer (which\nprayer exists at this day in the antient breviary of that church)\nEusebius C\u00e6sarius, who lived and died in the Arian heresy, they\nhaving, as is most probable, mistaken him at first, for Eusebius\nBishop of C\u00e6sarea, in Cappadocia, who was the successor of Saint\nBasil; whereas the man we have now been mentioning, was Bishop of\nC\u00e6sarea in Palestine; I am very well aware, some authors assert, that\nat the council of Nice, he conformed to the Catholic faith, in which\nhe remained steady ever after, but there are so many testimonies to\ncontradict this, and among the rest his own writings, that what is\nsaid in his defence seems void of all probability. The church of Turin\nvenerated a thief as a martyr, and erected an altar to him, which St.\nMartin destroyed, after having convinced them of their error; this is\nrelated by Sulpicius in his Life of St. Martin.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXIV. To excite a total distrust of the Vox Populi, you need only\nreflect upon the extravagant errors, which in matters of religion,\npolicy, and manners, have been seen, and may still be seen authorized,\nby the common consent of whole bodies politic. Cicero said, there was\nno tenet, though ever so wild and absurd, that had not been maintained\nby some philosopher or other: _Nihil tam absurdum dici potest, quod non\ndicatur ab aliquo philosophorum_. (lib. 2. de Divinat.) I will venture\nwith greater reason to affirm, there is no extravagance, however\nmonstrous, which has not been patronized by the uniform consent of some\ncountry.\n\nXV. Things which the light of natural reason represents as abominable,\nhave in this, and the other region, passed, and still do pass, as\nlawful. Lying, perjury, adultery, murder, and robbery: in short, all\nvices have obtained, and do obtain, the general approbation of some\nnations. The Herules, an ancient people, whose situation cannot be\nexactly ascertained, though they dwelt near the borders of the Baltic\nSea, were used to put to death all their sick and old people, nor would\nthey suffer the wives to survive their husbands. The Caspians, a people\nof Scythia, were more barbarous still, for they imprisoned and starved\nto death, their own parents, when they came to be advanced in years.\nWhat abominations were committed by some people of Ethiopia, who,\naccording to \u00c6lian, adopted a dog for their king, and regulated all\ntheir actions, by the gestures and motions of that animal; and Pliny\ninstances a people, whom he calls Toembaros, though not of Ethiopia,\nwho obeyed the same master.\n\nNor are the hearts of mankind in many parts of the world, much mended\nat this day. There are many places, where they feed on human flesh, and\ngo hunting for men, as they would for wild beasts. The Yagos, a people\nof the kingdom of Ansicus in Africa, eat, not only the prisoners they\ntake in war, but feed also upon such of their friends as die natural\ndeaths; so that among them, the dead have no other burying place than\nthe stomachs of the living. All the world knows, that in many parts\nof the East-Indies, they uphold the barbarous custom, of the women\nburning themselves at the funeral of their husbands, and though they\nare not by law obliged to do this, the instances of their failing to do\nit are very rare, because upon their declining it, they would remain\ninfamous, despised, and abhorred by every one. Among the Cafres, all\nthe relations of a person who dies are obliged to cut off the little\nfinger of the left hand, and throw it into the grave of the deceased.\n\nXVII. What shall we say to the countenance, that has been given to\nTurpitude, by various nations? In Malabar, the women may marry as\nmany husbands as they please. In the Island of Ceylon, when a woman\nmarries, she is common to all the brothers of her husband, and the\nconsorted parties may divorce themselves and contract a fresh alliance\nwhenever they please. In the kingdom of Bengal, all the new-married\nwomen, those of the first rank not excepted, before they are allowed\nto be enjoyed by their husbands, are delivered up to the lust of the\nbramins or priests. In Mingrelia, a province of Georgia, where the\npeople are Schismatic Christians, among the compound of various errors\nprevailing there, adultery is considered as a thing indifferent, and it\nis very rare, that any of their sex are faithful to their consorts; it\nis true, that the husband in case of catching the wife in the act of\nadultery, has a right by way of compensation, to demand of her paramour\na pig, which is considered as ample amends, and the criminal person is\ngenerally invited to partake of it.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXVIII. Was I to recite the extravagant superstitions prevailing in\nvarious places, the labour would be immense. It is very well known,\nthat the antient Gentiles worshiped the most despicable and vile\nanimals. The goat was the deity of one nation, the tortoise of another,\nthe beetle of another, and the fly of another. Even the Romans, who\nwere esteemed the most polished people in the world, were extremely\nridiculous in matters of religion; St. Austin, in many parts of his\nTreatise, called The City of God, upbraids them with it; and the most\nremarkable of their absurdities in this respect was, their adopting\nsuch an innumerable quantity of deities, to separate and distinct\ncharges; the protection of the harvest, and the grain, belonged to\ntwelve different Gods, each of whom had his particular department.\nTo guard the door of the house, they had no less than three; the God\nLorculos had the care of the wood, the Goddess Cordea that of the\nhinges, and the God Limentius looked after the pediment. St. Austin\njocosely remarks to them, that if each individual would appoint a\nporter, they would find him capable of doing much more than any one of\ntheir Gods, for he would be able to execute this whole business, better\nthan three of them, and with greater security. Pliny (who runs into\nthe opposite extreme of denying a Deity or a Providence, or at least\nof affecting to doubt there is a Supreme Being) in giving an account\nof the superstitious faith of the Romans, estimates the number of\ntheir deities to exceed the number of their people. _Quam ob rem major\nc\u0153litum populus, etiam quam hominum intelligi potest_ (Lib. 1. cap.\n6.) The computation is not aggravated, as every man according to his\nfancy, appointed himself Household Gods, to each of whom, he consigned\na particular charge, and besides this, worshiped all the established\nGods. The multifarious number may be inferred, not only from what St.\nAustin has told us, but from the same Pliny, who says, they erected\ntemples and altars, to all the diseases and misfortunes, with which\nmankind are visited: _Morbis etiam in genera descriptis, et multis\netiam pestibus, dum esse placatas trepido metu capimus_. It is certain,\nthat in Rome, there was a Temple erected to Fevers, and another to Ill\nLuck.\n\nXIX. The modern idolators, are not less blind than the antient ones.\nThe devil is worshiped in his own proper name by many people. In Pegu,\na kingdom in the Peninsula of India, although they worship God as the\nauthor of all good, they pay more adoration to the devil, whom they\nbelieve to be the author of all evil. Some people in the train of the\nambassador, whom Peter the Great, late Czar of Muscovy, sent to China,\nmet in the way an idolatrous priest praying, and they asked him whom he\nworshiped? To which he answered in a magisterial tone, _I worship a God\nwhom the God you worship cast down from heaven, but after awhile my God\nwill throw yours down from heaven, and then will be seen great changes\namong the sons of men_. They must in that region have had some account\nof the fall of Lucifer; but they may wait long enough for a redeemer,\nif they stay till their deity returns to heaven. From as ridiculous a\nmotive, the Jedices, a sect in Persia, never curse the devil, and that\nis, that one day or other he may make his peace with God, and then may\nrevenge all the affronts they offer him.\n\nXX. In the kingdom of Siam, they worship a white elephant, and four\nMandarines are appointed constantly to attend him, who serve him with\nhis meat and his drink, in a vessel of gold. In the Island of Ceylon,\nthey worshiped a tooth, which was pretended to have fallen from the\nmouth of God; but Constantine de Bergania, a Portuguese, having got\npossession of it, burnt it, to the great disgrace of the priests who\nhad invented the fable. The Indians of Honduras, worshiped a slave; but\nneither the divinity nor the life of the poor creature lasted long,\nfor he died within a year, after which, they made a sacrifice of his\nbody, and substituted another in his place: but their believing, that\nhe who could not redeem himself from the confinement and restraint, in\nwhich, by way of security they kept him, could make others happy, was\nridiculous enough. In the Southern Tartary, they worship a man who they\nthink is eternal, having been made to believe so by the artifices of\nthe priests appointed to his service. They only shew him in a private\nplace of the palace or temple, surrounded by a number of lamps, and\nthey always by way of precaution, in case he should die, keep another\nman secreted, who is much like him, that he may be ready to take his\nplace, and seem as if he was still the same man. They call him Lama,\nwhich signifies Father eternal, and such is their veneration for\nhim, that their greatest men procure by rich presents a part of his\nexcrements, which they put into a gold box, and wear it suspended from\ntheir necks, as a precious relic. But no superstition appears to me\nmore extravagant, than what is practised at Balia, an Island in the\nIndian Sea, to the eastward of Java, where every man has his separate\nGod, which he fixes upon just as his caprice dictates, either the trunk\nof a tree, a stone, or a brute, and many of them change their Gods\nevery day, for they are allowed this liberty, and often worship for the\nday the first thing they meet going out of their houses in a morning.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXI. What shall I say of the ridiculous historical tales, which are\nvenerated in some nations as irrefragable traditions? The Arcadians\ncompute their origin to be antecedent to the creation of the Moon. The\npeople of Peru maintain their kings to be legitimate descendants from\nthe sun. The Arabs believe as an article of faith, the existence of\na bird, which they call Anca Megareb, of such an enormous size, that\nits eggs are as big as large hills; which bird they say was afterwards\ncursed by their Prophet Handal, for having insulted him, and that it\nnow lives retired in a certain inaccessible Island. The credit of an\nimaginary hero called Cherderles, is not less established among the\nTurks; they say he was one of Alexander\u2019s captains, and that having\nmade himself and his horse immortal by drinking of the waters of a\ncertain river, he now goes about exploring the world, and assisting\nsuch soldiers as invoke him; they seem very happy with this delusion,\nand near a little Mosque appropriated to his worship, they shew the\ntombs of the nephew and the servant of this knight errant, and they\nadd, that by their intercession continual miracles are wrought in that\nquarter.\n\nXXII. In short, if you scrutinize country by country, the whole\nintellectual map of the globe, except only those places where the name\nof Christ is worshiped, you will find all this extensive surface,\ncovered with spots and stains. Every country is an Africa to engender\nmonsters; every province, an Iberia to produce poisons; in all places,\nas in Lycia, they invent chimeras; and in all nations, where the\nlight of the gospel is wanting, they are obscured with as dark mists,\nas formerly obscured Egypt. There are no people whatever, who have\nnot much of the barbarous. What results from this? why that the voice\nof the people is totally destitute of authority, because we see it\nso frequently posted on the side of error. Every one considers as\ninfallible, the sentiment that prevails in his own country; upon this\nprinciple, that every body says so, and every body thinks so. Who are\nthese every bodies? All the people in the world? Not so, because in\nother places, they think and say the contrary. But is not mankind the\nsame in one place as another? why then should truth be more attached to\nthe voice of this people, than of that people? Why because this is my\ncountry, and the other is a foreign one;--good reasoning!\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXIII. I never observed, that the dogmatic writers, who in various\nmanners, have conclusively proved the evident credibility of our\nholy faith, have introduced as one of their arguments, the consent\nof many nations in their belief of those mysteries; but have laid\ngreat stress, upon the consent of men, eminent for their sanctity and\nwisdom. The first argument would be favourable to idolatry, and the\nMahomedan Sect; the second cannot be answered, nor can it be used to\nmilitate on the other side; and in case they should oppose to us the\nauthority of the antient philosophers, who have been the partizans of\nidolatry, the objection would be grounded on a false supposition, it\nbeing established by irrefragable testimony, that those philosophers\nin matters of religion did not think with the people. Marcus Varus,\none of the wisest of the Romans, distinguished among the Antients\nthree kinds of Theology; the Natural, the Civil, and the Poetical.\nThe first existed in the minds of wise men; the second was used to\ngovern the religion of the people at large; the third was the invention\nof the poets; and of all the three, the philosophers held only the\nfirst to be true. The distinction of the two first, had been pointed\nout by Aristotle, in the twelfth book of his Metaphysics, cap. 8,\nwhere he says, that from the opinions of preceding ages which have\nbeen communicated to us respecting the Gods, may be inferred, they\nheld some things to be true, and others false, and that the last were\ninvented for the use and civil government of the populace: _C\u00e6tera\nvero fabulos\u00e8 ad multitudinis persuasionem_. It is true, that although\nthose philosophers were not of the same sentiment with the people, they\ngenerally talked their language, as an opposite conduct would have been\nvery hazardous; for whoever denied the plurality of Gods, was looked\nupon as impious; as it happened to Socrates. The sum of the whole of\nthis is, that in the voice of the people was contained all the error;\nand that the little or much which existed of truth, was shut up and\nimprisoned in the minds of a few wise men.\n\nXXIV. After all that has been said, I shall conclude, by pointing out\ntwo senses, in which only, and in no other whatever, is contained the\ntruth of the maxim, \u201cthat the voice of the people is the voice of\nGod.\u201d The first is, taking for the voice of the people, the unanimous\nconsent of all God\u2019s people; that is, of the universal church, which it\nis certain cannot err in matters of faith; nor through any antecedent\nimpossibility which may be inferred from the nature of things, but by\nmeans of the interposition of the holy spirit, with which, according\nto the promise made by Christ, it will be constantly assisted. I said\nall God\u2019s people, because a large portion of the church may err, and\nin fact did err, in the great Western Schism; for the kings of France,\nCastile, Arragon, and Scotland, acknowledged Clement the VIIth for\nlegitimate Pope; the rest of the Christian world, adhered to Urban the\nVIth. But it is manifest, that one of the two parties must be wrong,\nwhich may be considered as a conclusive proof; that even within\nthe pale of the Christian church, not only one, but several nations\ncollectively, may err in essentials.\n\nXXV. The second sense in which the maxim ought to be held true, is,\nby taking for the voice of the people, the universal concurrence of\nall mankind; it appearing morally impossible, that all the nations of\nthe world should agree in adopting any one error. Thus the consent of\nthe whole earth, in believing the existence of a God, is held by the\nlearned, as a conclusive proof of this article.\n\n\n\n\nVIRTUE and VICE.\n\n\nEvery mortal (said Philo, as cited by St. Ambrose, Lib. 1. of Cain\nand Abel, cap. 4.) has, within the little habitation of the soul, two\nfemales, the one chaste but rigid and unpleasant, the other wanton\nbut soft and amorous. The first is the type of virtue, the second of\nworldly delights.\n\nII. The learned Jew paints virtue and vice according to appearances\nat first sight, or according to the opinion of the world, but not\naccording to the truth; and so it comes to pass, that virtue is\ncommonly conceived to be all asperity, and vice all deliciousness;\nvirtue is placed among thorns, and vice reposing on beds of flowers:\nbut this is an error, and of all the false opinions upheld by the\nblindness of the world, the most pernicious one. I shall endeavour in\nthis discourse to expose its fallacy, by shewing, that even in this\nlife, abstracted from the rewards and punishments of that to come, by\npeople\u2019s abandoning themselves to the pursuit of criminal pleasures,\nthey are liable to more inquietudes, and experience more fatigues,\nthan they would be exposed to, by the practice of the moral and\nChristian virtues. For this purpose, I shall make use of such arguments\nas are furnished by natural reason and experience, without having\nrecourse to the sentences of fathers, or the sayings of philosophers,\nthe collection of which might be swelled to a vast bulk; but whoever is\nnot to be persuaded by reason, will never be convinced by authority.\n\nIII. Could we but see the hearts of men abandoned to a vicious\ncourse, the doubt would be soon removed; however, we may view them by\nreflection in the looking-glasses of their souls, of which their words\nand actions are the types. If you observe with attention these unhappy\nmen, you will find, that no others betray such perturbation in their\ncountenances, such inquietude in their actions, nor such embarrassment\nin their conversation; nor is this to be wondered at, there being many\ntormentors, who are continually disturbing them in the enjoyment of\ntheir beloved pleasures. That domestic enemy, that unavoidable, but\nunsavoury guest, their own conscience, with the nectar they drink, is\nconstantly mixing the gall they abominate.\n\nIV. Tully said with energetical propriety, that the crimes of wicked\nmen, reflected in their own imaginations, are to them continual and\ndomestic furies? _H\u00e6 sunt impiis assidu\u00e6, domestic\u00e6que furi\u00e6._ (Orat.\npro Rosc.) These are the serpents and vulturs, who gnaw in pieces the\nentrails of the wicked _Tityus_; these are the eagles, who tear the\nheart of the rash Prometheus. Consider the torments of Cain, a fugitive\nfrom the world, and who, if it were possible, would fly from himself\nalso; wandering through the woods and mountains, without ever having\npower to extract the dart which had pierced his breast, that is, the\nmemory of his crime; or like another wounded hind, under which image\nthe great poet describes the mortal inquietude of that enamoured queen,\n\n    ----_Silvas, saltusque peragrat_\n    _Dict\u00e6os; h\u00e6ret lateri l\u00e6thalis arundo._\n\nV. Contemplate the anxieties of a Lamech, so violently pressed by the\nrecollection of the murder, or murders, which he had committed, that,\nwanting power to remain the repository of his own secret, he throws\nit up like one who has swallowed poison, which excites a coughing or\ntickling in the throat, and runs the hazard of infamy and punishment,\nfor the sake only of enjoying a trivial and temporary relief. Plutarch\nrelates of one Apollodorus, that the memory of his crimes, haunted him\nin his sleep; for he dreamed every night, that after being quartered,\nhis members were dissolved in boiling water, and that while he suffered\nthis martyrdom, his heart screamed out, \u201cI am the cause and motive of\nthese torments.\u201d\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nVI. I acknowledge it to be true, that all men are not so susceptible\nof interior remorse, and that, as St. Paul expresses it, there are\nconsciences so cauterized, as to lose all sensation; and hearts, which\nby a long habit of sin are become petrified;\n\n    _Sic l\u00e6thalis hyems paulatim in pectora venit._\n\nVII. O men, of all the most unhappy! This obdurateness of the breast,\nis a schirrous of the soul, for which, by appealing to miracles only,\nyou can hope relief. Such people are apt to amuse themselves with\nthe hope, that during this mortal life at least, they shall pass on\nwith mirth and enjoyment; but how much are they deceived, who feed\nthemselves with such hopes, for these are the people who experience\nthe most toil. This will appear by a survey of the three vices, within\nwhose boundaries, almost every evil lays distributed, to wit, ambition,\navarice, and luxury.\n\nVIII. The ambitious man is the slave of all the world. Of the Prince,\nthat he may bestow a place on him; of his client, because he solicits\nhim; and of other men, for fear they should put obstacles in his way.\nHis soul and body are in continual agitation, from an apprehension of\nthe consequences, with which the loss of an instant of time may be\nattended, and he dreads all mankind, lest some one by an accusation,\nmay occasion all his solicitude to vanish in smoke. How forced are his\nlooks! for he smiles on those, to whom he bears a mortal enmity. What\nlabour does it cost him, to suppress those vicious inclinations, that\nmight throw obstructions in the way of his man\u0153uvres! All the other\npassions, are the victims of the ruling one, and the vice of ambition,\nlike a tyrant master, adds to the torment that itself inflicts, by\nthe prohibition of all those pleasures which the inclination prompts\nto. He sees one go to a comedy, another amuse himself with innocent\nrecreation, another go to a feast, and another to a ball; he sees them\nall, and envies them all; for his passions, though furious, may be\ncompared to the winds, which are confined and shut up in the prisons of\n\u00c6olus;\n\n    _Illi indignantes magno cum murmure montis_\n    _Circum claustra fremunt._\n\nIX. When he has obtained a place, his cares do not lessen, the object\nonly of his anxiety being changed, and his attention is but translated\nfrom the means of procuring his rise, to the study of how he shall\nkeep possession of what he has acquired. He finds himself placed on\na ladder, which he cannot ascend without much fatigue, nor remain\nwhere he is situated without uneasiness, and where the dread of\nfalling headlong terrifies him from descending. He finds the necessity\nof holding a tight rein on his depraved appetites increased, and\nis obliged to ride his vicious inclinations with a stronger curb.\nHe is solicited by avarice, instigated by gluttony, and burns with\nincontinence; but still obeys, although it is with reluctance, that\npassion which has the despotic rule of him. He would wish to crush by\nan unjust sentence, the man who has offended him; but fears lest the\ninjured person should appeal to the king, or a superior tribunal. He\nloves indolence; but if he relaxes in his application, all is lost.\nHe trembles at the thought of a change of administration, as the idea\nfills him with an apprehension of being left deserted in the street;\nand never reads a news-paper, without being terrified at seeing an\naccount of the death of his patron. Can a man lead a more miserable\nlife?\n\nX. It is a known thing, that the covetous man is one of the devil\u2019s\nmartyrs; or he may be compared to an Anchorite, who, by his abstinence\nand retirement, acquires merits, which may intitle him to a place in\nhell. His heart, divided between the desires of keeping and acquiring,\nexperiences a continual fever, mixed with a mortal cold, as he burns\nfor other people\u2019s property, and trembles with the apprehension of\nlosing his own. He is hungry, but does not eat; he is thirsty, and\ndoes not drink; he is always needy, and his mind knows no repose.\nHe is never free from alarms. A rat does not move in the silence of\nthe night, without the noise filling him with apprehensions, that a\nthief is breaking into his house. No strong wind can blow, that in\nhis imagination, does not threaten the wreck of one of his trading\nships. He is continually meditating new hiding-places for his treasure,\nwhich he frequently visits, doubtful of finding the money in the\nhiding-place, but always sure of finding his heart in the money. He\nviews it with anxious concern, and sometimes will not venture to touch\nit, lest it should crumble to ashes between his fingers. Thus, fat in\npossessions, and a martyr to fears, his days pass away, till, as it\nhappened in the case of king Agag, the fatal hour of punishment arrives\n(_pinguissimus et tremens_). Can a man\u2019s life be more unhappy?\n\nXI. If he seeks relief from lasciviousness, he will find, that no vice\nloads a man with so much uneasiness; and provided the meanness of his\ndisposition, or the depravity of his appetite, determine him to pursue\ncriminal pleasures, in the instant are set before his eyes the injuries\nit will be productive of, to the three articles, that are esteemed\nthe most valuable in this life, honour, wealth, and property. He goes\nfrom pitcher to pitcher, to satisfy his thirst, till meeting with\nsome infectious water, he poisons his whole mass of blood, by which\nmeans, his life is either endangered, or he is obliged to purchase the\npreservation of it at a dear rate, and although he recovers his health,\nhe will suffer in his reputation through life.\n\nXII. If, from the ampleness of his fortune, or the merit of his person,\nhis pursuits are directed to objects in a higher sphere, he will avoid\npart of the inconveniences before enumerated, to incur greater, which\nis shunning Scylla, and running upon Charybdis. Adventures of this\nkind, are full of alarms, inquietudes, and dangers. What anxieties\nawait him pending the love-suit! His eyes seek sleep, but find it not;\nfor Jacob, who was an honourable lover, experienced, and declared, that\nit was become a fugitive from his eyes. His heart longs for repose, but\ndoes not obtain it. In this manner he goes on, conceiving unhappiness,\nthat he may bring forth misfortune. He is constantly wavering in his\ndetermination, about what means he shall employ to accomplish his end;\nhe approves all that occur to him, and he rejects them all: _incert\u00e6\ntanta est discordia mentis_. He trembles to think of the possibility of\na repulse. Love drags him forward, fear detains him. He finds the whole\nroad of his courtship strewed with perils, which upon his arrival at\nthe summit of his wishes, will be multiplied, the hazardous instances\nin such cases, being many; but it seldom happens, that the injury is\nconfined to a single person, and it is next to a moral impossibility,\nthat a man should take so many steps without making a little noise,\nby which means, suspicion will be awakened, and watching in the end,\nbe rewarded with the discovery of truth; and although the purpose is\naccomplished, a man who commits insults, and does injuries, is never\nfree from alarms. What real pleasure is a man capable of feeling, who\ncannot separate the gratification of his lewd desires, from the hazard\nthat attends them? He cannot move a step in prosecution of the crime,\nbut the injured person, presents himself to his imagination, with a\ndagger, or a pistol in his hand; and this danger is constantly pursuing\nhim, whichever way he turns himself; so that he is precisely in the\ncase of that man, who is in continual dread of losing his life, and\nalways sees it hang suspended by a single thread before his eyes,\nwhich is a state, that God represents to his people as a terrible\ncurse: _Et erit vita tua quasi pendens ante te. Timebis nocte, & die, &\nnon credes vit\u00e6 tu\u00e6._\n\nXIII. But admitting there are circumstances where these apprehensions\ndo not exist, still it does not follow, that they are not attended with\nvery serious inquietudes. Suppose that after enjoyment, a loathing\nshould ensue, which happens very frequently, and which actually did\nhappen to Amnon with Thamar. You see in this case, for the sake of a\ndelicious moment, a disagreeable obligation intailed upon a man for\nlife. If he resolves to break the noose, he exposes himself to the\nrage of an abandoned woman, who finding herself neglected, runs mad,\neither through love or hatred, which are both equally dangerous. If\nhis criminal affection continues, the impatience of not enjoying his\nbeloved object with freedom, over-balances the satisfaction, which is\nafforded by a delight that he usurps by stealth. In such a situation,\nhis bowels being gnawed by a furious envy is unavoidable. But what\nif jealousies should steal in? Those who have experienced the rigour\nof these furies well know, how much they exceed the most exquisite\ncriminal enjoyments, and that whole years of that false glory are not\nequal to one day only of this hell. Reflect on what has been said, and\nthen tell me, whether you can figure to yourself a state more unhappy.\nSt. Austin, who found himself so long entangled in the labyrinth of\nthe three before-mentioned vices, is a good witness, that the dish\nwhich they present to the appetite, is filled with putrefaction. Hear\nhis words, when he addresses himself to God in the sixth Book of his\nConfessions: _Inhiabam honoribus, lucris, conjugio, & tu irridebas,\npatiebar in iis cupiditatibus amarissimas difficultates._\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXIV. Nor ought we to conclude, that those few whose will with respect\nto other men, is the law, and whose libertinism there is no rein\nto check, navigate the sea of vice without inquietude, for they\nalso experience the waters of that sea to be extremely bitter. I\nmean sovereign princes. Nero was lord of the earth, that is to say,\nmaster of the whole Roman empire. He gave the most latitudinary loose\nimaginable to all his perverse inclinations, and those inclinations\nwere irrefragable decrees. The weight of government, sat very light\non him, and far from supporting the state on his shoulders, which by\nway of example, had been done by the best princes, he trod it under\nfoot. All the world obeyed the sceptre, and the sceptre was the slave\nof appetite. He possessed whomsoever he liked, and put to death\nwhomsoever he hated. Love in the Emperor\u2019s hands, held its attainment\nand completion, and in the hands of his instruments, hatred held the\nknife. Passion could not carry a man to a more horrible pitch of\nextravagance, than he manifested, when he set fire to Rome to indulge\nhis cruelty, and also to gratify his base appetites, which were evident\nby the indignities he offered to his own sex. All this, to the disgrace\nof human nature, was executed by that monster in iniquity.\n\nXV. Who would believe, that this prince, who held the world in slavery\nto his arbitrary will, did not lead a joyous life? but according to\nTacitus, so far from enjoying this happiness, he was always possessed\nwith terrors: _Facinorum recordatione nunquam timore vacuus._ And\nSuetonius adds, that unable to sleep of nights, he used to run about\nthe salons of his palace, tumbling heels over head like a man out of\nhis senses.\n\nXVI. Tiberius was equal to Nero in power, and very little inferior\nto him in wickedness; but with all his power, he led so uneasy and\ndisturbed a life, that in order a little to relieve his heart from\nthe oppression of its anxieties, he could not avoid bursting forth in\ngroans and words, that were expressive of his grief and uneasiness.\nSo says Tacitus: _Tiberium non fortuna, non solitudines protegebant,\nquin tormenta pectoris, suasque ipse p\u00e6nas fateretur_; and a little\nbefore, he relates a mournful exclamation of the Emperor\u2019s, in a letter\nhe wrote to the Senate, where he says, my own crimes have transformed\nthemselves into executioners, in order to torment me; _adeo facinora\natque flagitia ipsi quoque in supplicium verterant_.\n\nXVII. These anxieties of bad princes, are for the most part, occasioned\nby their seeing themselves universally abhorred, in consequence of\nwhich, they live in continual dread of conspiracies. They reflect,\nthat out of so many people who hate them, some will be found, with\nsufficient resolution to execute, what had been previously concerted;\nso that amidst all their pleasures, they cannot feel more enjoyment,\nthan is felt by a culprit, at the sound of soft music, while he is\nwaiting to hear the fatal sentence. Dionysius the tyrant of Syracuse,\nin order to undeceive a person who envied his happiness, made use of\nthe following expressive device. He invited the man to a banquet, and\nseated him immediately under the point of a sword, that hung suspended\nby a fine thread, very near to, and just ready to pierce his neck,\nand then informed him, that was precisely the situation, in which his\nfortune had placed him.\n\nXVIII. Over and above this anguish, which is common to all tyrants,\nthere is no legitimate prince, however happy he may seem, without\nhis serious and weighty inquietudes. Alexander cloathed with glory,\nafflicts himself, because Homer does not live to celebrate his actions.\nAugustus, who had always been the favourite of fortune, because she\nonce slighted him in the case of the legions in Germany, passed much\nof his time, both night and day, in ravings and exclamations, as if he\nhad been mad. Caligula, fancies he shall insure his safety, by spilling\ngreat quantities of blood, but is grieved when he reflects, that all\nthe heads in Rome are not placed on one neck, and that he cannot strike\nthem off at a blow. The ambitious prince groans, because he cannot make\nhimself master of the whole world; the covetous one, because he cannot\naccumulate in his own treasury, the riches of other kingdoms; the\nvindictive one, because he cannot destroy a neighbouring prince who has\noffended him; the lascivious one, because his imagination represents to\nhim some foreign object, exempt from the power of his will. Thus bitter\nafflictions, are annexed to exalted stations.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXIX. So certain and so general is the sentence, which wisdom puts in\nthe mouths of all wicked men, when they arrive at the region where\nthe delusion ceases: _Lassati sumus in via iniquitatis & perditionis,\n& ambulavimus vias difficiles._ Oh! how have we fatigued ourselves\nin the way of perdition! our relaxation was weariness, our pleasures\nanguish; unhappy we, who have run the course of life, not through\ndelicious gardens, or pleasant forests, but through thorns and briars,\nand intricate paths! This is the language of all the damned: _Talia\ndixerunt in inferno hi, qui peccaverunt._ Of all? yes, they all say so,\nand they speak the truth. All sinners have their little hell in this\nworld. They all travel through asperities, to arrive at the precipice.\nThey all drink the dregs of that cup, which according to David\u2019s\ndescription our Lord holds in his hand: _Calix in manu domini vini\nmeri plenus mixto: & inclinavit ex hoc in hoc, verumtamen f\u00e6x ejus non\nest exinanita, bibent omnes peccatores terr\u00e6._ And it must be so, for\naccording to the sense and meaning of the text, the pure wine is for\nthe saints of the land, where the enjoyment is pure: the mixed, is for\nthe just of that country, where tribulation is mixed with happiness, so\nthat even in this life, there remains for sinners, only the bitter and\ngross dregs; and these they all drink. All, yes all, without excepting\neven those, on whom the good things of this world seem to be heaped up.\n\nXX. For the more clear understanding this matter, and to enforce the\nargument we are using, it will be necessary to premise, that in this\nlife, there is a heavy and mortal affliction, which is common to all\nmen; but with respect to sinners, it is peculiarly and most severely\nfelt by those who seem the most happy. This affliction, consists in\nthe reflection, that we must one day die. There is no doubt, but every\nliving creature feels horror, upon arriving at that fatal pass, and\nis naturally sad, whenever it occurs to him, that he must unavoidably\ngo through it; but he will be more affected beyond comparison, who\nafter having culled all the regales of fortune, has placed his whole\nhappiness in the enjoyment of them. Let us contemplate a man, rich,\npowerful, respected, and obeyed, and to whom nothing is wanting, either\nfor convenience or pleasure, and to whom, let his appetites be ever\nso vague, fortune has denied nothing that may enable him to gratify\nthem. Such a man, whenever he thinks that he must die, which is a\nthought that will sometimes occur to him, without his being able to\nprevent it, cannot fail to be exceedingly afflicted. The thought of\ndeath, to whoever does not employ it for the amendment of his life,\nbecomes a torturer. Let us admit, that he is a determined Atheist,\nso blinded, as not to entertain the least idea of the immortality of\nthe soul, and consequently, has not the least apprehension of what\nwill befall him in the world to come; yet he will at least consider\ndeath, as a merciless, and a savage tyrant, who will despoil him of\nall that is most dear to him; of the property which he possesses, of\nthe banquet he regales himself at, of the chace which diverts him, of\nthe music which delights him, and of the concubine whom he adores; all\nwhich will be lost at a stroke, never to be recovered any more. The\ngreater the pleasures are which he enjoys, the more miserable this\nconsideration will make him. The unhappy man, who is the outcast of\nfortune, and even he who is placed in a middle station of life, feels\nthe light consolation, that death will relieve him from many vexations;\nbut what comfort can he receive, whom it will only rob of enjoyments?\nDeath strikes terror into all men, but to such a one, it is terrible in\nextreme. Every man is intensely fond of his own particular happiness,\nand in proportion to the ardour with which he loves it, will be his\ngrief at losing it. Such a man, when he thinks himself arrived at the\nsummit of felicity, and knows no other than that which he possesses,\nwith what anguish must he reflect, that the whole, without the least\nreserve, will be one day lost!\n\nXXI. This inevitable melancholy, as they advance in years, is much\naugmented in all the favourites of fortune. Life, after a man is\narrived at his prime, may be from thenceforward, truly and properly,\ncompared to a chronic disease, which proceeds leading a man to death\nby slow paces; or to speak more properly, it is death implanted in\nour nature. Upon arriving at the period we have just mentioned, that\nis, the prime of life, the powerful man, from thenceforward, in the\nstrength which he continues to lose, and in the diseases he proceeds\nto gain, finds constant information, that by little and little, the\ncottage of life goes on crushing and crumbling to nothing, by the\nweight of the temple of fortune. At this stage, he revolves in his\nmind, one by one, all the pleasures he enjoys, and all the objects of\nhis love, and each thought tears from his heart a sigh, especially when\nhe reflects, that the time approaches, when he must bid them all a\nmelancholy farewell. He proceeds to cast another glance at death, and\nalmost in the words of the unhappy King David oppressed with grief,\nexclaims against her in a sentimental complaint, not so much for having\ncut the thread of his life, as for having separated him by an eternal\nabsence from all he esteemed and adored. _Siccine separat amara mors._\nO sinners! whom the world call happy, is this living? But let the\nworld be undeceived; for ye are the people, who burden yourselves with\nwhatever is most heavy, and hard to be borne, that is contained in the\nstores of mortality; all your relaxation is fatigue, all your pleasure\nis anxiety, all your nectar is poison.\n\nXXII. For your comfort and advantage, although you cannot be a stranger\nto it, listen at present, to that sweet and sonorous voice, which, by\nthe divine organ, was conveyed and dispersed over the whole face of\nthe earth. Attend, for to you it is addressed; hear and profit by it:\n_Venite ad me omnes, qui laboratis, & onerati estis, & ego reficiam\nvos._ Come unto me, all ye who labour, and are heavy laden with cares,\nfor I will lighten your burdens, and give you relaxation and ease.\nThese words, it is certain, are designed to reclaim sinners, and are\naddressed as a call to those who are distant from Christ. These then\nare they, who lead a wearisome life. Christ invites them to come nearer\nhim, that is, to embrace virtue; the virtuous then are those, who enjoy\nrelaxation and ease. Thus, you see, both the points I am attempting to\nprove are supported by evangelical authority.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nBut having demonstrated the first point by natural reason and\nexperience, I will proceed to do the same by the second. And first of\nall, I ought to acknowledge, that the beginnings of a virtuous life,\nare toilsome: _Ardua prima via est_; and more especially to those who\nhave been a long time under the dominion of their passions. Vicious\nhabits, are enemies, which in their first attacks, wage cruel war,\nbut their force declines daily, and sometimes, by a miracle of grace,\nthey are laid prostrate at the first onset. The flight of a vicious\nman from sin, is in all respects, like the escape of the Hebrews from\nthe land of Egypt. How dejected were they, when, with the Red Sea in\ntheir front, they saw the Egyptian army at their backs! How haughty\nwere the Egyptians! how desponding were the Hebrews! They are just on\nthe point of treating to surrender, when Moses, exalting his voice,\nsaid to the people, \u201cNow, Israel, advance boldly into the gulph, for\nthe Lord hath undertaken to defend you.\u201d They obey, and upon setting\ntheir feet in the water, the Sea divided. The troops of Pharaoh pursue\nthem in crouds. What pride possessed the Egyptians! what fear the\nHebrews! However, the last proceed with trembling pace, till they reach\nthe opposite shore; upon arriving there, they turn round, and look at\nwhence they came from, and they then perceive Pharaoh and all his host\nare buried in the Red Sea. Their grief is converted to happiness, and\ntheir groans to songs of joy.\n\nXXIV. Exactly like this, is the flight of a sinner from vice. Egypt\nis the criminal station. The enemies who pursue the fugitive sinner\nare his vicious inclinations, of which, he was a long time the slave:\nthese are strong, he is feeble. The first assault is furious. Moses\nis the virtue which animates him. The sinner at last, breaks through\na sea of difficulties, and although it requires more perseverance in\nsome to compleat the good work, than in others, he ultimately obtains\nthe satisfaction, of seeing all his passions drowned. He gains footing\non the opposite shore: and what follows? the same that happened to the\nHebrews, he bursts forth in songs of joy. Afterwards, in pursuing his\nroad to the Land of Promise, he is now and then upon the way, assaulted\nby enemies, that is, by some temptations; but they are overcome, as\nMoses overcame the Amalekites, by lifting the hands to Heaven, under\nwhich figure is implied the force and efficacy of prayer. Sometimes\nhe also meets with bitter waters, that is to say tribulations, but\na miraculous wood sweetens them; for the cross, or passion of our\nSaviour, makes them palatable. From Mara or Marath, a place whose name\nis used to express bitterness, on account of its nauseous waters, he\nmakes the transition to Elim, a situation, which is both pleasant and\ndelightsome.\n\nXXV. Thus it succeeds with the sinner, who, fugitive from vice, puts\nhimself under the divine protection, which never fails those who\nsolicit it; but to be uniform to what I proposed, it will now be\nnecessary, to consider virtue in its natural state, and abstracted from\nthe extraordinary aids, with which it is assisted by grace.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXXVI. The superlative Mount of Virtue is formed the reverse of all\nother mountains. In the material mountains, the skirts are pleasant,\nand the tops all asperity; therefore, in ascending them, the pleasant\npart diminishes, and the dreary part augments. On the contrary,\nthe skirts of the Mount of Virtue are disgusting, and the eminence\ngrateful. He who would arrive at it, must expect at first setting\nout, to meet with nothing but rocks, thorns, and thickets, but as he\nadvances in his course, the asperity diminishes, and he begins to\ndiscover the pleasant part; and at length, on arriving at the top,\nhe sees nothing but beautiful flowers, regaling plants, and crystal\nfountains.\n\nXXVII. The first passages, are excessively laborious and slippery: _per\ninsidias iter est, formasque ferarum_; he is courted by the songs of\nthe syrens, from the sea of the world; he is terrified in some parts\nof the mountain, by the roaring of lions. He casts a wishful look on\nthe smooth surface of the valley, and he contemplates with dread the\ntop of the mountain, to which he aspires. Freed from the prison of\nsin, still, in his passions he wears his fetters, the weight of which,\ntogether with the difficulty of the road, render his progress slow and\ntoilsome. He hears just behind him, the soft murmurs of his criminal\npleasures, which accost him as they did St. Austin, and say, is it\npossible that you can abandon us? _Dimittis de nos_: is it possible\nyou can take your leave and absent yourself from us for ever? _Et a\nmomento isto non erimus tecum ultra in \u00e6ternum._ He however proceeds\non, though a little dejected, and now and then meets a rub in the way,\nwhich causes him to stumble; but now he begins to find the path less\ndifficult, and the clamours of earthly delights make less impression\non him, because he hears them at a greater distance. Just so St.\nAustin experienced it: _Et audiebam eas jam long\u00e8 minus quam dimidias,\nveluti a dorso musitantes._ Having gone a little further, he begins\nto discover the road plain and smooth, and although now and then the\nforce of his antient habits causes him to think of the pleasures he has\nenjoyed, and the difficulty of forsaking them, the stroke is so feeble,\nthat it makes no impression: _Cum diceret mihi consuetudo violenta,\nputasne sine istis poteris? sed jam tepidissim\u00e8 hoc dicebat._\n\nXXVIII. He arrives at last, at the superior part of the mountain,\nwhere he beholds a beautiful, and an agreeable plain. The sweat and\ntears with which he watered the skirts, he finds have fertilized the\nsummit; for here he obtains an abundant harvest, far exceeding what\nis produced from cultivation and prolix labour. This is hid from the\neyes of the world, who, instead of considering him as enjoying a happy\nretirement at the top of the mountain, conclude, he is placed in an\nalmost inaccessible and arduous station. They think he cannot enjoy an\ninstant of repose, imagining the situation he inhabits, to be a field,\nwhere the elements engage with the utmost fury, and where the tempests\nrage with the greatest force and rigour. But it fares with him, as with\none who scales the height of Olympus, who afterwards enjoys a climate\nof uninterrupted serenity, where the air is not disturbed with the\nmost slight agitation, and where the tranquillity is so transcendent,\nthat characters written in ashes exposed to the open air will continue\nlegible for years together. There you always look down upon the clouds,\nand the fulminations burst on the skirts, without ever incommoding the\neminence. At the same time, those who dwell in the neighbouring vales,\nconclude, if information or experience has not undeceived them, that it\nis ever obscured by gatherings, and continually scorched by the rays of\nlightning.\n\nXXIX. Just so the difficulties of life, and the storms of fortune, fall\non those who inhabit the humble vallies of the world, but not upon him\nwho has ascended the Mount of God; the fat mountain, as David calls\nit. But with all this, sickness, grief, loss of goods, persecution,\nignominy, and other calamities, are they not common to the just, and\nto the unjust? and are they not in some degree acquired by the first,\nby silence, retirement, watching, prayer, discipline, fasting, and\nother penalties? It is all true, but these are clouds that are seen at\na distance, and only appear on the sides of Olympus, but never rise to\nthe top; that is, they never attain the power of inquieting the sublime\npart of the soul.\n\nXXX. I do not mean to insinuate, that just men are insensible, for this\nwould savour of the extravagance of the Stoics, who pretend, that in\nthe workshops of virtue you may transform men to marble. The virtuous\nhave their sufferings, but they don\u2019t sit so heavy on them, as they\ndo on the delinquents, and the inquietudes which they both experience\nare felt by the delinquents in their full vigour; by the virtuous only\npartially. You may distinguish the spirit of the just man and the\nsinner, as you would the elements of air and earth. The earth in all\nits regions, is exposed to the injuries of the other elements. The\ninferior portion of the air only is so exposed; which is the theatre\nof vapours and exhalations; but the sensible alterations, do not reach\nwhat is called the superior region of the air. There the temperature\nis observed to be always equal, there the Heavens are displayed in\na constant serenity, and there is always enjoyed an atmosphere,\ncrystalline and pure.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXXI. But let us scrutinize with the greatest exactness, the temporal\nconveniences of virtue. Health, honour, and property, which essentially\ncontribute to temporal felicity, are of great importance in this\nmatter, if the whole of it does not consist in the enjoyment of\nthem; and considered with respect to these contingents, the virtuous\nman has much the advantage of the vicious one. No one is ignorant,\nthat honour is the legitimate offspring of virtue; for which reason\nthe Romans, when they built them, joined the temples together, that\nwere appropriated to the adoration of those endowments, which they\nworshipped as deities; so that the only way by which you could enter\nthe Temple of Honour, was through the Temple of Virtue. The very\npeople who shun the practice of virtue, esteem and reverence it; and\nthe blessings of health and long life, on account of the regularity\nwith which he lives, are more likely to be attained by the virtuous\nman, than by the vicious one, who, by his debaucheries, ruins his\nhealth, and curtails his existence. Property finds a good steward in\nthe \u0153conomy of virtue, who takes care of and preserves it, by avoiding\nsuperfluities. Solomon expressed the whole, when he said, that the\nobedient to the divine mandates held long life in one hand, and in\nthe other honour and property: _Longitudo dierum in dextra ejus; & in\nsinistra illius, diviti\u00e6 & gloria._ (Prov. 3.) Now, even supposing the\njust man to enjoy no other advantages over the vicious one, is not his\ncondition much to be preferred?\n\nXXXII. But it has others. The tranquillity, and sweetness, which is\nadministered to the soul by a good conscience, places in a very eminent\ndegree, the fortune of the just, superior to that of the sinner. This\nis a blessing of little bulk, but of great value: a precious stone,\nwhich, within small dimensions, contains great and rich qualities. The\nconscience is the mirror of the soul, and it happens to the just man,\nand to the sinner, when they look in the glass, as it happens to the\nhandsome, and the ugly woman, when they view themselves in the crystal;\nthe handsome is pleased, because she sees perfections, the other is\nsad, because she observes nothing but blemishes. The condition of\nthe sinner is even worse than that of the ugly woman, for she, if she\npleases, may run from the glass, but the sinner cannot do this; for\nalthough he should not present himself before the mirror, the mirror\nwill present itself before him, and the understanding cannot shut its\neyes, when the memory presents to it the images of a man\u2019s evil deeds.\nIn that state, the sinner is filled with horror instead of delight, for\nhis desire forsakes him, and the blemish remains by itself. In addition\nto this, the sinner at such a conjuncture, is made unhappy by the\nreflection, that his infamies may be laid open to the world; at this\nthought, the inevitable torture of shame, and the punishment of the\nlaw, terrify him by turns. The just man, on the contrary, has nothing\nto fear. If he hides his actions from the world, it is not from the\ndread of their being observed, but to avoid the hazard of their being\napplauded. He contemplates them alone, and if he is so happy as to\nfind that they are all good, he receives that pure pleasure, which the\nsacred Chronologer, even in God himself, paints as an accidental glory:\n_Vidit Deus cuncta qu\u00e6 fecerat, & erant vald\u00e8 bona._\n\nXXXIII. The difference between the just and the unjust man, is not\nless, when fortune in disgust sheds its reverses, or heaven is severe\nby visiting him with tribulations. The sinner loses his property, his\nbeloved woman dies, he receives an injury from somebody, which it is\nout of his power to revenge. What relief does he find? None: he raves,\nhe storms, he burns; he neither eats, drinks, nor rests; his symptoms\nare worse than the disease, and sometimes so violent, as to oblige him\nto take to his bed, and deprive him of life; and his passions often\nrise to such a degree of ferocity, as to excite him to lay violent\nhands on himself. On the contrary, the first thing the just man does,\nunder similar circumstances, is to lift his eyes to Heaven; and whether\nhe considers the tribulation as a just punishment for some crime he has\nbeen guilty of, or as a visitation for the exercise of his patience,\nhe trusts, it will all turn out for his benefit; he knows the stroke\ncomes from a friendly hand, and he knows also, that for his own good\nhe is wounded; he not only is reconciled, but kisses the rod. Thus\nyou see, by an admirable metamorphose, his heaviness is converted to\nsatisfaction; and that what is poison to a wicked man, becomes balsam\nto a just one: for, _Diligentibus Deum omnia co-operantur in bonum._\n\nXXXIV. Who, upon a view of what we have enumerated and urged on this\nhead, will not be convinced, that even in this life, the lot of the\njust man is incomparably better than that of the vicious one; that\ntranquillity and temporal convenience, are only to be met with in\nthe paths of virtue, and that the field of vice, under the delusive\nappearance of flowers, produces nothing but thorns?\n\nXXXV. There now remains but one argument for me to solve, and that is\ntaken from the words of Christ in St. Matthew, where our great Master\nassures us, the road is broad, that is, easy, which leads to perdition;\nand that the path is narrow, that is, toilsome, which leads to life\nimmortal.\n\nXXXVI. I say then, that before we proceed further, it will be proper\nto reconcile this text with the one before quoted, where our Saviour\ninvites sinners to pursue the paths of virtue, and propounds to them\nrelief and ease, upon a supposition, that they are crippled and borne\ndown by the weight of sin: _Venite ad me, omnes qui laboratis_, &c.\nand it is also necessary, to compound this with that sweet expression,\nused in another place, when he intimates to us, that his yoke is easy,\nand his burden light; and we should likewise harmonize with it, what\nDavid teaches us also, which is, that the road of the divine precepts\nis broad, and that the precepts themselves are so likewise: _Latum\nmandatum tuum nimis._ In fine, this text should be understood in a\nsense, that is not repugnant to reason, or experience.\n\nXXXVII. The solution is easy, if we say, that grace reconciles and\nsoftens, that which is hard and difficult to nature; and the same yoke,\nwhich is heavy to be borne by mere natural powers, is made light,\nwhen the divine aid concurs and lends its assistance. And this is the\nmanner, in which the fathers commonly reconcile those texts.\n\nXXXVIII. It may also be said, by way of answer, that the Redeemer\nspeaks only of the first passages or entrance into the one and the\nother path, so that the path of virtue, at its entrance, is toilsome\nand laborious, but afterwards becomes easy; on the contrary, the path\nof vice is easy at the beginning, and toilsome at the end. The context\ngives reason for this construction, for Christ, when he is exciting\nmen to pursue the paths of virtue, describes all the difficulty as\nplaced at the first passages: _Intrare per angustam portam_, says St.\nMatthew, which according to St. Luke, is, _Contendite intrare per\nangustam portam_; which amounts to the same thing, as if he had said,\nin the entrance lies all the difficulty; therefore take courage, press\nforward, fight, _contendite_: to conquer the obstruction, which you\nfind in the narrowness of the door.\n\nXXXIX. So it is, that this door is exceeding strait, and the newly\nconverted is pressed by the power of its hinges, that the ill habits\nhe has imbibed may be squeezed out, and not only the skin is grazed by\nthe pressure, but sometimes pieces of flesh also are torn off, and left\nin the entrance. But the difficulty of this transit once conquered, the\nway by little and little grows wider, till at last, it is extended to a\ndelightsome and a spacious valley;\n\n    _Largior hic campos \u00e6ther, & lumine vestit,_\n    _Purpure, solemque suum sua sidera morunt._\n\nXL. The path of vice is very differently formed, and may be compared to\na passage or cave, which, according to the naturalists, is fabricated\nas a place of safe retreat by the Rat of India. This sagacious\nanimal, knowing the enmity the dragon bears him, and knowing also the\ninsufficiency of his own strength to resist him, not only defends\nhimself, but conquers his enemy by the following stratagem. He makes\ntwo entrances to his cave, the one small and proportioned to the bulk\nof his own body, the other wider at the surface, but which he draws\nnarrower by degrees, till towards the other end it is but just wide\nenough to admit of his passing through. The use of this place is as\nfollows: When the little animal finds himself pursued by that voracious\nbeast, he flies to his cave, which he enters at the wide mouth, not\ndoubting but the dragon will follow him, who eager for his prey, the\nlarge aperture being sufficiently wide to admit his whole body, plunges\nin, but as it insensibly becomes narrower and narrower, the dragon,\nwho presses violently on, finds himself in the end so straitened, as\nnot to be able either to retreat, or advance; the rat, as soon as he\nperceives this, sallies out of the narrow passage, and in the rear of\nthe dragon, entering the wide one, revenges himself upon him much at\nhis leisure, converting him into a regale for his appetite, and food\nfor his resentment.\n\nXLI. The stratagem of this little animal exactly resembles that which\nthe devil practises upon men. He displays to him the road of vice, very\nbroad and commodious at the entrance; the unhappy man, lured by this\nappearance, enters without suspicion, and in the consequence becomes\na prey to his criminal pleasures. The road, by little and little,\ngrows narrower; one care oppresses him on one side, and another on the\nother; sickness and old age, which are very nearly allied together,\ncome on; his limbs begin to contract, and the use of them to forsake\nhim; fear, solicitude, grief and heaviness, press upon him more and\nmore every day, till he is put in such a strait, that even the soul\nwith its spiritual nature is unable to ruminate or reflect on: by this\nprogression, the sinner, in the end, arrives at the summit of anguish,\nand at that unhappy station, from whence it is impossible to recede,\n_ubi nulla est redemptio_, and where he will be eternally food for that\nravenous serpent, whose voracity and thirst of blood is never satiated:\n_Mors depascet eos_; which Cardinal Hugo expounds, _Diabolus depascet\neos._\n\nXLII. This remarkable difference and opposition between virtue and\nvice, was not hid from the antients, for the light of natural reason\nwas sufficient to acquire this knowledge; and Virgil has painted\nbeautifully, the distinction between the one and the other path, in the\nfollowing verses:\n\n    _Nam via virtutis dextrum petit ardua collem_\n    _Difficilemque aditum primum spectantibus offert,_\n    _Sed requiem pr\u00e6bet fessis in vertice summo._\n    _Molle ostentat iter via lata; sed ultima meta_\n    _Pr\u00e6cipitat captos, volvitque per ardua saxa._\n\n\n\n\nExalted and Humble FORTUNE.\n\n\nThose were blind themselves, who feigned Fortune to be blind; and\nthey were unjust, who accused her of partiality. This error is\ncorrected by religion, when it teaches us, that what is meant by the\nword Fortune, is nothing else but the Divine Providence, which is\nall eyes, and proceeds in every thing from the justest motives. But\nalthough the error is corrected in the essential, the deception is not\nso effectually dispelled, but there is still left remaining, a faint\nappearance of the principle. The complainers of fortune, compute the\ninequality of men\u2019s lots, according to the greater or less parade and\nfigure which they make among their fellow creatures; and seeing that in\na great measure, this inequality is not proportioned to men\u2019s merits,\nthe wicked attribute it to the chimerical force of accident, the\nidolators to the caprice of a blind deity, and the true believers to\nthe disposing will of a Supreme Providence.\n\nII. These last conclude well, but they suppose ill, for thus it is; the\ncircling wheel of Fortune, and all its movements, are directed by a\ndivine hand; and the raising up some, and casting down others, is so\nordered and regulated, with the most wise design. It is also certain\n(and this reflection is of infinite importance) that with respect to\nmany, we see but one half of the wheel\u2019s turning, the remainder of its\ncircuit being reserved for completion in the other world. We observe,\nthat Fortune raises some, and never lowers them, and that it casts down\nothers, without ever raising them. What is this? Nothing more, than\nthat Providence in this mortal life, gives the wheel but half a turn;\nthe round is concluded in the other hemisphere; so that those who rise\nhere, go down there, and those who descend here, are there mounted up.\nThis is the most ordinary course, although there is no rule without an\nexception.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nIII. But supposing what I have just premised is admitted,\nnotwithstanding all the solutions and precautions we can advert to, a\nserious and pernicious deceit continues to impose on, and in some sort,\ngovern the world, which is derived, as I have already observed, from\nthose who conclude well, but suppose badly. In the distribution they\nmake of happy, and unhappy people, they suppose an inequality, which\nin reality does not exist, nor is it to be found in the fortunes of\nmen. He who occupies posts of dignity, he who inhabits a magnificent\npalace, he who possesses great riches, and much more he whose temples\nare adorned with a crown, is reputed the happiest of men. On the\ncontrary, he who beneath an humble roof, scarce known to the world,\nwho to subsist and enable him to live, has no more than is absolutely\nnecessary, is considered as unhappy. At least, the fortune of this\nlast, is judged to be as much inferior to that of the other, as a\nlittle fountain is to the whole stock of waters contained in the Nile.\n\nIV. Very different was the sentiment of the oracle of Delphi, who, when\nhe was asked by Gyges King of Lydia, who was the happiest man in the\nworld? replied, \u201cAgalus Psophidius, the possessor of a little estate,\nin a confined corner of Arcadia, is the most happy man who inhabits the\nglobe.\u201d The King, who expected to be told that himself was the happiest\nman, remained equally confounded and surprized.\n\nV. Agathocles was a monster of Fortune; from being the son of a poor\npotter of the City of Regio, he rose to be sovereign of Sicily, with\nall which, I believe, that by comparing his fortune with that of\nCarcinus his father, we shall find that the father was the more happy\nman of the two. It is certain, he did not live in that continual\nuneasiness, which agitated the whole life of Agathocles, nor did\nhe suffer any grief so intense, or of so long duration, as that of\nAgathocles, which was occasioned by the death of his sons, who were\nbarbarously beheaded by his own soldiers.\n\nVI. Pliny, in his seventh Book, speaking of those Romans, who, in some\ninstances, were the most remarkable favourites of Fortune, such as the\ndictator Scylla, the two Metellus\u2019s, and Octavius Augustus, points\nout at the same time, so many counterpoises to their good luck, as to\nleave it doubtful, whether the scale of their adversity, or of their\nprosperity preponderated.\n\nVII. The labour would be infinite, if, by turning over history,\nyou was to instance all those, to whom the hand of fortune, has\nalternately dealt the most cruel blows, and administered the most\ntender gratifications; nor would such an enquiry be of any avail to\nour purpose, because every one will readily grant, there is no asylum\nin this world, to protect us from the rigours of fate; nor is there\nany privilege annexed to high dignity, which exempts it from the\njurisdiction of misfortune. The best method then is, to weigh the one\nand the other fortune, the exalted and the humble, and estimate them,\naccording to what in their common and ordinary state, they are found\nto contain in themselves; abstracted from any extraordinary accidents,\neither favourable or adverse.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nVIII. I say then, that humble fortune according to its intrinsic value,\nif it does not exceed, is at least equal to the exalted. In order to\ngive at once a clear and a solid proof of this fact, which may seem\na mystery, it should be understood as a certain truth, that riches\ndo not constitute happiness in men, in proportion to their material\nmagnitude, but in proportion to what is enjoyed of them, either with\nrespect to convenience, or the pleasure they occasion. What is a rich\nman the better, for having his table covered with a variety of delicate\neatables, if he has lost his appetite? with all his dainties, he\ncannot be said to regale himself; and it fares much better in point of\ngratification with a poor man, who eats of a coarse dish, if his palate\nembraces it with earnestness.\n\nIX. The comparison of relish with respect to food, may be applied to\nall our other senses and faculties with respect to their objects;\nfor let these be gratified and delighted to whatever degree you can\nsuppose, the pleasure produced in every individual, will tally with the\ndisposition of the organ; and therefore, the greater or lesser degree\nof felicity of the subject, in the use of those objects, should be\nmeasured, not by the entative magnitude which is contained in them, but\nby the delight they afford. This being the case, you will find, that\nvast riches do not furnish to an opulent man greater enjoyments, nor\nturn aside from him more vexations, than is afforded to, and diverted\nfrom a poor man with his scanty means; and you will conclude, those are\nnot more happy than these, and that consequently the fortunes of both\nare equal.\n\nX. But how are we to know the hearts, and what passes in the breasts\nof persons in the one and the other state? Nothing is more easy. Nero\nerected a temple to Fortune, which he built with transparent stones,\nfound in his days in Capadocia; so that from the outside, although\nthe doors were shut, you could see all that passed within the temple.\nAnd nature has so made mankind, that from without, you may discern\ntheir good or bad interior situation, their looks for this purpose\nsupplying the use of transparent stones, and their lips expressing\ntheir pleasures and vexations. Observe, says Seneca, (Epist. 80.)\nthrough the crystal of their countenances, the recesses of the bosoms\nof the rich and the poor: _compara inter se pauperum & divitum vultus_,\nand you will most frequently find the last more chearful than the\nfirst: _s\u00e6pius pauper, & fidelius ridet_. In this instance, he gives\nthe preference to the condition of the poor; in other respects, he\nsupposes the benefits of both stations to be equal: observe, says\nhe, the greatest part of the poor people, and you will find, that\nthey are in no respect more sad or oppressed than the rich: _primum\naspice quanto major pars sit pauperum, quos nihilo notabis tristiores,\nsolicitioresque divitibus_. (In consolat. ad Helviam.)\n\nXI. Saint Austin found great benefit, from a reflection he made, upon\nseeing a Mendicant Friar go through a village in the state of Milan, to\nall appearance quite chearful and happy. He compared his own fortune\nwith that of the poor man, and found, that he was joyous, and himself\noppressed; that he was free from apprehensions, and himself full of\nterrors: _Et cert\u00e8 ille l\u00e6tabatur, ego anxius eram; securus ille, ego\ntrepidus_; and from thence he concluded, the fortune of that Mendicant\nwas much better than his own: _Nimirum quippe ille felicior erat._\n(Confess. lib. 6. cap. 6.)\n\nXII. This is viewing things according to what they are in their own\nnature. To estimate the felicity of any man, you should not consider\nthe goods he possesses, but the enjoyment he receives from the\npossession of them. Although the rich man always sits down to a\nsplendid banquet, a poor man regales himself better than him, if, as\nis most commonly the case, he knows better what he eats. No man will\nsay, that the existence of riches without their use is of any value. It\nis necessary, in order to relish their sweets, that you should expend\nthem. They are a good of such a nature, that they can only be enjoyed\nwhen you part with them. He who keeps his gold in a chest may receive\nsome satisfaction in contemplating, that he has it at his command,\nbut that is much inferior to the inevitable chagrin, which attends\nhis continual care and anxiety. Horace sung wisely, who held, that\nconvenience consisted more in the want, than in the possession of such\ngoods, as their concern for the preservation of kept people in constant\nalarms and terrors night and day, for fear a thief should break in and\nsteal them, an unfaithful servant purloin them, or a fire consume them.\n\n    _An vigilare metu exanimem, noctesque diesque_\n    _Formidare malos fures, incendia, servos_\n    _Ne te compilent fugientes, hoc juvat? Horum_\n    _Semper ego optarim pauperimus esse bonorum._\n\n    Lib. 1. Sat. 1.\n\nXIII. Quicksilver occasions continual tremors to him who works it in\nthe mines; gold and silver, to him who keeps and turns them over in a\nchest. There is no doubt, but the pleasure of finding himself rich\nis greatest in a covetous man, but his care and anxiety are excessive\nin proportion to it. Besides this, he is not so much gratified by the\ngoods he enjoys, as he is made uneasy by the desire of possessing those\nhe is not master of. There is always in his heart an immense vacuum, as\nobnoxious to his avarice, as a vacuum in all bodies is to nature, and\nhis thirst is of the dropsical kind, so that the more he drinks, the\nmore he craves.\n\nXIV. Upon a supposition then, that instead of convenience, there is\nevil and vexation in the mere possession of riches, let us proceed\nto take a view of the benefits that may result from their use. And\nfirst, riches to a very large amount, are exceedingly superfluous for\nfurnishing the accommodations of life. If a man, possessed of a few\nthousands of crowns, can find sufficient to purchase all that can be\nreasonably desired, of what use are millions? To what purpose should he\nwho finds water sufficient for all his occasions in a little fountain,\nbring a river into his house? He would acquire nothing by such an\nact, but the hatred and indignation of those, who see, that without\nutility to himself, a man monopolizes a stock of water, sufficient to\naccommodate a whole town; by doing which, he exposes himself to the\nmalicious designs that a wicked and perverse person may form to take\naway his life, in hopes that by perpetrating the fatal deed, he might\nbecome master of his property; and it is certain, that many persons\nfrom such a motive only, have fallen victims to the knife or to poison;\nso that an excess of doubloons to the owner, are rather things of\nweight, than things of worth. I mean, that instead of a convenience,\nthey are dangerous, and an evil of life.\n\nXV. But though they are not necessary to furnish the reasonable\naccommodations of life, they may be serviceable to purchase the\npleasures of it. Upon this head much may be said. The natural desires\nof the greatest part of mankind, are fixed upon such objects, that with\na moderate income, they are able to satisfy all their real wants. Meat\nand drink that might be stiled regaling, the diversion of hunting, and\nfrequent amusement at play, may be all attained with a moderate portion\nof thousands. Of what advantage are immense riches to him, whose whole\ndelight is centered in the cup and the dish, if he cannot eat or\ndrink more than the proportion of a single man; and if, urged by his\ngluttony, he strives to cram down as much as would serve two, he would\nsoon destroy his health, and not be able to eat a sufficient quantity\nto satisfy half a man. A person spending his substance, in diversions\nthat are not suited to his genius or inclination, is throwing it away\nintirely. The sweetness or soothing of music, is allowed to be the\ngreatest enchantment existing in the world, but what charms has it\nto him who wants an ear, or cannot relish it? The vassals of Ant\u00e6us,\nan ancient King of Scythia, having taken Ysmenias, the famous Theban\nmusician, a prisoner in war, presented him to their master as a prize\nof great value. Anteus after hearing him awhile, declared, that the\nneighing of his horse sounded better to him than all the fine tones of\nYsmenias. Nor should we understand, that the want of musical feeling\nis confined to one single barbarous genius, for not only the tigers\nfly from the lyre, but many cultivated spirits are deaf as adders to\nthe charms of music. It is told of Justus Lipsius, that he abhorred\nmusic, and that his whole delight was in flowers and dogs. Many men\nare insensible of the recreation afforded by harmony; and those who\nare not, for the most part content themselves with a coarse sort of\nmusic, which may be had at a cheap rate, and often for nothing. The\nremarks we have made on music, may be applied generally to all other\nkinds of amusement. How many are there, who cannot endure so much as\nto be in company with, or to converse with women! Flowers, which are\nthe most beautiful production of nature, and with which the fields are\ncloathed with more splendor and gaiety than Solomon in all his glory,\nto some people are not only ungrateful, but noxious also. There have\nbeen those, who the fragrancy of a rose has caused to fall into a\nfainting fit. Cardinal Esfrondati, in his Curso Philosophica, relates\nof another Cardinal, that during the whole time of the spring, he kept\na watch at the door, to prevent a rose being brought into his house.\nSpacious gardens afford but a slender delight to abundance of men, and\nto many, not even that slender one; besides this, in time, it becomes a\nsickening amusement, which with regard to the gardens of others may be\nremoved, but not with regard to a man\u2019s own; for that being always in\nhis view, he comes at last to loath the sight of it.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXVI. Thus with respect to many individuals, all that is attracting\nis comprehended in objects of little value. It is true however, that\nif you could collect all these into one heap, they would amount to\nsomething considerable. But to what end should people endeavour this?\nI am sure I don\u2019t know, nor many times they themselves neither. What\npassed between Pyrrhus, King of Albania, and his wise friend and\ncounsellor Cineus, is pleasant, and applicable to this matter. Cineus\nsaid to that prince in a conversation between them, the subject of\nwhich was Pyrrhus\u2019s intended invasion of the Romans; \u201cTruly, Sir, the\nundertaking is difficult, for we shall have to do with a martial, and\na powerful people; but supposing the success of our arms to be so\ngreat, as that we should subdue the Romans, what fruit shall we reap by\nthe conquest?\u201d \u201cAre you at a loss to find out that, answered Pyrrhus?\nShall not we make ourselves masters of all Italy?\u201d And what shall we do\nafterwards, replied Cineus? Pyrrhus answered, \u201cWe will conquer Sicily,\nwhich is in the neighbourhood, and may be easily subdued.\u201d \u201cThat will\nbe a great thing, said Cineus; but when that\u2019s done, shall we put an\nend to the war?\u201d Pyrrhus, who had not yet penetrated the drift of\nCineus in asking all these questions, answered, \u201cBy no means; after\nconquering Sicily, we will proceed to Africa, and possess ourselves of\nCarthage, and the adjacent kingdoms.\u201d \u201cYou are clear, said Cineus, that\nthe Gods will indulge you with all this good fortune; but when this is\ndone, what are we to employ ourselves about next?\u201d \u201cWe will return,\nsaid Pyrrhus; to our own country, cloathed with immense power, and\nwe will conquer all the Empire of Greece.\u201d \u201cHaving conquered Greece,\nreplied Cineus, what are we to do then?\u201d \u201cWhen this is compleated,\nanswered Pyrrhus, we will pass the remainder of our lives in soft and\nsublime indolence, without thinking of any thing but banquets, and\nfestive society.\u201d Here Cineus, who had without the King\u2019s being aware\nof him, entangled him in the net, said laughingly; \u201cBut pray Sir, what\nshould hinder us from beginning to enjoy all this happiness at this\ninstant of time? Is not the kingdom you are possessed of sufficient to\nfurnish you banquets, and every other kind of regale? To what end then,\nshould you conquer provinces and cross seas, wasting your health, and\nexposing your life to the rage of waves, and fury of battles?\u201d\n\nXVII. This reasoning, which is taken almost literally from Plutarch,\nis well adapted, not only to that ambitious Prince, but may be also\nproperly applied to an infinite number of other men; who accumulate\nriches upon riches, at the expence of dangers and fatigues, and\nwho, without knowing what they are in pursuit of, run a vicious and\nan erroneous course, in search of the very thing they possess. The\npride of Philip King of Macedon, was mortified with great address by\nArchidamus the IIId, King of Sparta, whom Philip had overcome in a\nbattle; and the day after wrote Archidamus a letter, full of arrogance\nand insult; to which Archidamus answered, That if he would place\nhimself in the sun, he would find that his shadow was not a jot bigger\nafter, than it was the day before the battle. Thus it is, that fortune\naggrandizes, but adds nothing to the stature.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXVIII. Those, who are under the dominion of ambition and avarice,\ninvert the order and nature of things; placing the end in the means\nof attaining it. They desire more, only to hoard more, and to have\nmore power, merely for the sake of domineering more. But how does\nit fare with such people? why that they are always unhappy; because\nthe hunger and thirst of their desires is never appeased, but either\nremains constantly in the same state, or else proceeds to acquire fresh\naugmentations. The weight of honour and riches has the same effect on\nthe human heart, which weights have upon a clock; the greater they\nare, they cause the machine to be more violently agitated, and to move\nwith greater impetuosity. The passions go on to display a succession\nof cavities, as the first openings are continued to be filled up. At\nfirst, the thirst can be satisfied with a fountain; after having grown\ninto a dropsy, it requires a river to satisfy it, and after having\nswallowed the river, it craves the ocean: _Ecce absorbebit fluvium, &\nnon mirabitur._ Alexander in his first schemes of ambition, had nothing\nfurther in view, than the destruction of Thebes, and the conquest of\nThrace and Illyricum; having compleated this, he took it into his head\nto subdue the Asiatic Empire, and when he was in quiet possession of\nthat, upon hearing a philosopher say, there were more worlds, he wept\nwith grief, because that being the case, his ambition could not be\nsatiated with the conquest of one only; which caused Juvenal to sing as\nfollows:\n\n    _Unus Pell\u00e6o juveni non sufficit orbis._\n\nXIX. Those who endeavour to acquire riches to make use of them, and\nto employ them in pleasures, seem to have the advantage with respect\nto temporal convenience. For who can dispute the happiness of him,\nwho being master of great riches, makes them the tributaries of his\nappetites? so the world judges, and the world deceives itself. The\nmost able man that the world ever produced, and the best qualified to\ngive an opinion in this matter from his own experience, was Solomon,\nas there was not upon earth, a man who was richer, or even so rich,\nas him, nor did any man expend his riches with more prodigality to\nprocure enjoyments; in the doing of which, he had this advantageous\ncircumstance in his favour, to wit, his great wisdom and knowledge of\nnature; which taught him the means that were the best adapted, and\nthe most likely to furnish delight, and which was the best method,\nof applying objects to enchant the senses: I say, hear this man\u2019s\nsentiments on the subject, who himself confesses, that he had given\na loose to his pleasures, and gratified them with every thing their\nvoracity craved: _Omnia, qu\u00e6 desideraverunt oculi mei, non negavi eis:\nnec prohibui cor meum, quin omni voluptate frueretur._ And what did he\nmeet with in this sea of delights? nothing but bitter waters: he found\nthat all was vanity and vexation of spirit: _Vidi in omnibus vanitatem,\n& afflictionem animi_; and he found it so to such an extreme degree, as\nto make his life a burthen to him: _Idcirco t\u00e6duit me vit\u00e6 me\u00e6._\n\nXX. This is exalted and brilliant fortune; and so exalted, that the\nfortune of no man ever rose to a more sublime degree of altitude. I\nask now, if the most miserable man in the world can find his heart\nplaced in a state of greater anguish, than when he endures the irksome\nsensation, of loathing, or being tired of his existence? We know that\nJob used no other phrase, to express the profound agony which his\nsingular calamity had brought upon him: _T\u00e6det animam meam vit\u00e6 me\u00e6._\n\nXXI. What Solomon says is infallible, because the church has received\nthat book as canonical. But though it should be confessed, that\nthe truth of this matter is an article of faith, it also appears\nmysterious: for how could so much bitterness, be contained in the\ngreatest delights? Solomon did not chuse to decipher this enigma,\nalthough his abilities would have permitted him to do it with the\ngreatest ease. Let us see if I can hit upon its explanation, and I\nthink I shall.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXII. My first position is, that he who enjoys the most delights, is\nthe man who enjoys the fewest; and I might even say, he enjoys none\nat all; but although this is another enigma more puzzling than the\nfirst, I shall easily extricate myself from the difficulty of solving\nboth the one and the other. I ask in the first place, can meat or\ndrink afford pleasure or gratification to a man, who eats without\nbeing hungry, and drinks without being thirsty? every one will readily\nacknowledge, little or none; but in this manner, do such opulent men\nas hold a loose rein on their appetites, enjoy delectable objects.\nThe objects anticipate the desires. Hunger does not await the food,\nthirst the drink, nor lust the concupiscence. How then? do they make\nuse of that for which they have no inclination? in the beginning, no;\nin the progress and the end, yes. The opulent man, who gives himself\nup to pleasure, begins very early in his course, to acquire a habit of\ngluttony in all his passions; by which means, in a very short time,\nthe least glimpse of desire attracts him to the object. Even though\nhis passion has been quite stifled by the antecedent enjoyment, new\ncraving scarce begins to revive in embryo, when he gives himself up\nto fresh satiety; and as at such a crisis, concupiscence must be very\nlanguid, the enjoyment of course can be but insipid. This habit, by the\nimmense repetition of acts, goes on every day, acquiring more and more\nforce, till it excites men at last to drink of the forbidden liquor,\nwhen they are not the least stimulated by thirst. Here you see a man\narrived at a state, in which, without tasting pleasure, or being able\nto experience gratification, he continues to destroy his health, and\nshorten his life.\n\nXXIII. But I have not yet explained all the evil. The worst is, that\nhunger and satiety come to be joined together. If I say that the rich\nman who is filled, is as sensible of hunger as the poor man who is\nreally hungry; it will be thought that I am propounding a new paradox,\nor at least a new riddle. But this shall not deter me from speaking\nthe truth. The hungry poor man hungers after food, the hungry rich one\nhungers after hunger itself. He who is distressed, and in want of what\nis precisely necessary, craves for aliment. The glutton, who after\nhaving filled his belly, sees his table covered with dainties, craves\nfor an appetite. The first is unhappy, because he wants what is needful\nfor him, the other, because he can\u2019t enjoy what he has. There is little\ndifference in point of pain or uneasiness, between him who is really\nin want of water, and him who is oppressed with a dropsical thirst.\n\nXXIV. This depraved craving, this flame, which raises itself upon the\nashes of another fire, worst or last disease of concupiscence, or of\nthe concupiscence of the superior part of the soul, oppresses those\nmuch, who, when they attain the pinnacle of power, arrive at the summit\nof perverseness; whose whole pursuit, has been seeking provocations\nfor the appetite, dainties to feed their sensuality, and extravagant\nincentives to inflame desire. In looking for the exquisite, they found\nthe monstrous. Heliogabalus went so far, as to make a banquet, all\ncomposed of the combs of cocks. Nero exercised his lust, cloathed\nin the skins of wild beasts, which was a habit, well suited to the\ncharacter of that brute. So extravagant were the abominations of other\nEmperors, that neither the course of so many ages, nor the fragrance\nof such number of saints as have lived since, have dissipated at Rome,\nthe stink of the Princes of those times. But with all their solicitude,\nwhat did they obtain? Nothing; they only augmented the violence of\na bad habit, and caused it to exert itself in loathing. Pleasure\nin the mean while fled away, like the water of Tantalus, which,\nnotwithstanding he seemed to have it always within his reach, his\nexcessive anticipation of laying hold of it, was the occasion of his\nnot being able to obtain it. These people, with all their toil, only\nacquired anxieties of mind, sickness, and bodily pain. And it is worthy\nof remarking, that those who gave themselves up to gluttony and lust,\nbecame melancholy, peevish, and disagreeable; and it may be from this\ncause, that we have rarely heard of a Prince, who was lascivious and a\nglutton, in whom cruelty was not joined to those vices. Some of them\ncame to be tired of themselves, for instance, the second Apicius, who,\nafter gorging two millions and a half, deprived himself of life with a\nhalter. What was this, but finding vanity and vexation of spirit, among\nthe greatest: endowments of fortune? Do even the miserably poor, think\nyou, lead so unsavoury and tiresome lives?\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXV. Truly, I have now pursued the comparison of the one and the\nother fortune, through the most difficult part, having drawn into the\nparallel, the most elevated, and the most abased, the sovereign state,\nand that of beggary. I did not intend so much when I began to write\nthis chapter, but the pen took a flight without my being aware of it,\ntowards the extreme of both the extremities. So much was not necessary,\nbut as it is done, let us suppose that we have conquered all the\ndifficulty at the first onset; because, if he who is under the feet of\nfortune, is equal to him who treads the summit of her wheel; the reason\nis stronger, for supposing him who has no more than what is required to\nprovide things that are precisely necessary, equal to the man, who is\npossessed of a princely fortune.\n\nXXVI. The truth is, if we are to speak out, that he is not only equal,\nbut superior. Upon a superficial view, the rich man appears to be\nbetter accommodated, and exposed to fewer inconveniencies than the\npoor one, but if you search to the bottom, you will find the reverse.\nThe rich man has great abundance, and variety of delicious eatables;\nbut do they taste more savoury to him, than his common coarse food\nto the poor one? no, nor so savoury, for the appetite with which the\npoor man sits down to table, more than compensates, for the advantage\nderived to the rich one by his excess. Of what consequence is it to the\nbees of Lithuania, a rude and unpleasant country, that they have not\nsuch beautiful and odoriferous flowers to gather from, as the bees of\nother countries; if from their own trifling and unpleasing ones, they\nextract the sweetest and best-flavoured honey that is to be found in\nall Europe? The rich man lays himself down on a feather-bed, but does\nhe sleep more, or better than a poor one on a truss of straw? You\nsee that the poor man, always rises chearful and pleasant, and that\nthe other, often complains of having passed an uneasy night. How many\npeople slept sweetly on the hard ground, the same night, that king\nAhasuerus not being able to take rest, was constrained to amuse himself\nwith reading the annals of his Kingdom! The rich defend themselves\nfrom the rigours of cold, with thick walls, tapestry hangings, and\nfurred garments; but observe, and you will find, that they complain\nmore of the intemperance of the season, shut up within the walls of\ntheir palaces, than the shepherd covered with skins, on the heights\nof the mountain. David, when he was grown old, found it difficult to\ndefend himself from the cold, with all the covering he could put on,\nwhen at the same time, many antient labourers, with half the cloathing,\nmade light of the frosts. You will see at every turn, an opulent man\ntrembling, and expressing his extreme sensations of cold, whenever he\nis obliged to leave the fire-side, while at the same time, the common\npeople are passing chearfully along the street. The same difference\nis observeable in summer. The rich man is low spirited and oppressed\nwith lassitude, and scarce ventures to go up stairs or down; while the\ncommon people, with alacrity and chearfulness, apply themselves to\nwhatever falls in their way. So that what Dionysius of Sicily, said\nof the golden cloak, which covered the statue of Jupiter, by way of\nfurnishing a pretence to plunder it, may be applied to the riches of\nopulent people; which was, that a cloth cloak was better, because the\ngolden one in winter, did not defend him from the cold, and in summer,\nit fatigued him with its weight. The opulent man, inhabits a capacious\nand commodious palace, and never contented, he is always thinking of\nenlarging or improving it, but the thought of his habitation being too\nconfined, scarce ever occurs to a poor man in the whole course of a\nyear.\n\nXXVII. The rich man wears fine holland, the poor one coarse dowlas;\nbut tell me, if you ever heard a poor man complain, that the roughness\nof the dowlas was unpleasant to, or gave him bodily uneasiness. The\nrich man is idle, and the poor one at work all the day; but you will\nnot observe, that the poor man is more sad at his work, than the rich\none in his state of indolence; on the contrary, and especially if he\nworks in company, his time passes merrily, and he goes on singing and\nchanting through the whole course of his labour. When that is over,\nhis relaxation is not like that of the rich, an insipid indolence,\nbut sweet repose, and in the conclusion, soft and uninterrupted sleep\nrecompences the labour of the day. The rich, on the contrary, (as\nsleep does not sit easy on members which have not been exercised,)\nrestless and impatient, turns a thousand times in his bed; so that\nthe poor man may be said to work by day, and the rich one by night.\nIn case of going a journey, it is true, the rich man travels either\non horseback or in a coach, and the poor one on foot. Notwithstanding\nwhich, the rich man is more sensible of the inclemency of the weather,\nand is much more affected by an incommodious lodging-room, a hard bed,\nand the want of refreshment than the poor one; to whom, by his being\naccustomed to them, such things are familiar, and consequently they do\nnot make him uneasy. I, in my journies, have remarked, that the lad\nwho attended me on foot, seemed much less sensible of the difficulties\nand inconveniencies of the road, than myself. You may add to this, the\ndread of thieves, from whom the poor have nothing to fear, when the\nrich, behind the trunk of every tree they come near, fancy they see a\nrobber.\n\nXXVIII. If we would weigh the pleasures of one and the other state, we\nshould attend to the remark of Seneca before cited: _Inspice pauperum,\n& divitum vultus._ You will observe the poor, chearful in their\nconversation, laughing from their hearts at their rustic balls, and in\nall appearance truly happy: _S\u00e6pius pauper, & fidelius ridet._ On the\ncontrary, you will see the rich, even at their festive meetings, seem\ntired and surfeited. At least, happiness does not shine so brilliant\nin their countenances, as in those of the poor.\n\nXXIX. All these disproportions, spring from, or grow out of one general\nprinciple, which is this; nature left to herself, is contented with\na little, but by attempting to polish her, you fashion her into a\nfantastical lady, who craves every thing, and despises every thing.\nA human heart with three ventricles, in the year 1699, was presented\nto the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, as the most monstrous\nproduction that had ever been seen; but morally and politically\nspeaking, it is a monster we see every day. The human heart, naturally\ncontains but two large cavities; but if you fill these with worldly\ngoods, a succession of others will begin to open, and others still\nwithout end. Pleasure and delight, are nothing to a man who does not\nconsider and feel them as such, and no man considers that as a regale,\nwhich he is used and accustomed to; or which is adapted and familiar\nto his own sphere of life. Therefore delicate food, is delicate to\nhim only, who has been used to eat plain victuals; but dainties, are\nfamiliar and common things to the man who has been accustomed to feed\non them, and therefore, he craves something more exquisite. Even\nvariety itself, to him who is used to vary his objects every day, that\nthey may tally with his inclinations, loses all the enchantment which\nit originally contained. A poor man tastes more pleasure in feeding on\na common fish at his own homely board, than Caius Hirtius, in eating\nwith great pomp, his most regaling Murenas; and he is more happy, when\nhe adds to his inheritance a foot of land, than Alexander was, when he\nadded to his conquests the City of Tyre.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nXXX. If we were to compare the anxieties incident to the one and the\nother state, as we have done the pleasures, we should find, that by\nmuch the greatest load of the first, would rest on the shoulders of\nthe rich; either from the greater sensibility of the subjects, or from\nthe greater magnitude, or multitude of their cares. The rich are of a\ndelicate texture, liable to be moved and disturbed with every blast, or\nmade of sonorous metal, which complains loudly at the gentlest touch.\nThey may be compared to a well at Chiapa, a Province in New Spain, from\nwhich, by throwing in a small stone, you raise a horrible tempest.\nHence the furious perturbations which in the opulent, are produced by\nslight causes. The Sultan Mahomed the Second, was seized with such a\nbarbarous rage upon missing a melon out of his garden, that he ordered\nthe stomachs of fourteen pages to be opened, to discover who had eaten\nit. And Otho Antonio, Duke of Urbino, ordered one of his servants to\nbe burnt alive, for having neglected to wake him at the time he had\nappointed.\n\nXXXI. The toils of the great are also more in number, than those of the\npoor. The larger the bulk of a man, the fairer mark he is for his enemy\nto hit; and the greater the amplitude of his fortune, the larger the\nspace is exposed to the wounds of adversity. The rich are high towers,\nthe poor humble cottages, and the ray of lightning, oftner discharges\nits fury on the tower, than on the cottage. One of the greatest\ntemporal evils that can befal a man, is a broken constitution, as the\ngreatest temporal blessing, is a robust state of health. And there\nis no doubt, but that with equal stamina, a poor man is more healthy\nthan a rich one, because the last injures his health by his excesses,\nand the other, preserves his by his sobriety. Of what avail are all a\ngreat man\u2019s riches to him, when he is oppressed by a fit of the gout?\n(and the gout, by the way, is a distemper which seldom attacks the\npoor.) I say what is he the better for them, if they cannot procure him\na remedy for the evil, nor even obtain him the least ease or relief?\nWhile the fit lasts, he suffers pain; and when it is over, he endures\nthe terrors and apprehensions of fresh attacks. Solomon pronounced the\nfollowing sentence, which is applicable to all the rich: _Quid prodest\npossessori, nisi quod cernat divitias oculis suis?_ Of what other\nuse are riches to a man who possesses vast treasures, than to feast\nhis eyes with the sight of them. But the sentence is more strongly\napplicable, to an opulent man of a bad constitution, who is constantly\nailing.\n\nXXXII. A great man has more cares, and consequently more to vex him,\nthan an humble one. More people are envious of him, and consequently\nhe has more enemies. He is desirous of aggrandizing his fortune still\nmore, and grieves at every little obstacle he meets with; which he\nconsiders as a steep rock in the way of his pursuits. From those below\nhim, he expects more homage; and one only, as in the case of Mordecai\nand Haman, refusing to bend the knee to him, is sufficient to make him\nunhappy. He is anxious to be upon an equality with his superiors, and\nwhen he sees any one, whom he looks upon as his equal, or his inferior,\nstep before him, he can hardly contain himself. There was a famous\npainter, named Francis of France, rich, both in possessions and fame.\nWhen this man was at Bolognia, he saw a figure of Saint Cecilia, which\nhad been painted by Raphael of Urbino, for a church in that city; and\nseeing, and being sensible, how much he was outdone in the use of the\npencil, by that incomparable artist, it so affected him, that he fell\nsick and died in a few days. It cannot be said with truth, that ever a\npoor man died from such a cause, or of such an affection.\n\nXXXIII. Fears and apprehensions, in which are contained the most severe\nmartyrdom of life; because by means of them, people endure all future,\nand all possible evils, have their very nests in the hearts of the\ngreat. He who is oppressed with evils, is always grieving; he who is\npossessed of goods, is always fearing: and what is more afflicting\nthan perpetual terror? The dangers which threaten a great man, are\nin proportion to the possible cases, of others enriching themselves\nby despoiling, or murdering him; and though these are many, in his\nimagination they are still more; so that riches are acquired by toil,\nand preserved by anxiety. The inhabitants of Macasar, an Island in the\nIndian Sea, have a custom of drawing some of their teeth, and putting\ngold or silver ones in the place of them, which practice, cannot fail\nto be troublesome and hurtful to them. Can any thing favour stronger\nof barbarism, than the suffering a voluntary pain, only to gain an\ninconvenience? Those fall into the same mistake, who pant for, and are\nanxious in their pursuit after riches. They draw their teeth, that is,\nthey undergo great suffering in order to acquire more wealth; and in\nthe room of those they have parted with, they get teeth of gold and\nsilver, yes, but these are teeth, which in the end, will feed on, and\ngnaw their own hearts. It is very remarkable, that in the age of gold\nand silver, (according to the description given, and the division made\nof the four ages by the poets,) there was no gold or silver to be met\nwith, but these metals made their appearance in the age of iron. Thus\nOvid, speaking of this age:\n\n    -------- _Itum est in viscera terr\u00e6_\n    _Quasque recondiderat, Stygiisque admoverat umbris_\n    _Effodiuntur opes irritamenta malorum._\n    _Famque nocens ferrum, ferroque nocentius aurum_\n    _Prodierat, prodit bellum quod pugnat utroque._\n\nXXXIV. The age of gold passed without gold, and was therefore the\nGolden Age, that is fortunate and happy. In the age of iron, there was\ngold, and on that account, it was called the Iron Age, that is, it was\nharsh and toilsome.\n\nXXXV. Lucan, in his fifth Book of the Civil War, makes a fine\ndigression upon the happiness of the poor boatman, Amiclas, when he\npaints C\u00e6sar, in the silence of the night, tapping at the door of\nhis cabbin to awake him, and make him rise, and carry him with all\npossible haste to Calabria. All the world was agitated, and trembling\nwith the movements of the civil war; and within Greece itself, which\nis the theatre of the war, in the very neighbourhood of the armies, a\npoor boatman on dried sheep skins, sleeps without fear. The strokes\nof the generous leader at his door awake him, without producing the\nleast surprize in his breast; for although he was not ignorant, that\nthe whole face of the country was covered with troops, he knew very\nwell, there was nothing in his cabbin to invite military insults. O\nlife of the poor, exclaims the poet, in which is contained the felicity\nof being exempt from outrages. O poverty! thou greatest blessing of\nheaven, although not recognized or justly valued by men. What palaces\nor what temples were there, which enjoyed the privilege of Amiclas and\nhis cabbin, neither of which, could be made to tremble at the strokes\nof the robust hand of C\u00e6sar!\n\n                -------- _O vita tuta facultas_\n    _Pauperis, angustique lares! O munera nondum_\n    _Intellecta div\u00fbm. Quibus hoc contingere templis;_\n    _Aut potuit muris, nullo trepidare tumultu_\n    _C\u00e6sarea pulsante manu!_\n\nXXXVI. It is not to be wondered at, that temples and palaces should be\nshaken, when cottages remain secure; because in temples and palaces,\nriches are kept, therefore in them, there is no being free from\nalarms. If we compare the fortune of Amiclas, with the lives of C\u00e6sar\nand Pompey, who were all contemporaries; how brilliant were theirs,\nhow obscure was his; but if you consider them prudently, how much\npreferable was that of Amiclas. Those ambitious heroes, whose elevated\nsplendor, made the world regard them as two suns, were in reality no\nmore than parahelions, or suns in appearance only, false reflections,\nstamped in the inconstancy of flying clouds. How far were they from\nhappy, each being constantly tormented with the jealousy of the other\u2019s\npower.\n\n    _Et jam nemo ferre potest, C\u00e6sar ve priorem_\n    _Pompeiusve parem._\n\nXXXVII. They contend for the Empire, hazarding in the competition, life\nand liberty. How each is possessed, with the fear of his rival becoming\nvictorious; what miserable forsaken man, did fortune ever place in such\na strait, that in order to better his condition, he should be obliged\nlike C\u00e6sar, in the dead of the night, to commit himself to the rage of\na tempestuous sea? Amiclas, at the same time, knows no other cares,\nthan those of exploring the sea, and spreading his nets to dry in the\nsun. Others are agitated and tossed about on the plains, and in the\nfields, while he is secure amidst the waves. He catches fish in the\nsea, while others on land fish for tempests. At the expence of a little\nlabour, the water affords him as much as is necessary to support life;\nwhen the great fatigues of C\u00e6sar and Pompey, serve only to precipitate\non them a violent death. The din of so much martial noise, disturbs\nnot his rest; while each of the two chiefs, finds in his own heart, a\ncontinual alarm to awaken him. He fears nobody, because no one covets\nhis fortune; but if any body should be so prudent as to covet it, he\nmay enjoy the same thing, without despoiling Amiclas. C\u00e6sar and Pompey\nfor the present, mutually fear each other. The vanquished person in\nfuture, fears all the world, and the conqueror has to fear all those\nwho envy him.\n\nXXXVIII. The heathen poets, feigned poverty to be a divinity, on\naccount of the mischiefs it preserved people from, and the goods it\nproduced; but Lucan, calls it the mother of great men; and Horace says,\nthat to this deity, the Romans owed the virtues of a Curius, and a\nCamillus. Aristophanes the Greek, erred much in his description, when\nhe represented her as a savage fury, always ready to commit acts of\ndesperation. These extraordinary furies, are much more common among\nthe rich, than the poor, although it is true, that they rage with the\ngreatest violence, in such poor people as have been formerly rich;\nat least, during the time they are in the noviciate state of their\nmisfortunes.\n\n\nSECT. X.\n\nXXXIX. I would not have it be understood, that by the eulogium I have\njust ended on poverty, I mean to speak of absolute poverty, but of the\nrelative; not of the state of beggary, where people are in want of what\nis precisely needful; but of that limited moderation, which administers\nto nature, no more than what is absolutely necessary, and what her\nwants demand; and that, at the expence of bodily labour. In truth,\nwhen I speak of beggars, I am at a loss what to say, or what decision\nto make concerning them. On the one hand, I see them suffer great\ninconveniences, and on the other, I see many people betake themselves\nto that way of life, who could earn their living by their labour, and\nwho prefer going from door to door, to working in the field, or even\nto leading an idle life in an alms-house. Henricus Cornelius Agrippa,\nin his Book on the Vanity of the Sciences, says of those who go\nabout pretending to occult science, that they would not change their\ncondition, for that of nobility; and I believe he says right.\n\nXL. All those voluntary poor, who are not so in the gospel sense, and\nfor that reason, not comprehended in the benediction of Christ, are\nthe pests of the states they inhabit, or where they strole about. They\nlive well, not only without being of the least advantage, but are\neven an injury to the community. Like the ants, they are serviceable\nto themselves only, and a nuisance in the place where they make their\nnests, and where they run about. For which reason, they are not\ntolerated in any republic, that is governed by the maxims of good\npolicy.\n\nXLI. Disabled or impotent beggars, are legitimate creditors of our\ncompassion. There is notwithstanding, great difference among those\nof this class. Those who are afflicted with habitual disorders, it\ncannot be denied, are very miserable, and especially if they do not\nsweeten their toil, with a due resignation to the divine will; but if\nthey do, they will become the most happy, or those, who fall within\nour Saviour\u2019s description of the most fortunate. The disabled by the\nloss of a limb, or by a defect in the organization of parts of their\nbodies, if they have a tolerable share of ingenuity, and have the\nart of begging with address, fare admirably; and not a few of them,\nhave left behind at their deaths decent sums of money. Those who are\nill-favoured, and ugly, find it difficult to subsist, especially,\nif nastiness in their persons, is joined to the deformity of their\nbodies. The error into which people fall, in the ordinary distribution\nof charity in this particular, is great, they being apt to deal out\ntheir bounty with an unequal hand. The beggar, who has a pleasing and\nmoving way of painting his distress, is relieved by almost every one,\nand more especially if he has a good countenance, and looks clean\nin his shabby dress. There is scarce any body who does not shun and\nloath the ill-favoured and driveling poor: but we ought to remember,\nthat Christ our Lord, is as much the representative of the one, as of\nthe other; and as a Redeemer, is rather inclined to favour those of\nthe most displeasing and despicable aspect: thus Isaias describes him\nin his most sacred passion, _Non est species ei, neque decor_: and a\nlittle lower, _Quasi absconditus vultus ejus, & despectus_. And that\nchristian piety should not despise, or avoid those who are afflicted\nwith loathsome diseases, the same Prophet compares our Saviour to the\nlepers, _Nos putavimus eum quasi leprosum_.\n\nXLII. But without having recourse to so high a motive, natural reason\nwill instruct us sufficiently, that we should not only distribute\nequally, but exceed in our donations, to those who are deformed and of\nan unhappy aspect, because these last experience the most sufferings,\nand are in the greatest necessity. The others, as I observed before,\nwill never want any body to assist them with more than they stand in\nneed of. The first require pity to be exerted in their favour with all\nits force, although their ungrateful appearance should strike us with\nhorror. And I protest for myself, the alms which the narrowness of my\nfortune will permit me to bestow, is distributed, much more in favour\nof those of a disgusting and a forbidding aspect, than in favour of\nthose who have a persuasive manner, and a winning outward appearance.\n\nXLIII. But it is proper that I should repeat, that I did not intend\nto take into the comparison I have been making, the sort of poor I\nhave just described; but those only, who procure themselves food,\nraiment, and shelter, by the sweat of their brow, proportioned to the\nnecessities of nature, without advancing to any kind of exceeding. This\nis what I call humble fortune, and that which I judge to be at least\nequal to the exalted and brilliant, enjoyed by the opulent and great;\nand it seems to me, that I have sufficiently proved it so. But I judge\nalso, that the condition of those who are placed in a middle station\nof life, is preferable to either of them. I mean such as possess a\nmoderate income, and can go through life, without experiencing the\npinchings of the one state, or the troubles incident to the want of\naccommodations of the other.\n\n\nSECT. XI.\n\nXLIV. I have hitherto treated of the happiness of men, by making an\nestimate of it, according to their situations or conditions of life;\nabstracted from any particular accidents, that may intervene or occur\nto individuals of both sorts, both high and low; there being no doubt\nbut humble fortune, is also exposed to terrible reverses and mortifying\ndisgusts, although not so frequently as the exalted.\n\nXLV. But if I am asked, whom I repute absolutely happy or unhappy\namong mortals? With respect to the happy, I answer with a sentence of\nthe great Chancellor Bacon, in his book entitled _Interiora Rerum_:\nwhere he says, I judge those to be happy, whose mode of living is\nproportioned to their genius or inclination: _Felices dixerim, quorum\nindoles naturalis cum vit\u00e6 su\u00e6 genere congruit_: a decision, worthy\nof the superior talents of that incomparable Englishman. I think,\nnotwithstanding, there should be some limitation added to the sentence,\nwhich is, that the genius or inclination should not be a vicious one,\nfor in that case the person would be always unhappy. The ambitious\nman, for example, although he finds himself in the occupation of high\nposts, is ever restless and anxious to rise to others still higher.\nThe covetous man, even when he is overloaded with riches, labours and\ntoils to add fresh treasures to his heap. The opulent glutton fills\nhimself with meat and drink, but he also fills himself with diseases,\nwhich afterwards, turn all he has eaten and drunk to bitterness.\n\nXLVI. With the limitation I have mentioned, I esteem the sentence a\nvery true one. Temporal conveniences are all relative, and there is as\nmuch variance in the genius of men with respect to the application of\nthem, as there is in their inclinations with respect to the food they\nfancy. What one esteems good, another thinks bad. God only is good, and\nsavory to all men. This man disdains the lot, which that adores; and\none grasps the thing, which another despises. C\u00e6sar, when he was going\nto Spain, in his passage over the Alps, came to a very poor little\nvillage, where one of his companions, in a conversation which turned\non the misery of the inhabitants, asked another sneeringly, if he\nthought these Barbarians also, had their questions and disputes, about\nwho should command and govern. To which C\u00e6sar replied quickly, saying,\n\u201cI assure you, I had much rather be the first man in this village,\nthan the second at Rome.\u201d The learned Fleming Nicholas Clenard, went\nover to Africa, with an intention of learning Arabic, and remained\ntwo years in the kingdom of Fez, from whence he wrote often to his\nfriends; and in his letters assured them, that he never was in a place,\nthe customs of which suited so well with his genius, for this reason\nonly, because in that kingdom, they had not such a multitude of laws,\nnor were their litigations so prolix, as in Europe; all disputes being\ninstantly determined by the magistrate in a summary way. This method\nsuited well with the disposition of Clenard, who abhorred extremely,\nthe endless windings and turnings of processes in our tribunals. George\nPaschio, relates of him in his Book, _de Novis Inventis_, though what\nhe says is not true, that on this account only, he left his own country\nand went to live in Fez. To this it may be replied, that it appears\nfrom the testimony of many authors, his return to Spain was voluntary;\nfrom whence, after teaching languages some time in the University of\nSalamanca, he went to the Court of Lisbon, where he was engaged as a\ntutor to the Prince of Portugal, brother of King John the Third.\n\nXLVII. This great variety in the genius and dispositions of men, and\nnot the platonic love of their country, is the true cause why many find\nthemselves satisfied in miserable and unpleasant regions, and refuse to\nleave them for others more happily situated. Ovid having observed, that\nsome Scythians, who were brought to Rome, never missed an opportunity\nof flying back to their own steril bleak country, which was the place\nof their nativity, attributes their doing so to an occult affection\nfor home, (that he himself, with all his explanatory powers, could not\nhit upon the explanation of,) which, like a sympathetic faculty, or\nmagnetic virtue, attracts every man to his own country, and at last\nleaves it undefined, with a sort of declaration, that he does not know\nwhat it is:\n\n    _Nescio qua natale solum dulcedine cunctos_\n    _Tangit, & immemores non sinit esse sui._\n    _Quid melius Roma? Scythico quid frigore pejus?_\n    _Huc tamen ex illa barbarus urbe fugit._\n\nXLVIII. It is owing to none of all this, nor was it the effect of a\nmysterious magic, which charms and enchants men to be fond of their own\ncountry, which induced the Scythians to leave the soft habitations of\nRome, for the frozen regions of Scythia; for we every day see men, who\nto improve their fortunes leave their native homes, sometimes never\nto return again; but it does not follow from thence, that they cease\nto love their country. The place where I write this abounds in such\nexamples. The true reason of this political ph\u00e6nomenon is, that the\nmode of the Scythians living in their own country, was proportioned and\nsuited to their natural genius and disposition. The same thing happens\nwith respect to the Laplanders, a Northern nation, situated between\nNorway, Sweden, and Russia, on the coasts of the Frozen Sea. These\nBarbarians live in a continual state of war, with an immense number of\nbears and wolves, and in a country full of lakes, and almost always\ncovered with snow. Many of them at various times have been brought\nto Germany; but notwithstanding they were well accommodated, and had\na good maintenance assigned them, there never was one, who, when an\nopportunity offered, did not fly back to his own country.\n\nXLIX. True temporal felicity, consists, in attaining that state or mode\nof life, which the genius or inclination of a man prompts him to wish\nor desire. Conveniences with respect to the soul, may be compared to\nclothes with respect to the body, it not being possible to bring those,\nwhich in appearance are best made, to suit well with, or to fit every\nshape.\n\nL. There are however some of such flexible tempers, that they can\naccommodate themselves to every kind of fortune, and be content to\nlive within the limits of its extension; some dispositions of soft\nwax, who at will, can conform themselves in such a manner, that every\nthing sits easy on them. Nothing inquiets them, because the softness\nof their texture gives way to every impulse. They enlarge and contract\nthemselves, in proportion to the limits of the walk which is allowed\nthem. They rise without fatigue, and they descend without violence.\nIn their own docility, they find the honey, which edulcorates every\nsort of acid. They are of so happy a temperament, that provided they\ndon\u2019t want what is absolutely necessary, they are contented in every\nstation. The wheel of their mind is concentrical with the wheel of\ntheir fortune, and let this last turn as it will, they with great\nfacility turn themselves to correspond with it. They bear their fortune\nwithin themselves, let them move whichever way they will. It cannot be\ndenied, that there are but few people of this sweet disposition; but\nit should be also confessed, that such are the truly happy, and that\nonly the saints themselves can be more so, because they are either\nwithout the circle of the wheel, or placed in the center of it, so that\nits turnings can neither raise them to pride, nor precipitate them to\ncontempt.\n\n\nSECT. XII.\n\nLI. We have said which are the absolutely happy: but who are the\nabsolutely unhappy? Those, whose destiny have drawn them into a train\nof life, which is contrary to their genius or disposition. The violence\ndone their inclination is constant, and therefore, their disgust is\nconstant also. That which would be sweet to others, is bitter to them.\nFortune could certainly, without adding fresh goods, make people more\nhappy; it might be done at no more cost, than permitting them to change\nstations and employments, as from envying each other, when they have\nnothing to be envious of, springs the mischief. The bird from his cage,\nsees with envy, the stone mount and fly with freedom through the air,\nbut the ascent is a greater violence to the stone, than the confinement\nto the bird. The poor man looks with envy on him he sees idolized on a\nthrone. The Prince burns with impatience, because he cannot taste the\nliberty enjoyed by the poor person.\n\nLII. Some are made unhappy by fortune, and there are others who are so\nby nature. Those I say, who in their own proper genius and tempers,\nfind their greatest enemy; discontented men, who are pleased with\nnothing, but are always loathing what they are in present possession\nof; who although they should frequently change their fortunes, would\nfind no other effect from it, than they would from changing their\nshirts, which after ten or twelve days wear would be ready to poison\nthem. These people live in a continual opposition to the movements of\nFortune, notwithstanding which, they are dragged on, and obliged to\nobey the impulse of the wheel, being compelled by force and violence;\nor like the stars, which are constrained to follow the movements\nof the sphere to which they are attached, although they are always\nendeavouring at a motion, opposite to that of the orb which agitates\nthem. These are sickly souls, whose stomachs turn at all sorts of food,\nand there are not a few of such men in the world.\n\n\n\n\nTHE MOST REFINED POLICY.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. The center of all the political doctrine of Machiavel, is placed\nin that cursed maxim of his, that in the application of temporal\nmeans, the semblance or appearance of virtue is useful; real virtue,\nor virtue itself, is an obstacle. From this point issues forth, in\nright lines, the poison, to the whole circumference of that pernicious\nsystem. All the world abominates the name of Machiavel, and almost\nall the world are his followers. Although, to speak the truth, the\npractice of the world is not taken from the doctrine of Machiavel; but\nthe doctrine of Machiavel, is rather taken from the practice of the\nworld. This depraved genius taught, in his writings, that which he had\nstudied in men. The world was the same before Machiavel, which it is\nat present, and they deceive themselves greatly, who think, that the\nages continued to grow worse, as they continued to succeed one another.\nThe golden age never existed but in the imaginations of the poets; the\nhappiness they feign to have prevailed in it, was enjoyed by only one\nman, and one woman, Adam and Eve; and continued so short a space of\ntime, that so far from lasting an age, according to many fathers, it\ndid not endure an entire day.\n\nII. You need only examine history, both sacred and profane, to be\ninformed, that the policy of the antients was not better than that of\nthe moderns; and I for my part, am inclined to think it was worse; for\nthey scarce knew any other road to the temple of Fortune, than that\nwhich was either laid open by violence, or fabricated by deceit. Good\nfaith and friendship, lasted as long as people found it their interest\nto preserve them. Religion and justice, served as footstools to the\nidol of convenience. Ovid and Aulus Gellius relate, that when Tarquin\nresolved to build the great temple of the capitol to the honour of\nJupiter, he demolished, in order to make room for it, the temples of\nmany inferior Gods, who were all obliged to give way to Jupiter; but\nthe God Terminus, or the patron of interest and convenience, refused to\ncede or make way for Jupiter himself, so he maintained his ground, and\nhis statue kept its place in the capitol, jointly with that of Jupiter:\n\n    _Terminus, ut veteres memorant, conventus in urbe_\n    _Restitit, & magno cum Jove templa tenet._\n\nIII. This fiction discovers to us the following truth, that the object\nof men\u2019s pursuits is their own convenience, which they are ever\nstrenuous and anxious to promote; and this is the deity, who never\ncared to cede or give place to Jupiter himself, for from the most\nantient times, _ut veteres memorant_, interest has ever disputed the\nprecedence with religion.\n\nIV. Polybius lived a great while ago, and in his time they had not only\none, but many Machiavels, who taught, that the management of public\naffairs was impracticable, without the aid of deceit and treachery:\n_Non desunt, qui in tam crebro usu doli mali necessarium eum esse\ndicant ad publicarum rerum administrationem_ (Lib. 13. Histor.)\nAlthough you may see in Lucan, the fundamental doctrine of Machiavel\nmore strongly expressed than it is in the above sentence, by the\nabandoned Phocion, in the speech he made to Ptolemy King of Egypt,\nto prevail with him, in violation of gratitude, and in breach of his\nplighted word, to take away the life of the great Pompey;\n\n                      _Sidera terra_\n    _Ut distant, & flamma mari sic utile recto._\n\nV. This is precisely saying, that virtue is always in a state of\nwarfare with private utility, and that to negotiate convenience, it\nis necessary to abandon justice. A little after he adds, that he who\nresolves to be merciful and just, should banish himself from courts,\nfor there, vice only is patronized:\n\n          _Exeat aula_\n    _Qui vult esse pius._\n\nVI. This is the creed, not of a few people only, but of the world at\nlarge, and it has been so in all times. What Machiavel, Hobbes, and\nother infamous politicians have inserted in their works, is the same\nwhich you hear every day in juntos of people; to wit, that virtue is\nneglected, that vice is caressed and exalted; that truth and justice\nare banished from courts; and that flattery and lying are the wings,\nwith which people ascend to high stations. But this I suppose to be\nan error, and that it ought to be classed in the catalogue of common\nerrors, and in my reasoning on this subject, I shall undertake to\ndemonstrate that it is one, by informing mankind, that contrary to the\nopinion of the world, the most refined, and the most safe policy, is\nthat which is founded in justice and truth.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nVII. I shall begin with confessing, that those who aspire at being\nusurpers, can never attain their ends, but by wicked means, because to\nthe goal of insolence, there is no road through the land of virtue. But\nwho will say these are subtil politicians? They are the most blind and\nmistaken of all, because they pursue a road, that is all over drenched\nwith blood. Very few have travelled through it, who before they arrived\nat the point in view, have not lost their lives in a violent and an\nignominious manner. You hardly see any thing in this whole rout, but\nmen hanging on gibbets, carcasses extended on scaffolds, limbs torn\noff by wild beasts, and the ashes of victims, who have been sacrificed\nto the vengeance of the party offended. You may find here or there\none, who, by pursuing this road, has at the end of his career attained\nsovereignty. But is the accidental success of one or two lucky people,\na counterbalance to so horrid and bloody a spectacle? Who will be\nencouraged to trust himself in a sea, strewed with rocks, and covered\nwith wrecks and dead bodies, because in the course of many ages, three\nor four vessels which have navigated it, have arrived safe at their\ndesired port? We should add, to the hazard of shipwreck, the toils\nand terrors of the navigation; for it is certain, that those who\nnavigate a sea of danger and horror, before their catastrophe, endure\na tempest within their souls. Those who from private people aspire at\nbeing sovereigns, lead a life of perpetual alarms and anxiety, in order\nafterwards to die with ignominy: so that their toil and their danger\nremain cemented to their fortune, even after they have accomplished\nor succeeded in their undertaking; for all tyrants live in terror,\nand rarely or never die in their beds. But how can such as these be\nconsidered even as middling politicians? Policy, in the sense we here\nuse the word, means the art of negotiating one\u2019s own convenience. But\nwhat convenience can a man find, by travelling through a laborious life\nto a violent death? I say, that so far from contemplating such people\nas able politicians, we ought to esteem them consummate fools.\n\nVIII. There are however, some among them, who by calling them fools,\nyou do not say enough of; as they give cause to have themselves\npronounced raving mad men; such, as when they see they are advancing to\na lofty precipice, will attempt to scale the height; people, emulous\nof vain exaltations, who that they may shine on high, consent to be\nreduced to ashes, and who prefer the shortest life elevated in air,\nto a long duration on the humble earth. These take to themselves the\nmotto of Saavedra, _dum luceam peream_; provided they shine, they are\nindifferent about being consumed. Such was the ambitious Agrippina,\nwho, when the Chaldeans told her her son would obtain the empire, but\nthat he would take away her life, answered spiritedly, _Occidat dum\nimperet_. Provided he reigns, I don\u2019t mind his murdering me. Such\nagain was Anna Bolen, who, finding herself condemned to death for an\nadultress, said proudly, They may do what they will with me, but they\ncan\u2019t deprive me of having been Queen of England; from whence may\nbe inferred, that she esteemed it a preferable lot, to have been a\nQueen, and die with indignity in the flower of her age, than to enjoy\na long life of honour as a private person. We should look with an eye\nof pity on geniuses of this character, not only with respect to their\nmisfortunes, but to their delusion also; and we should degrade those\nfrom politicians to mad men, who knowing their danger, run headlong\ninto it.\n\nIX. I will go so far as to acknowledge, that some iniquitous\npoliticians, have experienced the gale of fortune favourable for\nthem, even to the day of their deaths. Philip, King of Macedon, and\nfather of Alexander, was fortunate in almost all his undertakings;\nfor which he was as much indebted to his craft and deceptions, as to\nhis arms; and in his conquests, was equally favoured by Mercury and\nMars; and if his injustice to Pausanias, in not caring to punish the\nabominable act of turpitude, which Atalus, one of Philip\u2019s captains,\nhad violently perpetrated on him, had not irritated that generous\nyouth to such a degree, that he murdered the unjust Prince with his\nfists, it might have been said, that none of his wicked deeds had ever\nbeen prejudicial to his fortune. Cornelius Scylla manifested, that\nhe professed no regard to any religion, by the havock he made among\nthe Grecian temples, which he accompanied with such piccant terms of\ncontempt and derision of their deities, as they were well deserving\nof; and though he was extremely able in the conduct of war, he was\nnot less so in political subtilties; which made his enemy Carbon say\nof him, that in the person of one man, he found himself engaged with\na lion and a fox, but that he feared the fox more than the lion. His\ncruelty exceeded the bounds of barbarity, notwithstanding which, he\nwas wonderfully successful. He first triumphed over the enemies of the\nrepublic, and afterwards over his personal ones. Nor did his putting\nthousands of people to death violently, who while he was dictator were\nall executed by his order, excite a sufficient degree of public or\nprivate hatred, to occasion his being treated in the same way; but his\nnatural death was worse than any violent one; for he died eat up by\nlice, in consequence of all his flesh by degrees, being converted to\nthose vermin.\n\nX. England furnishes us in later times with two wayward, but successful\npoliticians. The first was Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester[1], the\nfavourite of Queen Elizabeth, and so great a favourite, as to cause\nhis entertaining hopes, that she would give him her hand in marriage,\nwhich was the occasion of one of the most wicked acts of his life,\nfor he murdered his wife to remove the obstacle to his attaining so\nhigh an honour. Fortune always cherished and continued faithful to\nhim, making him to the day of his death, master of the affections of\nthat Queen, whom he held in chains, by the sprightliness of his wit,\nand his fertile and domestic talents of pleasing, as well as by his\ngenteel and graceful person; and he had the presumption, when he found\nhe could not obtain her for his wife, to solicit from her the last\npersonal favours. The second was Oliver Cromwell, who, under the title\nof Protector, was tyrant of England, and principal actor in the death\nof Charles the First. An attempt so horrible, from the circumstance of\nhis own subjects having erected themselves into his Judges, and having\ninstituted process, and pronounced sentence with all the formalities\nwhich are ordinarily used with respect to common criminals, is such\nan example, that the world till then, had never seen the like. The\ninsult was made greater, by their affecting to elude insulting him,\nunder the pretence, that they proceeded according to law. The English\nnation so far debased themselves by that act, that the person who was\nthen hangman of London, and who could not be prevailed on, either by\nthreats or promises to execute the sentence, appeared to be the most\nnoble spirited man in the kingdom. Cromwell, the author of such an\nenormous piece of wickedness, and of many other inferior ones, reigned\nafterwards, not only absolute master of Great Britain for the residue\nof his life, but, by dint of his incomparable sagacity, came to be the\narbiter of all Europe.\n\nXI. There are these examples, but you will find very few others, of\nperverse politicians, who have been always successful. But what shall\nwe infer from such examples? Shall we esteem those fine politicians who\nhave pursued the same rout? no, we should rather call them absurd and\ninsensible ones. It shews great want of judgment, to found hopes and\nexpectations upon one or two singular events, in preference to what\ncommonly happens in the ordinary course of things. Because some one has\nfound a vein of gold by digging the ground, would it not be madness in\nme to occupy myself, and spend all my time in opening wells through the\nbowels of the earth? for if two or three have found the philosopher\u2019s\nstone, (though I much doubt if any one ever did) the number of those\nare infinite, who by searching after it, have wasted their substance,\nand lost their lives. In these very rare chances, on which imprudent\nambitious people found their expectations, there likewise intervene\nother very rare accidents, and that these should all concur to favour\nhim, is more than any prudent man can expect. Those few successful\npeople were also assisted with very uncommon natural talents, by dint\nof which, if they had directed their steps through the paths of virtue,\nthey would have gone on smoothly, and would have arrived at happiness\nwith much greater ease and satisfaction to themselves, than they did\nin the vicious course they pursued; and this corresponds with the\nobservation Titus Livius makes on the elder Cato; _In illo viro tantum\nrobur corporis, & animi fuit, ut quocumque loco natus esset, fortunam\nsibi facturus videretur._\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXII. But abstracted from the innumerable craigs and stumbling blocks\nin the way of ambition, when it advances to its object by the\nroad of infamy; if its views are very high, the best and most safe\npolicy is, to pursue the pretension by the way of justice and truth.\nLord Chancellor Bacon, who was as great a politician as he was a\nphilosopher, divided policy into the high and the low. The exalted or\nsound policy, consists in the knowledge of disposing means for the\nattainment of ends, without deviating, either from truth, equity,\nor honour. The low or mean policy, consists in the art of attaining\nends, by the means of fictions, flattery and sophistries; the first is\nproper and natural to men, in whom a generous and an upright heart, is\njoined to a clear understanding and a solid judgment. In fact, says\nthe author we have cited, almost all eminent politicians have been\nof this character: _sane ubique reperias homines rerum tractandarum\nperitissimos, omnes fer\u00e8 candorem, ingenuitatem, & veracitatem in\nnegotiis pr\u00e6setulisse_. The second sort is composed of men, of bastard\ndispositions or understandings: or of such whose understandings are\nso faintly enlightened, that they can discern no other road which\nwill lead them to their desired end, but that of deceit; or their\ndispositions are so depraved, that they embrace dishonesty without\nreluctance, if they conceive it will be useful to them; or I am rather\ninclined to think, that both their dispositions and understandings are\nvitiated.\n\nXIII. The representation of both these sorts of politicians, may be\nseen as in two mirrors, by viewing the characters of the two Emperors,\nAugustus and Tiberius, who were immediate successors to each other.\nAugustus was open, candid, generous, steady in his friendships,\nfaithful to his promises, and free from all deceit. In the whole\ncourse of his life, which was a very long one, there does not appear\nthe least treachery; why do I say treachery? not even the slightest\nfallacy. Tiberius, on the contrary, was deceitful, false, gloomy, and\ndissembling. His looks and his breast, were never in concord, and his\nwords were always opposite to his designs; which of the two was the\nbest politician? Tacitus decides the question, when he extols the\nperspicuity of Augustus, and remarks on the caution of Tiberius; in\nthe last he recognizes high dissimulation, and in the first supreme\nability, which induced Mucianus, by way of animating Vespasian against\nVitellius to say: _Non adversus Augusti acerrimam mentem, neque\nadversus Tiberii cautissimam senectutem insurgimus._\n\nXIV. I should always esteem him the best politician, who, contented\nwith the little or much which Heaven has bestowed on him, avoids\ninterfering with, or engaging in the traffic and bustle of the world;\nin the same sense, we understand the saying, that the best thing which\ncan be done with dice, is to forbear playing with them; but we must\nexcept the case of filling a public office, the business of which must\nbe attended to. The following admirable distich, of I don\u2019t know what\nantient, seems addressed to all private people:\n\n    _Mitte superba pati fastidia, spemque caducam_\n      _Despice, vive tibi cum moriare tibi._\n\nXV. But I would not have it understood from what I have been saying,\nthat I approve of those they commonly call good men, who are in all\nrespects useless members of society, to whom may be applied the\nItalian proverb, _Tanto buon che val niente._ They are so good, that\nthey are good for, or worth nothing. Much less do I approve of those\nnarrow-minded geniuses, who care for nobody but themselves. It is\nmeanness of spirit, says the excellent Bacon, for a man to direct all\nhis attention to his own convenience, and to make that the centre\nof all his happiness: _Centrum plane ignobile est actionum hominis\ncujusquam commodum proprium._ Man is a sociable animal, not only by\nthe force of social laws; but the obligation of assisting other men\nwhen it is in our power, is a debt we owe to our own nature, and more\nespecially to our friend, and our neighbour, but most of all, to our\nKing and our country. Pliny says, that those who are disposed to acts\nof beneficence, and to administer ease and comfort to other men, have\nsomething divine in them: _Deus est mortali juvare mortalem._ Those\nwhose whole care or attention is confined to themselves only, scarce\ndeserve the name of human beings.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXVI. What reason dictates is, that we should neither officiously\nengage in, nor obstinately refuse entering into business, provided\nwe find in ourselves talents, that are apt and proper for it. If a\nperson can make his fortune in this line, although he does not solicit\nemployments, he should not refuse accepting them; because the public\nis much interested, in having places of trust filled with able and\ngood-intentioned men. But upon a supposition, that the doctrine we have\nlaid down on this head, is not suited to men of such moderation, but\nrather applicable to those who are somewhat affected with the malady\nof ambition, and who are not fond of reading documents of morality,\nbut had rather study political ones: I say upon this supposition, let\nus proceed in following the parallel of the two courses, by which a\nman may either make his fortune, or improve that which he is already\npossessed of.\n\nXVII. All that a person can reasonably desire, may be attained without\ndeviating from the path of honour. A man of a clear head, accompanied\nwith perspicuity and prudence, will always find a way to arrive at\nthe goal of his pretensions, without inclining the line of rectitude\nand honesty, towards the curve of deceit. Fidelity in friendship, and\nsincerity in behaviour, are so far from being prejudicial, that they\nafford great assistance; because with these endowments, he will gain\nthe confidence and good-will of such as can lend their hand to raise\nhim, and of those, who may be useful as instruments in helping him\nforward. By being disinterested and a lover of justice, he will acquire\nthe esteem and affection of many, and the veneration of all men. To be\nopen-hearted, and to communicate with confidence in all matters, except\nsuch as prudence dictates to you to conceal, or else, such as are\nconfided to you under the seal of secrecy, by those with whom you have\nfriendly intercourse, have a most powerful attraction. And although\nthis behaviour may sometimes occasion disgust, to here and there a\nperson of a different cast of mind; that disadvantage would be doubly\ncompensated for, by the good opinion, that person would entertain of\nsuch a one when he is persuaded, that he is a man of sincerity; for the\ndisgust would pass away, and the good opinion would remain. In fact,\nthese transparent souls, when discretion is combin\u2019d with the purity of\ntheir dispositions, are those, who ascend to the greatest height with\nthe least fatigue. The theatre of nature in this particular, is an\nemblem of the theatre of fortune. The diaphonous and brilliant bodies,\nare those which occupy the most elevated stations in the fabric of the\nglobe; the gloomy, opake, and obscure ones, the lowest.\n\nXVIII. He who finds himself aided with an apt or ready prudence, an\nupright intention, and a firm loyalty, together with the qualities\nwe have before enumerated, has no need to be always considering and\ncontriving means to better his affairs. Apelles, who in every other\ninstance celebrated the famous painter Protogenes, pointed out a defect\nin him, which was, that he never knew when to have done finishing a\npicture; this shews, says Pliny, that too much diligence many times is\nprejudicial: _Documentum memorabile nocere s\u00e6pe nimiam diligentiam._\nWhen our politician finds himself on the theatre where his talents\nbecome conspicuous, expedients occur to him without much thought or\nstudy. An officious left-handed competitor may happen to dispute\nthe palm with him, but it will be at the expence of a great deal of\nadditional toil and labour. The cunning snake may arrive at the same\neminence, to which the generous eagle aspires to mount, but with how\nmuch fatigue? The character and properties of a low politician, cannot\nbe better displayed, than under the figure of a snake, the side way\nand oblique motion with which he goes on, points out the deceit he\nproceeds with; his breast fix\u2019d to the earth, shews his adherence to\nself-interest; the various inflexions and foldings of his body, are\ndescriptive of his crooked soul; and his conceal\u2019d venom, denotes the\nevil intention he hides. O serpent! what pains does it cost you to\nbetter your situation, only because thou art a snake; while at the same\ntime, the eagle with a careless and an easy flight, ascends to the top\nof Olympus.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXIX. This is not the greatest inequality discernible; the most striking\nconsists, in the different security consequent to the one and the other\nmode of conduct. The left-handed politician, both while he is seeking\nhis fortune, and even after he has obtained it, is exposed to great\ndanger. It is impossible, or next to impossible, that the artifices\nand mal-practices of a man beset and watched by many rivals, should\nnot be discovered; and when these are once laid open, as this was the\ncement of the whole fabric, its being reduced to ruins will not be\ndelayed an instant. It is very difficult says father Famianus Estrada,\nfor him to avoid a sudden fall, who stands on slippery ground, and is\npress\u2019d upon by many people: _Difficile est in lubrico stare diu, quem\nplures impellunt._ This is the state of a deceitful politician; he\nwalks through a very slippery path, and is always upon false ground.\nThe people who labour to pull him down consist, of all those who\neither envy his fortune, or abhor his evil deeds; which is as much as\nto say, he has for enemies, both the good and the bad. How can a man\nso circumstanced, support himself for any length of time? he must be\noverthrown, and, as it frequently happens, may in his fall be dashed to\npieces: an energetic description of this is sung by Claudian:\n\n    _--------Jam non ad culmina rerum_\n    _Injustos crevisse queror: tolluntur in altum_\n    _Ut lapsu graviore ruant._\n\nXX. The upright politician, on the contrary, meets no dangers on his\nroad, and has nothing to fear at his journey\u2019s end. He is the more\nsafe, the more the grounds of his conduct are displayed. He has fewer\nenemies than the other, because they can consist of none but bad\npeople. In case he is overthrown, his fall will not be precipitate\nand violent, but soft and easy. His innocence will at least preserve\nhis life; and the worst that can befal him, is being reduced to his\nformer state; but it most commonly happens, that evil-intentioned\npeople do not succeed in their attacks upon him, and that the shafts of\ntheir malice recoil and wound themselves, which oftentimes, affords\nhonour and triumph to the party accused. The history of a politician\nof integrity, although an infidel by his religion, occurs to me at\npresent, which is very applicable to the subject we are treating of.\nThe relation is taken from Tavernier\u2019s Voyages, and it being new and\npleasant, I shall give a brief recital of it.\n\nXXI. Mahomed Alibeg, high steward to the King of Persia, was, from\nbeing a poor shepherd, raised to that elevated post, in the beginning\nof the last century. The King, one day when he was hunting, met with\nhim in the mountains, where he was playing on his flute, and attending\nhis flocks. For his amusement, he asked him some questions, and, taken\nwith the vivacity and acuteness of the lad\u2019s answers, he carried him\nwith him to his palace; where having him instructed, the rectitude\nof his heart, and the clearness of his understanding, soon gained\nthe affection and confidence of the King, who advanc\u2019d him rapidly\nfrom charge to charge, till he at last placed him in the office of\nhigh steward. His inflexible integrity, and his aversion to bribes,\na thing very rare among the Mahometans, raised him powerful enemies;\nbut finding him so thoroughly possessed of the confidence of his\nmaster, they could not venture to act in a hostile way against him\nduring the King\u2019s life. After his death, when his successor who was\na young man mounted the throne, they suggested to him, that Mahomet\nhad subtracted vast sums from the Royal Treasury. The Prince ordered\nhim to make up his accounts in fifteen days, to which Mahomet replied\nwith intrepidity, that so much delay was not necessary, and that if his\nMajesty would be pleased to go with him immediately to the Treasury\nOffice, he would there deliver them to him. The King went, followed\nby all the accusers, but he found every thing in such fine order, and\nthe books of accounts so exactly and accurately stated, with which\nall other circumstances corresponded, that nobody had a word to say.\nFrom thence the King proceeded to Mahomet\u2019s house, where he could not\nhelp admiring the moderation of the furniture, and the poverty of the\ndecorations. One of the enemies of the favourite observing the door of\na room shut, and secured with three strong chains, hinted it to the\nKing, who asked Mahomet what he had got shut up in that room. Sir,\nanswered Mahomet, here I keep my own things, all you have hitherto\nseen belongs to your Majesty; and having said this he opened the door.\nThe King entered the room, and after looking all round, saw nothing\nbut the following particulars hanging on nails drove into the wall. A\nleathern doublet, a wallet, a shepherd\u2019s crook, and a flute. The King\nwas viewing them with astonishment, when Mahomet throwing himself at\nhis feet, said, Sir, this is the habit, and these are the goods which\nI was possessed of, when the King your father brought me to court.\nThese were what belonged to me then, and these are what I have now, and\nthese only I claim as my own; and as they are so, I supplicate with\nthe greatest submission, that your Majesty will permit me to enjoy\nthem, by returning to the mountains from whence my fortune brought\nme forth. Here the King, unable to refrain from tears, embraced the\ngenerous favourite; and not content with this mark of his approbation,\nimmediately stript off his royal robes, and ordered Mahomet to wear\nthem, which in Persia, is esteemed the highest honour a King can confer\non a subject. The result of all this, was, that Mahomet during his\nwhole life after, preserved the firm confidence and love of his Prince.\nWhat pity it is, that this disinterestedness, this nobleness of mind,\nthis rectitude, this moderation, should be all lodged in an infidel!\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXII. The obstacle in the way of an honest politician, is the\ndifficulty of treating with men in power upon the principles of\ntruth and candour. Flattery is a door, that opens very wide for the\nintroduction to favour, but as it is very low also, no man of a\ngenerous mind can enter in at it. I have heard all the world declare\nthey abhorred flatterers, but I never saw any one who did not cherish\nthem. This proceeds, from every man rating his own talents at more\nthan their true value, and because the true language of a flatterer\ncorresponds with the good opinion the person flattered entertains\nof himself, who does not look upon him who pays the adulation as a\nflatterer, but as a man of abilities, and one who forms right judgments\nof things: but allowing him to be so prudent, as even to undervalue,\ninstead of over-rating his own talents, he might still lie open to\nthe practices of a flatterer; as for instance, the flatter\u2019d person,\nmight be induced to attribute the excessive high opinion the flatterer\nprofessed to entertain of him, to the excess of his love and esteem\nfor him, and all that is represented through the microscope of love,\nis greatly magnified in the imagination; and in this case, although he\ndoes not credit the applause, he esteems the affection. By these means,\nflattery becomes a universal net, which catches and entangles fish of\nevery kind.\n\nXXIII. This method then, if managed with art, for there are some\nflatterers, who are fulsome and surfeiting, is sufficiently effectual\nand secure to practise with, but is at the same time most vile and\npernicious, and therefore should never be made use of, nor should the\ntruth ever be deviated from. But truth is disgusting! no matter,\nprudence will find seasonings to make it palatable; and although it\nbe true, that by using these means, an honest man will be longer in\ningratiating himself into the good opinion of a great person, than a\nsordid flatterer, still, he will in the end obtain a more solid and\nlasting estimation with him. The first thing to be observed by him,\nis never to give his opinion with asperity, nor ever to give it at\nall but at proper opportunities. The rigidity of undeceiving people\nwith respect to their errors, should be softened by the gentleness of\nrespect; and if reverence and sweetness of manner, are used as vehicles\nto convey the proposition, they will cause it to be well received. It\nwould be better still, to refrain intirely from doing what we have\njust mentioned, if you could with propriety be excused from speaking\nyour sentiments. These qualities were celebrated by King Theodoricus,\nin a favourite of his: _Sub genii nostri luce intrepidus quidem;\nsed reverenter adstabat, opportune tacitus, necessarie copiosus._\n(_Casiodor. lib. 5. Epist. 3._) In cases that admit of waiting for\nfavourable opportunities, be watchful and attentive to make use of\nthem, when the mind of the great man is happily tempered, and when he\nis well disposed to be undeceived, and to receive information; the\nchoice of these must be confided to discretion, which best understands\nthese matters, and is the best guide in such cases:\n\n    _Sola viri molles aditus, & tempora noras._\n\nXXIV. In the second place, you should never, in opposition to the\nopinion of a great man, be stiff or positive in maintaining your\nown sentiments, because this is difficult to be done without giving\noffence. The philosopher Favorinus answered wisely to some, who blamed\nhim for giving way in a dispute he had with the Emperor Adrian, by\nsaying to them, it was proper and necessary to give way to a man who\ncommanded thirty legions.\n\nXXV. Thirdly, you may sweeten the bitter of truth, with a species of\nengaging and modest condescension; which consists more in actions,\nthan in words, I mean that it is contained in being obsequious, and\nexpressing by your gestures, a disposition and desire to please; and\nthese will have a notable effect in promoting attention to your advice,\nbecause they will create an opinion, that the instruction is the\noffspring of generous sincerity, and not of positive pride. I would\nnot however have it understood, that the submission should be abject,\nor savour of meanness of spirit; but I had almost said, that with\nrespect to superiors, submission is generally defended from the hazard\nof such an imputation. Dionysius, tyrant of Syracuse, having refused\nto grant a request which was made to him by Aristippus of Cyrene, he\nprostrated himself at his feet, and obtained what he asked. Some people\nreprehended the action, as beneath the dignity of a philosopher; to\nwhich Aristippus answered, \u201cHe that would be heard by Dionysius, must\napply his mouth to his feet, for there his ears are placed.\u201d The saying\nwas pleasant, and I won\u2019t determine whether or not the submission was\nexcessive.\n\nXXVI. I repeat my assurance, that by using these precautions, the open\nhonest politician, will obtain a much higher degree of estimation\nin the mind of a great man, than the sly contemplative one. When he\narrives at convincing the person who was before persuaded he was able,\nthat he is candid also, he stands on sure ground. In consequence of\nhis integrity, he may at times experience a few slights, but he will\nstill continue to possess the confidence he has gained; as it happened\nto the Duke of Alva, with Philip the Second, when he sent the Duke to\nconquer Portugal. The king, before he set out, shewed him the slight\nof refusing to let him wait on him to take his leave, and at the same\ntime confided to his management, an enterprize of such importance. On\nthe contrary, the flatterer, although he in his ordinary conversation\nand deportment, is always pleasant and entertaining, still you will\nperceive, if his superior is a wary man, that such sort of talents\ndo not introduce him deep into his esteem. Many people make use of\nflatterers, as men who are feverish use water; which although it may\nseem obnoxious to them, they gargle their throats with, but do not\nswallow it. Generally speaking, and to me the conclusion is infallible,\nthat with an equal share of talents, the good, candid, faithful,\ngrateful man, who is a lover of justice and equity, will make a\ngreater fortune, and with more certainty, than he who is void of those\nqualities, or possessed of opposite ones.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXIX. But here I find myself pressed with an objection, which is\npretended to be derived from common experience, to wit, that nothing\nis seen in the world but perverse people exalted, and virtuous ones\ncast down; that flattery and deceit ride triumphant; and that truth\nand candour lie groaning and oppressed. I answer first, that all this\nseems more like the voice of envy, than just observation founded on\nexperience. I confess, that you hear these complaints at every turn;\nbut who articulates them? not those who occupy places, for they\nwould hardly speak against themselves; neither do virtuous neglected\npeople utter them; for they are not apt to go about complaining,\nand troubling the world with their disappointments, neither do they\nsnarl at, or envy the honours conferred on men in power, nor do they\ncompliment themselves with being the only people who possess any degree\nof merit. Who are those then, that find themselves so neglected? none\nbut the bad and incapable; such who from want of ability, and by\ntheir bad behaviour, have made themselves unworthy of all attention;\nthese are the men, who accuse Fortune of partiality; and the angry\nand discontented people being very numerous, they make such a noise\nwith their complaints, that the cries vociferated from their vitiated\nbreasts, seem like the clamours of all the world. You may add to this,\nthat as no man who arrives at obtaining power, can serve every one he\nsees in an inferior station, but only a few of them, all such then\nas do not partake of his beneficence, think he has made an unjust\ndistribution of his favours; like the Cafres, they only worship God\nwhen he sends them fair weather, and are very angry with him when\nthey have foul. The very people obliged, are apt to complain, because\nthe favours bestowed on them, fall short of what they expected, or\nwhat they thought themselves entitled to. I can assert from my own\nexperience, that having had intercourse with some of those persons\nwho had been the artisans of their own fortune, I found them beyond\ncomparison better men, than common fame had represented them to be.\n\nXXVIII. Secondly, even though it should appear true, that the fortunate\nvirtuous men are but few in number, I answer, nothing can be inferred\nfrom thence to contradict what we have asserted. If those are few\nwho have made their fortunes by pursuing the paths of virtue, it is,\nbecause few have attempted it in that way. How can many arrive at a\ngoal, which but few have set out on their rout to? It is certain, that\nmen of sanctity of manners, or those who are truly virtuous, are never\nsolicitous about ascending to high stations. They are like the stars,\nnone of which attempt rising to a sphere superior to that in which God\nhas placed them. Those who are not blessed with such solid virtue, but\nare endowed with the talents we have mentioned before, are the men we\nare about to treat of; and I say, that in all countries, such men are\nbut few in number, though I will venture to assure those few, if they\nwill apply themselves, that they will succeed and do their business.\nShew me a single man of distinguished natural parts, and of a clear\nunderstanding, who is well intentioned, and has a firm and constant\nheart; who is courteous, faithful, and just; that has not better\u2019d his\nfortune, if he has diligently endeavoured at it. Many of these, I mean,\nmany in proportion to the number of them, are sought by fortune, even\nwhen they themselves seem to slight her; and although I may be possibly\nshewn some such, who have been reduced; still, for every one of this\nsort that can be instanced, I will venture to point out a hundred\ncrooked left-handed politicians, who have been brought to poverty and\nmisery, by their frauds, little tricks, and mean cunning.\n\nXXIX. But I have not mentioned all, for I am firmly persuaded, that\nyou will rarely meet with a man, to whom virtue has not been of use,\neven in point of temporal convenience; because, if the system of\ngovernment, and the men in power are favourable to him, he is raised;\nif indifferent, he is respected; if adverse, he is at least not hated;\neven when the state is inflam\u2019d by factions, the opposite party, if in\npower, although they do not confide employments to him, consider him\nas an exception to their resentment. There never was seen in the world\na furor, equal to that of the Sicilians, when in their famous vespers,\nthey cut the throats of the French; nor was there ever any nation so\nirritated against another; for their barbarity, carried them to rip\nopen the bellies of all the Sicilian women they suspected were with\nchild by Frenchmen. In this horrible massacre, they did not spare one\nof that nation who fell into their hands, except William de Porceleto,\ngovernor of the district of Calatafima, who was protected from the\ngeneral rage, by the fame of his goodness. So certain is it, that the\ntemple of virtue is the only asylum of public safety.\n\nXXX. The noise and clamour that men of great abilities are neglected,\nand lie hid in corners, is a mere fable; and if they do not voluntarily\nhide themselves, totally void of truth, or if this is not the case,\nthey are neglected, because to their great talents, there are annexed\ngreat defects. I have gone about and seen the world, but to this day,\nhave not observed a man of distinguished abilities, (who was not\nblemished with glaring defects,) slighted and disregarded; however, as\nwe ought in every instance to speak the truth, the esteem for him, has\nnot always been in proportion to his degree of merit. Some maintain an\nopposite sentiment to that we have been advancing, but if you attend\nto them, they do not so much complain of other peoples\u2019 slights and\ndisappointments as of their own. With their tongues, they lament that\nmen of talents are despised; in reality, they only grieve that those\nare despised who are void of them, which are themselves; and under\nthe pretence of zeal for the public good, they vent their own private\nspleen. It is the vulgar artifice of people of extreme incapacity to\ncensure the partial distribution of favours, and it has been remarked,\nthat if one of these censurers ever ascended to what he aspired at, he\nimmediately approved of all those measures of government, which he had\nbefore clamoured against; from whence it may be inferred, that all the\nmerit he before lamented to have been trodden under foot, he considered\nas centered and collected together in his own person. I have seen some\nunworthy men exalted, but do not remember an instance of a great man\nwithout spot ever having been despised or contemned.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nXXXI. It is now time for us to treat of the inconvenience of low\npolicy. The celebrated Bacon, calls it the asylum of those, who\nfor want of talents, are incapable of pursuing the sublime path of\nheroic policy: _Quid si quis ad hunc judicii, & discretionis gradum\nascendere non valeat, ei relinquitur tanquam tatissimum, ut sit rectus\n& dissimulator_ (_de Inter. rer. cap. 6._). This maxim, coincides with\nthat which Plutarch cites of the General Lysander. The Laced\u00e6monians\nremonstrated with him, that on account of his little faith and truth,\nhe degenerated from Hercules whom they boasted being the descendants\nof. To which he answered wittily, alluding to the habit Hercules used\nto wear, that for want of the skin of a lion, he was obliged to make\nuse of the skin of a fox.\n\nXXXII. There are different degrees of low policy, some of which, are\nworse than others. The first, is that of dissimulation and craft. The\nsecond, is that of false appearances and lying. The third, is that of\nwickedness and insolence. The first, if it does not come in contact\nwith the line of the second, is in the moral indifferent; but it is\nvery difficult to pursue a course of craft and reserve, without being\nunder the occasional necessity of telling many lies; because if a man\nis pressed with questions, silence, by being unfavourably interpreted\nwith respect to the person questioned, is equivalent to, or makes as\nmuch against him, as a positive answer; and the gift of being ready in\nthese streights with an ingenious come off, is bestowed on very few\npeople.\n\nXXXIII. An habitual dissimulation proceeds, partly from a defect in\nthe understanding, and partly from the natural talents being vitiated.\nThose who cannot distinguish when it is proper to observe silence, nor\nwhen it is requisite, and when hazardous, to be open and explicit;\nupon a short reflection, either decide upon keeping silence totally;\nor else on all occasions, never to venture more than a very diminutive\nexplanation; like blind people, who even when they are walking on\nplain ground, for fear of slipping, proceed with great caution.\nThis in some, is more the effect of pusillanimity than the want of\nreflection, although they always mix one with the other; but be that\nas it will, they lead but a weary and unpleasant life; for wearing a\npadlock continually on the lips, is the same thing, as living with a\nheart which is ever imprisoned. Such people, are ever in dread that\nthe secrets of their breasts should be laid open, or else, that some\nwords which they have made use of, have already discovered them. They\nare destitute of the comfort of unbosoming to a friend, because all\npusillanimous people are distrustful and suspicious; they scarce think\nany man sincere in friendship, or safe to put confidence in; they also\nmake themselves unpleasant and disgusting companions, because they\nmake a mystery of every thing; and the reciprocal communication of\nsouls, being the sweetest correspondence among men, they are unhappy,\nbecause they cannot taste of this bliss; and they are disagreeable,\nbecause as far as it depends on them, they deprive other people of that\nhappiness. We may add to this; that no prudent person confides in him\nwho has confidence in no one; because such a man, is ever suspected of\njudging other people by himself. It also happens, that in consequence\nof his not communicating his designs to any one, those afford him no\nassistance, who might either be disposed, or have it in their power\nto serve him, for want of being acquainted with what he aims at. This\nwas the case of Pompey, who although a daring warrior, was a timid\npolitician. His intention was the same as C\u00e6sar\u2019s, that is, to rule the\nrepublic with an absolute sway. C\u00e6sar succeeded in his scheme, because\nhe attempted the thing openly. Pompey, by hiding his designs from his\nmost affectionate friends, who were numerous; and by using occult\nartifices, and endeavouring to disturb the republic, in order that it\nmight fall spontaneously into his hands, missed his aim; because his\nfriends, being ignorant of what he intended, knew not how to apply\ntheir influence in assisting him. Tacitus comparing him with Marius and\nSylla, says, _Occultior non melior._ For all these reasons, it appears\nvery difficult, for men who are exceedingly deceitful to better their\nfortunes. At least, they will hardly ever owe their doing it to their\ngenius.\n\n\nSECT. X.\n\nXXXV. The dealers in false pretences, and the men of cunning, compose\nthe vulgar of a court, and are the most numerous part of population in\nthe political world; but they who act upon these principles, follow a\nvery dangerous tract, although it is the most beaten. Their deceptions\nare so manifold, that notwithstanding art and fortune should conspire\nto hide them, it is next to impossible that some will not appear. A\nfabric built on false ground, without the wind overturning it, will\nfall of itself. When a lying genius is once found out, the least\ninconvenience consequent on the discovery is, his never being believed\nany more. Tiberius, on account of his having been so often detected\nin falsehoods, was not credited, even when he spoke the truth: _Vero\nquoque, & honesto fidem demissit_, says Tacitus.\n\nXXXV. Not only lies detected are unfortunate, but they are likewise\nsometimes so, on account of their being thought true; for in this\ncase, they produce an effect, quite opposite to the purpose they were\nintended to answer. Nero wanted to murder his mother Agrippina in such\na manner, that her death should appear accidental, and not design\u2019d.\nFor this purpose, he caused a ship in which Agrippina was to embark,\nto be constructed so artfully, that the part where his mother was\nto be lodged, could be easily separated from the other, and let the\nunfortunate Princess drop into the Sea. The purpose was not answered,\nbecause the part did not separate as was intended, but only open\u2019d, so\nas to cause great dread of shipwreck in those of the party. Aceronia,\na lady who attended Agrippina, when the alarm happened, ran out and\ncalled aloud for assistance, saying, she was Agrippina, the mother of\nthe Emperor. The darkness of the night favoured the deceit, and those\nwho knew Nero\u2019s intention, believing she was Agrippina, came quickly\nto her; not with a design to assist, but to demolish the unfortunate\nAceronia, which they did, upon a supposition that they were doing an\nagreeable piece of service to Nero.\n\nXXXVI. Lying, is proper and natural to base and ambitious people, who\nby mixing flattery with their lies, become vile and contemptible to\nthe last degree; and their doing this, makes them the slaves of all\nmankind. They submit to every one, and humble themselves to every one,\nand treat all the world as their masters; some because they should do\nthem service, and others because they should not injure them; like\nthe savages of Virginia, who not only worship the stars because they\ngive them light, and promote fertility, but they worship all they fear\nlikewise; not only the devil whom they most dread, but also fire,\nclouds, horses, and great guns are venerated as deities by them. They\nhave work enough upon their hands who serve so many masters, for over\nand above the labour which liars find in obeying such a number of\ndirectors, they are alarm\u2019d and fatigu\u2019d with the risques they run, for\ntheir practices of deceiving being once discover\u2019d, all mankind abhor\nthem.\n\n\nSECT. XI.\n\nXXXVII. We come now to the quintessence of the venom of ambition, to\nthose pests of society, abandoned politicians; to those concealed\nAtheists, those devils in disguise, who without the least scruple to\nattain their base purposes, practise the most deformed vices; who to\nlay their hands on benefits, set their feet on, and trample upon the\nlaws; who with the fine accomplishments, of perjury, ingratitude,\nand treachery, are galanting fortune night and day. These, of all\npoliticians are the most blind, because the road by which they think to\narrive at happiness and honour, leads them directly to misfortune and\ndisgrace. Who, by such sort of means, was ever made happy? Machiavel\nhimself, the grand master of this infernal policy, passed the last\nyears of his life in extreme misery; and he would long before his\ndissolution happened have died on a gibbet, if he had not denied in\nthe torture, his participation in the conspiracy against the family\nof the Medicis. If one or two, have happened to raise themselves by\nthe dint of wicked practices, their elevation may be compared to that\nof Simon Magus, who was lifted up, that his legs might be crushed to\npieces with his fall. Sejanus, in consequence of a similarity in their\nhabits and dispositions, gained such a degree of favour with Tiberius,\nand came to have such an ascendant over him, that he directed and\ncontrol\u2019d him with an absolute sway. And what did all these smiles of\nfortune end in? Nothing more, than that no culprit was ever put to\ndeath with greater ignominy. Petronius Arbiter, by flattering the\nlascivious disposition of Nero, arrived at being superintendant of\nhis turpitudes, or regulator of his brutalities; so that in all which\nrelated to criminal pleasures, the Prince obeyed his subject; nor would\nhe taste of any thing, but what Petronius prescribed; notwithstanding\nwhich, the criterion arrived, when Nero condemned him to death; which\nPetronius anticipated, by opening his veins. It is very remarkable that\nout of all the people Nero most hated, Seneca was the last who died\nby his order. The arm of the Prince, was restrained by the virtue of\nthe philosopher, notwithstanding that same virtue made the Prince\u2019s\nlife unpleasant, and was an irksome monitor to him; and after all,\nthe philosopher did not die without a crime, for he was privy to the\nconspiracy of Pison. If virtue enjoys these immunities under bad\nPrinces, what may it not expect from good ones?\n\nXXXVIII. It would be strange delirium in him who is making war against\nheaven, to expect, the stars should be favourable to his designs. A\nFrenchman, reminding an Englishman of the time, when in the reign of\nHenry the Sixth, the English were almost absolute masters of France,\nsaid sneeringly to him, \u201cWhen do you think you shall return again to be\nLords of our kingdom?\u201d to which the Englishman made him this admirable\nreply, _When your iniquities shall be greater than ours_. Little\ndifferent from this was the saying of Agislaus; who (when Tisaphernes\nfinding himself superior in force, in violation of the peace he had\nsworn to observe, began hostilities,) spoke thus: _I am very happy at\nthis event, because Tisaphernes by his perfidy, has engaged the Gods\non my side._ The issue was, that Agislaus came off triumphant, and\nTisaphernes lost the battle and his life.\n\nXXXIX. But to illustrate how much God takes part with the enemies of\nhim, who hopes to succeed in his undertakings, by violating the oaths\nsworn by his holy name, there is not a more memorable instance in\nhistory, than may be seen in the case of Ladislaus the fourth, king of\nHungary. This Prince, after gaining some victories, agreed upon a truce\nwith Amurat the Second; but in a short time afterwards, instigated by\nthe indiscreet zeal of the Pontifical legate, he began the war afresh:\nWorldly policy taught him, that the opportunity was favourable, as the\nTurks had not recovered from the consternation of their late defeats.\nLadislaus had excellent troops, and for his General, John Huniades, who\nwas esteemed the most skillful warrior the world knew in that age. They\ncame to a battle, which in the beginning, was much in favour of the\nHungarians. Amurat, when he saw his troops ready to betake themselves\nto flight, drew out from his bosom the instrument containing the\ntruce, which Ladislaus had sworn to observe; and lifting his eyes\nto heaven, in a loud voice, addressed our Saviour, in words to this\neffect: _Jesus Christ, if thou art the true God, as the Christians\nbelieve you to be, chastise the affront offered to you by these people,\nin breaking a truce, which they have sworn by thy holy name to keep\nsacred_; and wonderful to relate, at this instant the gale of fortune\nveer\u2019d about, the Mahometans defeated the Christians with a bloody\nslaughter, and to compleat the whole, Ladislaus himself was among the\nslain:\n\n    _Discite justitiam moniti, & non temnere Divos._\n\n\nSECT. XI.\n\nXL. One of the most common effects of infamous policy, is, the author\u2019s\nown maxims being often turned upon, and brought to militate against\nhimself. Jeroboam, when the kingdom of Israel was divided, having made\nhimself master of the ten tribes, spun, as it appeared to him, a most\nexquisite fine thread of policy; for observing, that from a religious\nmotive, the hearts of his subjects were attached to the Temple of\nJerusalem; and that, if he could not separate them from the Jews in\npoint of worship, he was not secure in the possession of his portion of\nthe empire; he raised two idols, and insisted the ten tribes should\nworship them, forsaking the true God, who was worshiped in the Temple\nof Jerusalem; but this keen piece of policy, as we read in the Book\nof Kings, was the very cause, which deprived his posterity of the\nsuccession to the crown; his son Nadab in consequence of it, having\nlost the kingdom and his life by the hands of the rebellious General\nBaassa. In the death which the Jews inflicted on our Saviour, they\npretended, that political precaution made it necessary they should\ndeprive him of life, for otherwise, the Romans would demolish them for\nhaving acknowledged any other King but C\u00e6sar; but for their having\ncarried this cursed maxim into execution, heaven ordained as their\npunishment, that these very Romans, should afterwards be the people to\ndestroy them.\n\nXLI. Thus Providence disposes, that the very same means which\nMachiavilian politicians apply for their exaltation, or their security,\nbecome the instruments of their destruction. Haman, is hang\u2019d on the\nsame gallows, which he prepared for Mordecai. Perillus, is burnt in the\nsame brazen ox, which he fabricated to indulge the cruelty of Phalaris.\nCallipus, tyrant of Sicily, has his throat cut by the same knife, with\nwhich he took away the life of the generous Dion. Isaac Aaron, a Greek\nby nation, whose eyes were put out by order of the Emperor Emanuel\nComenus, as a punishment for his evil deeds, afterwards advised the\nusurper Andronicus, not only to put out the eyes of his enemies, but\nto cut their tongues out also; because, that after being deprived of\ntheir sight, they could do mischief with their tongues. The Emperor\nIsaac Angelo, succeeded Andronicus, and ordered, that the tongue of\nthe infamous counsellor who had before lost his eyes, should be cut\nout likewise. Perrin, Captain General of Geneva, the great persecutor\nof the Catholics, when in the year 1535, that republic changed their\nreligion, caused the stone of the great altar in the Cathedral to\nbe transported to the place of execution, that it might serve as a\nscaffold to dispatch delinquents on; and father Maimburgus, in his\nHistory of Calvinism, tells us, that the blood of Perrin, who was\nbeheaded for his crimes, was the first which stained the stone. Thomas\nCromwell, whom Henry the Eighth, when he erected himself into head of\nthe English church, constituted his supreme vicar in all ecclesiastical\nmatters, was a man extremely false, cruel, and avaricious. To furnish\npretences for persecuting the ecclesiastics, that he might enrich\nhimself with their spoils, he prevailed on Henry to make that most\niniquitous law, that sentences of death, and confiscations, pronounced\non people for high treason, should be good and valid, although they\nhad not been heard in their defence; but Cromwell himself, was the\nfirst man this law was put in practice against; Henry having caused\nhim to be beheaded, without his being heard or permitted to make any\ndefence:\n\n    _--------Nec lex est \u00e6quior illa,_\n    _Ut necis artifices arte perirent sua._\n\nXLII. Finally, and to sum up the whole, if we search history, we shall\nhardly find one among a thousand of those politicians, who have sought\nto exalt themselves by means of wicked arts and practices, that have\nnot come to an unhappy end. Thus it has ever been till this time, and\nso it will ever continue to be from henceforward. What blindness then\nis it, to persevere in following a path, by pursuing which, you can\nonly by a miracle of chance avoid a precipice? What can this be but\ndelirium, the infallible symptom of the fever of ambition? which is\na flame that cannot burn with violence in any man, without his being\naffected with a phrensy of the brain.\n\n\nSECT. XIII.\n\nXLIII. All we have said of policy, as it relates to private people,\nmay be applied to princes, or superiors, who govern every kind of\nstate; and with respect to these also, the division of policy into\nthe high and the low, is apt and proper, as the first is secure, and\nthe second hazardous in them, in the same proportion, which it is with\nrespect to subjects or private men. Any ruler whatever, who is endued\nwith the three virtues, of prudence, justice, and fortitude, will be a\nsingular good politician, without ever having read any of those books,\nwhich treat of reasons of state. The true arts of governing, are, to\nchuse such ministers as are wise and upright, to reward merit, and\nto punish crimes; to watch over, and attend to the interest of the\npublic, and to be faithful in promises. By these means, the respect,\nthe love, and the obedience of subjects, will be much more effectually\nsecured, than by all that compound farrago of political subtilties,\ncalled reasons of state; a mystery, deposited in the minds of privy\ncounsellors, which, as if it was a most sacred thing, they never suffer\nto be totally displayed; nor ever to go forth to the public, unless\ncovered with a thick veil; and is for the most part, no more than a\nridiculous phantom, or vain idol, which under the title of a Deity,\nthey exhibit for the adoration of the ignorant vulgar. Reason of state,\nis the universal agitator, or primum mobile of a kingdom, and is the\nreason for every thing, without being the reason of any thing. If it\nis asked, why was such a thing done, the answer is, for reasons of\nstate; very well, but why was such another thing omitted to be done,\nwhy for reasons of state also. Would it not be better to say, it was\ndone because justice required it, or because religion, clemency, or\nsome moral virtue dictated the doing it? The reason of the directions\nof a minister to his inferiors, in all matters, is, that they are the\nKing\u2019s commands. The reason why a Prince orders any thing to be done,\nshould be this, and this only, because the commandments and laws of\nGod, require it; for a Prince in a more rigorous sense, is the minister\nof God, than his subalterns are ministers to him.\n\nXLIV. If we are to understand, that reason of state means political\nprudence, why not call it by that name? because the phrase political\nprudence, implies or signifies a moral virtue, but the term, reason\nof state, we don\u2019t know the meaning of. This expression, _ragioni\ndi stato_, took its rise in Italy, but it does not seem as if they\nentertained a high veneration for it there, since we are told, that the\nholy Pontif Pius, could not bear to hear it mentioned; and was used to\nsay, that reasons of state were the inventions of perverse men, and the\nvery reverse of religion and the moral virtues. It was observable, that\nPope Pius, in no case stood in need of these political subtilties; for\nwithout their aid, he was not only a great saint, but a distinguish\u2019d\nand exemplary ruler.\n\nXLV. It was a remark of the celebrated Bacon, that the most desirable\ngovernments which the church has in all times experienced, were under\nthose Popes, who having passed the greatest part of their lives in\nmonasteries, were reputed ignorant of political business; and that\nthese made excellent Princes, and recommended themselves much more\nto the good opinion of posterity, by their wise regulations, than\nthose, who had been bred in the schools, and had exercised themselves\nall their lives, in the management of public affairs; instancing as\nexamples of the truth of this assertion, Pius V. and Sextus V. who both\nreign\u2019d in the same age: _Im\u00f2 convertamus oculos ad regimen pontificium\nac nominatim Pij V. vel Sixti V. nostro s\u00e6culo, qui sub initiis habiti\nsunt pro fraterculis rerum imperitis, inveniemusque acta paparum ejus\ngeneris magis esse solere memorabilia, quam eorum, qui in negotiis\ncivilibus, & principum aulis enutriti ad papatum ascenderint_ (_Lib._\nI. _de Augment. Scient._) This testimony to the truth, is given by a\nCalvinist Heretic, although abstracted from his religion, he was in\nevery sense a great, and most enlightened man, and one, who was not\nmore remarkable for his incomparable talents, than for his candour and\ningenuity.\n\nXLVI. The reason he gives why the Popes, who before their elevation\nto the throne, had lived in holy retirement, excelled in the mode and\ngoodness of their government, those, who before their rise, had always\nbeen exercised in public business, entitles him to the appellations we\nhave just bestowed on him. He says, the want of civil instruction in\nthose Pontiffs, was more than compensated for by their virtues; because\nPrinces, who follow steadily, the plain and safe road of religion,\njustice, and the other moral virtues, readily and expertly, without\nthe aid of studied policy, put in train, and dispatch all sorts of\nbusiness that may occur to them. They are sound and robust souls, who\nhave no more occasion for civil arts, than men who are healthy, and\nblessed with good constitutions have for physic. _In eo tamen abund\u00e8\nfit compensatio, quod per tutum, planumque iter religionis, justiti\u00e6,\nhonestatis, virtutumque moralium, prompte, atque expedite incedant,\nquam viam, qui constanter tenuerint, illis alteris remediis non magis\nindigebunt, quam corpus sanum medicina._\n\nXLVI. I almost blush, that a Heretic should talk in this strain, when\namong the Catholics, we find so many politicians who abound in very\ndifferent maxims. But the case is, that the subtilties and artifices\nwhich compose what is commonly called worldly policy, are a sort\nof remedies, which sickly souls only, stand in need of. A vicious\ngovernment, which he who has the management of turns and winds to\nanswer his private purposes, cannot exist without the help of such\nmedicaments, which may with as much propriety be called drugs, as those\nthat are sold in an apothecary\u2019s shop. But a sound understanding,\nendued and justly tempered with the four elemental qualities, of\nprudence, justice, fortitude, and sobriety, with only the assistance\nof these virtues, will, without the succour of other arts, and without\nembarrassment, surmount all the difficulties that can occur in\ngovernment.\n\nXLVII. And since Bacon has mentioned him, let us take a cursory view\nof the reign of Sextus the Vth. This spirit, so truly incomparable,\nthat it seems as if God had formed him for the purpose of governing\nthe whole world; in whom, the magnanimity of C\u00e6sar, the prudence of\nAugustus, and the justice of Trajan were joined, and who, in these\nvirtues, even excelled them; in a few months after his mounting the\nthrone, had gained the respect of all the Princes of Europe, and had\nput the whole ecclesiastical state in better order, and under better\nregulation, than it had been known to be blessed with or enjoy, for\nmany antecedent ages. Thefts, cheating, murders, subornations, and\nlicentious insolence, were so effectually rooted out and banished from\nthat great city, that it never till then, could with so much propriety\nbe called Holy Rome. All dread of extortion and injustice was lost,\nand nobody feared, only God and the Pope; and as Gregory Leti tells\nus, in his History of Sextus, women, and other defenceless persons,\ncould walk the streets at all hours of the night, as safely, as they\ncould walk in the cloisters of a Capuchin Convent. In the five years\nwhich he reigned, he embellished Rome with many noble edifices, and\nleft the treasury some millions richer than he found it. I ask now, by\nwhat political arts, and what ingenious devices, he performed all these\nwonders? He knew no arts, save those of an indefatigable vigilance\nand attention to the concerns of government; a fervent zeal for the\npublic good, and an unalterable rectitude and justice. I cannot tell,\nwhether what has been so much rumoured about Sextus having put on\nfalse appearances before his advancement to the throne, be true, but\nI believe it is not; and it is certain, that after he found himself\nseated in the Papal chair, he was a man void of all dissimulation;\nalways generous, open, free and sincere, and one, who that his designs\nshould not appear occult, frankly exposed and laid them open; and\nunless the virtue of prudence dictated caution, or the character of the\nprelate demanded reserve, he concealed the purposes of his heart from\nno man. This frankness, was natural to his genius, and he was the same\nin that respect while he was a religious; and therefore, I cannot give\ncredit, to what is said of his practising duplicity while a Cardinal,\nin order to obtain the Popedom. It is more probable, that they mistook\nwhat was the real effect of his virtue, for dissimulation. They also\ncharge him with doing violence to his nature, by bearing all sorts of\ninjuries patiently, that he might acquire the character of a meek and\ngentle man; but why should not all this be imputed, to his desire, in\nobedience to the gospel precept, of imitating our Saviour? The severity\nhe observed when he was Pope, proves nothing to contradict this\nsentiment; because bearing with offences that are merely personal, and\nthose which are committed against dignities, are very different things.\nThey also say, he feigned himself decrepid and worn out with age and\ninfirmities, to excite in his favour, the choice of the Cardinals;\nfrom the prospect that his would be a short pontificate, and that they\nshould have a quick return of another conclave. But notwithstanding\nwhat people say, I don\u2019t believe the Cardinals are so much influenced\nby this sort of policy as the world imagine, from their having so often\nchosen Popes of good constitutions, and not far advanced in years,\nprovided at the time of their election, their judgment was arrived\nat that state of maturity, which it is not common to attain but in a\nmore advanced age. On the other hand, it is probable, that Sextus who\nwas seventy-four when he ascended the Papal chair, was much broke. If\nhe afterwards seemed more robust, it might be, because having charged\nhimself with such weighty obligations, he used extraordinary exertions\nto comply with what he had undertaken; and besides this, the before\ncited Leti informs us, that to enable him to discharge the duties\nincumbent on him, he fed more copiously, and took more nourishing\naliment, both with respect to meat and drink, when he was a Pope, than\nhe did while he was a Cardinal.\n\nXLVIII. I have dwelt with pleasure on the eulogium of this singular\nman, who was always the object of my admiration, although some have\nbeen unjust enough, not to render him the praise due to his merit.\nAnd here by the way, I cannot forbear congratulating the seraphic\nreligion, on having produced in the person of this Pontif, and in\nthat of Cardinal Cisneros, two politicians so eminent, that in my\nopinion the world never saw greater; though neither the one or the\nother have been without their enemies, who, envious of their merit,\nhave strove to tarnish their glories; but what I most admire in this\nparticular is, that so able a man as Don Antonio de Solis, should in\nthe third Chap. of his History of Mexico, paint the Cardinal, as a man\ndeficient in point of political abilities; notwithstanding he in all\nother respects, heaps on him the highest encomiums. Foreign authors\ndo him more justice, and particularly, Flechier, Bishop of Nimes, who\nwith great judgment and discretion wrote his life, celebrates him, as\na most eminent and brilliant politician: and another modern French\nauthor, having drawn a parallel of the characters of the two Cardinals,\nCisneros, and Richlieu, gives the preference to our countryman;\nacknowledging, that he was equal to the other as a politician, and much\npreferable to him as a devout man; though by the way, when he says\nthis, he pays no great compliment to the sanctity of Cisneros.\n\nXLIX. From all that has been said on this subject, it is evident and\nplain, that with an equality of talents, those politicians who proceed\nupon the principles of honesty, and who pursue the road of rectitude\nand truth, will with greater certainty, and more ease, attain their\nends, than those, who follow the rout of artifice and deceit; for the\nfirst, is the sound or true policy, the other, the rotten or false.\n\n\n\n\nTHE MACHIAVELIANISM OF THE ANCIENTS.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. As we are about to treat in this discourse of the tyrannic doctrine\nof Machiavel; I believe it will be agreeable to the greatest part of\nour readers, to have some particular information respecting this man,\nof whom all the world talks, and whom all the world detests; for by\nwhatever means men make themselves famous, they excite a curiosity to\nknow who and what they were.\n\nII. Nicholas Machiavel, who was a native of Florence, lived in the\nbeginning of the sixteenth century, and was a man of more than middling\ningenuity. He wrote the Tuscan language with elegance and propriety,\nalthough his knowledge of the Latin was but moderate. He had a good\ngenius for writing comic poetry, which he manifested in various pieces\nwhich he wrote for the theatre; and more particularly in one of them,\nthat was represented at Florence with such great applause, that it\nexcited Pope Leo the tenth, as Paulus Jovius informs us, to cause it\nto be acted at Rome by the same players, and with the same dresses and\ndecorations, with which it had been exhibited at Florence. When the\nunhappy conspiracy against the family of the Medicis, was set on foot\nby the Soderinis, Machiavel, who was impeached as an accomplice in\nit, was put to the question by torture; but either his fortitude, or\nhis innocence, caused him to resist the rigour of that trial without\nmaking the least confession. I do not know whether it was before, or\nafter this event, that he was made secretary to the republic, but it\nis certain, that for the title of historian to it, which was conferred\non him together with a good salary, he was totally indebted to the\nfavour of the Medicis; but whether they did this from a conviction of\nhis innocence with respect to the late conspiracy, and were disposed to\nrecompence him by this honourable emolument, for the injury he suffered\nin the torture; or whether they did it from considering him as an able\nman whom they had a mind to keep under obligations to them, in order\nto avail themselves of so good a pen as Machiavel\u2019s in their favour;\nI say, whichever of these motives they were actuated by, is not quite\ncertain.\n\nIII. The conferring this benefit on him, did not prevent new suspicions\nbeing entertained of his fidelity, and of his having concurred in\nanother plot concerted by some private individuals, to take away the\nlife of cardinal Julius de Medicis, who afterwards ascended to the\npopedom, by the name of Clement the seventh. This suspicion was founded\nentirely, on the repeated applauses, with which both in his writings\nand private conversations, he had celebrated Brutus and Cassius, as\nthe defenders and vindicators of the liberty of the Roman republic;\nwhich at that time, was interpreted as an indirect exhortation to\nthe Florentines to defend their liberty, which the Medicis either in\nreality or appearance, meditated to suppress. But with all this, either\nfrom mere motives of policy, or because the suspicions seemed lightly\nfounded, no proceedings were had against Machiavel. It is confirmed\nhowever, that after this time, he passed the remainder of his days in\nmisery and poverty. Perhaps the Medicis, who were secretly displeased\nwith him, thought it more adviseable, instead of bringing him to open\npunishment, to accomplish their dark revenge, by occult ways and\nmeans. It might also happen, that he brought himself to poverty by his\nown misconduct; but, be this as it will, he hastened his death as many\nother people have hastened theirs before him, by taking a precautionary\nmedicine to prolong his life, which instead of lengthening, shortened\nit, and brought him to an untimely end in the year 1530.\n\nIV. Machiavel was of a jocose and satyrical disposition, and was\nbelieved to have little or no religion. There are some who say, that\nwhen he was near dying, they were under a necessity of employing\nthe authority of the civil magistrate to oblige him to receive the\nsacraments. We read in many authors, a wanton and insolent impiety of\nhis, under the colour of a joke; that is, his having said, that he had\nmuch rather go to hell than heaven; because in heaven he should only\nmeet with fryars, mendicants, and other miserable and groveling people;\nbut that in hell, he should enjoy the company of popes, cardinals,\nand princes, with whom he could converse of state affairs. Others\nsubstitute, for his saying popes, cardinals, and princes, the most\neminent philosophers and political writers, such as Plato, Aristotle,\nPlutarch, and Tacitus.\n\nV. He published a variety of books, and among them, the life of\nCastrucius Castracani, and the history of Florence, which do not obtain\nthe greatest credit with the critics. But the work that made him\njointly the most famous and infamous man in the world, was a political\ntract, intituled, \u201cThe Prince;\u201d in which he teaches and recommends to\nall sovereigns, to reign tyrannically, and to govern their people,\nwithout regarding either equity, law, or religion, but sacrificing them\nall three, together with the public good, to his interest, his will,\nhis caprice, and his own particular grandeur.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nVI. But notwithstanding the principles of this book are so pernicious,\nthere have not been wanting those, who have patronized both the book\nand the author. Abraham Nicholas Amelot de Houssaye, defends it in the\nmost odious point of view, which is approving his maxims as beneficial\nto the public, and asserting, that they are only reprobated by ignorant\nmen, who know nothing of politics or reasons of state; and adds, that\nthe same people who now live as private men, and are unacquainted with\nthe management of public business, and at present condemn them, were\nthey by any great and unexpected change of fortune, to arrive at being\nprinces or prime ministers, would approve, and practise them.\n\nVII. There are others, who, although they acknowledge the maxims of\nMachiavel are pernicious, sanctify the intention of the author. They\nsay, that so far from intending to instruct princes against their\npeople, he only meant to caution the people against the proceedings\nand arts of tyrants, to the end that princes, seeing the tendency of\ntheir schemes liable to be exposed, should be more circumspect in their\nbehaviour, and that the people, by being aware of the arms with which\nthe attacks were made upon liberty, might be the better able to parry\nthe blows. They add further, that Machiavel was under a necessity of\nusing this artful method of warning the people, and of couching his\ncautions to them, under the veil and figure of teaching princes how to\nmake themselves absolute, because these last, would not have permitted\nhis book to be licenced, if he had openly declared himself inimical to\ntheir total independency.\n\nVIII. They endeavour to prove the probability of this sentiment, by\nurging, that Machiavel was an utter enemy to tyranny, and a strenuous\nadvocate for the liberty of the republic; and that the whole tenor\nof his words and actions, conspire to manifest these were his\ninclinations. His two great and favourite heroes, were Brutus and\nCassius, who killed C\u00e6sar to restore Rome to her liberty. He also\nquotes the tenth chapter of the first book of his discourses, where he\nspeaks strongly against tyrants; and urges further, that he was accused\nof being an accomplice with the Soderinis in their conspiracy against\nthe family of the Medicis, who were thought at that time, to have an\nintention of tyrannizing over the republic of Florence; and that he\nwas afterwards, not exempt from being suspected, of having a finger in\nthe conspiracy against the life of cardinal Julius de Medicis. Nardi,\na Florentine author who was a contemporary with him, says, that he was\nclosely connected with the contrivers of that plot and design, and also\nwith the rest of the faction, who were in opposition to the Medicis.\nHe then proceeds to say, what view or intention could a man have in\nfavouring and abetting tyrants, who had given so many proofs of his\nabhorrence of them? or how could the man be suspected of designing to\nextend the power of princes above their natural sphere, who had always\nmanifested himself an admirer of democracy? he next says, it must\nfollow then of course, that his intention must be different, and very\ncontrary to what the ordinary and superficial sense of his words seem\nto import. This is the way those reason, who support this opinion.\n\nIX. Finally, there are others, who admit that the maxims of Machiavel\nare detestable, but waiving the question about what was his intention,\nthey limit their excuse of the author, by affirming, there has not,\nnor can there arise, any general inconvenience from the publication\nof them. These say, that Machiavel has broached nothing new; and that\nhis maxims are the same with those you will find inserted in various\nhistories, and which were practised by an infinite number of princes;\nand what more pernicious effect can they have on him who reads them in\nMachiavel\u2019s book, than on him who reads them in any other?\n\nX. This is the very excuse which Bocalini puts in the mouth of\nMachiavel, when he supposes him to be speaking in his own defence\nbefore Apollo. He says, I do not pretend to defend my works, but\nrather to arraign, and condemn them as impious, and full of cruel and\nexecrable documents for the government of states; but provided the\ndoctrine I have written shall appear to be new, or the invention of my\nbrain, I am ready at this moment, to submit to the execution of any\nsentence, the judges shall think proper to fulminate against me. On the\nother hand, if my writings contain nothing more than those political\nprecepts, and those rules of state, which I have deduced from the\nactions and conduct of some princes, the speaking ill of whom would\nformerly have been punished with death, and, if you will be pleased to\npermit me, I can now name; I say if this be the case, what justice,\nwhat reason can there be, for respecting those as little less than\ndivinities, who have been the authors and inventors of all the furious\nand desperate maxims of policy which appear in my writings; and of\ntreating me, who have done nothing more than republish them, as an\nabandoned vagabond, and an Atheist I certainly cannot conceive, why the\noriginal should be adored as a saint, and the copy execrated; nor why\nI deserve to be so persecuted, when the reading of histories, not only\ntolerated, but recommended, are sufficient to convert to Machiavels,\nall those who peruse them with a political view.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXI. But not to leave the reader in suspence, or not to give him\noccasion to think that I propose these three opinions as problems,\nI will here declare the judgement I entertain of them. The first is\nfalse, shocking, abominable, and only worthy of a second Machiavel.\nWhat reason, I won\u2019t say can dictate, but even endure the detestable\nmaxims, that a prince owes more to himself than to the republic?\nthat this last was instituted by nature for the convenience of the\nprince, and not the prince for the good of the republic? that the\nright to govern with tyrannic sway, is an appendage, appertaining to\nthe prerogative of the crown? that the untimely and disgraceful deaths\nof tyrants, ought to be attributed to chance, and not to the divine\nvengeance or judgements? with others of the same sort.\n\nXI. The second apology, is contradicted by the literal and natural\nsense of the author\u2019s writings; for if he intended to convey a meaning\nwhich was different from these, it is not easy to ascertain what that\nmeaning was. I will admit as good and conclusive, all the arguments\nthat are used to prove Machiavel was an enemy to tyranny. There is no\nman whatever who does not abhor tyranny, while he contemplates it as a\nrestraint on his own person, or while he is apprehensive part of the\nweight of it may be loaded on his own shoulders. But many of those who\nabhor it in general, are friends to it in particular, and especially,\nif they entertain hopes that the favour of the tyrant will better\ntheir fortunes. It is very natural to suppose, this was the state and\nsituation of Machiavel\u2019s mind when he wrote his book. The Medicis at\nthat time ruled the city of Florence; and he imagined that he should\nsooth and flatter them, by approving and recommending a government,\nthat dispensed with all law, as the means the best calculated to pave\nthe way for the introduction and establishment of despotic power.\nPerhaps also, he might entertain hopes, that some prince who read\nhis book, might be induced to make him his prime minister, from an\nexpectation, that by having the author of these maxims at his elbow, he\nmight be able to raise his power to the highest pitch of uncontroul and\ngrandeur.\n\nXIII. The excuse, with which it is attempted to defend Machiavel by\nthe third supposition, is manifestly sophistical. It cannot be denied,\nthat we read in a variety of authors, of numbers of princes who have\nput in practice the doctrine of Machiavel, but there is this great\ndifference between those authors and Machiavel, that they condemn the\ndoctrine, which he adopts and enforces. They, at the same time that\nthey inform you of the fact, inspire you with horror of the maxim; he,\nwhen he teaches the maxim, exhorts to the execution of it. How great\nmust his zeal have been to recommend and persuade tyranny, when he had\nthe presumption to propose Moses and David, as examples of tyrannic\ngovernment? but to this execrable degree of impiety, did Machiavel\ncarry his daring blasphemy.\n\nXIV. With regard to the peculiar defence which Bocalina makes for\nMachiavel, it is easy to see, at whom his malignant expressions point;\nwhich he might very well have omitted, because without alluding to any\none in so elevated a form of life, he had very near at hand in the\nperson of C\u00e6sar Borgia[2], a man furnished with all the requisites\nfor his purpose, and whom he did not run much hazard of announcing. I\nmean, that in order to excuse Machiavel from being the inventor of the\nmaxims he published, and to point out some person under whom he had\nstudied and learned them, he could have fixed on no one more proper\nthan that prince, because C\u00e6sar Borgia was without doubt, a man of\nmost iniquitous and tyrannic politics, and capable of committing all\nsorts of wickedness, provided his doing it would contribute to advance\nhis grandeur; for he was fiery, daring, and cruel, and was besides\nso furiously ambitious, that were it in his power, he was capable\nof burning the whole world, for the sake afterwards of domineering\nabsolutely over the ashes of it.\n\nXV. Hermanus Coringius, a protestant author, says, that Machiavel was\nsome time in the service of this prince. If this be true, it is easy to\nguess from whom he learned what he afterwards committed to writing;\nand I believe the Italians would not disdain to acknowledge, that their\nFlorentine politician had been instructed by a Spanish master.\n\nXVI. But the truth is, that Machiavel had no occasion to seek for an\nexample, either in him, or in any other of the princes of his own\ntime; for as he was a man pretty well read in history, every age had\nfurnished him with examples in plenty. They mistake little less, who\nsuppose Machiavel learned his maxims from the politicians of his day;\nthan those do, who believe the politics, posterior to Machiavel, were\ntaken from his doctrines.\n\nXVII. But notwithstanding all that can be urged in opposition to it,\nthis second opinion is much entertained and received by people of\nlittle reading and short reflection, in which group we may suppose to\nbe comprehended the bulk of mankind. Not a few, when they converse\nupon this subject, add with a mysterious gravity, and as if they were\nextracting a profound apophthegm from the inmost recesses of their\nunderstandings, that although Machiavel was the master who introduced\nthis doctrine, it has since his time been so much improved upon in\ncourts, that if the master could now come back into the world, he would\nfind it necessary to go to school again.\n\nXVIII. I cannot refrain from laughter, when I hear men discourse in\nthis manner, who, from their education, ought to know and reason\nbetter. The maxims of tyrannic policy are as antient in the world,\nas government or dominion. Machiavelianism owes its first existence\nto the most antient princes of the earth, and only to Machiavel its\nname. It is rooted in our nature, and it does not require ages, as\nmoments, when fit occasions present themselves, are equal to bring\nforth its malignant productions. Nor is the passion of domineering more\nnatural to man, than that of amplifying and extending his dominion. An\nambitious man, by attaining to be a prince, does not find his ambition\nsatisfied; but is always desirous of extending his power, exteriorly\nwith respect to the subjects of other states, and interiorly with\nregard to his own. The love of independence can seldom be contained\nwithin reasonable bounds. He who is free from all subjection to other\nmen, aspires at being independent of the laws also.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXIX. I am so far from thinking that Machiavel has made the world worse\nin this respect, or from supposing that the princes of these times,\nhave refined upon the iniquitous politics of Machiavel, that I firmly\nbelieve, if we limit our enquiries precisely to Europe, we shall find\nthe sovereigns of it in general, much better than those of the remote\nages.\n\nXX. Now-a-days, if it is in contemplation to impose some new burthen\non the subject, or to wage war with a neighbouring state, divines and\nlawyers are consulted upon the justice and propriety of the measure;\nan enquiry is made, how the laws stand with respect to the subject\nmatter in question, and the archives and records are examined and\nturned over; and although it often happens, that from the ambitious\nadulation of the people consulted, a right is attributed to their\nprince, which in reality does not belong to him, their malice does not\nimpeach his good faith. In former times this was not the case. If a\nprince was disposed to trample on the rights of his subjects, or to\nsubdue his neighbours, he consulted nobody, nor made any other enquiry\nor examination, than whether he had force and power sufficient to\naccomplish what he meditated; and the question was always decided, by\nhis ability or inability to execute what he designed. In times not very\ndistant from our own, and even in the most polished kingdoms, where the\ntrue religion has humanized people\u2019s minds, when the person invaded\nby a powerful prince his neighbour, has represented to him, that his\npretensions to what he possesses are just and legal; the invader has\nlaughed at the representation, and answered savagely, in the language\nthat was then become proverbial in the mouths of kings and ministers\nof state, that the rights of princes were not to be determined by old\nrolls of parchment, but by burnished arms.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXXI. The further our memories carry us back through the series of past\ntimes, we find this evil the greater; and from hence proceeds that ill\nopinion, which in early ages was generally entertained of kings. The\nRomans were struck with amazement, to find the Cappadocians, upon their\noffering to make their country a free republic, instantly request,\nthat they would permit them to remain under kingly government; which\namazement, was occasioned by their considering in a rigorous or strict\nsense, that mode of rule, as a mark or type of slavery. Cato said, this\nanimal which is called a king, is a great devourer of human flesh;\n_Hoc animal rex carnivorum est._ And Flavius Vopiscus, tells us of a\nRoman buffoon, who pleasantly and keenly remarked, that the effigies\nof all the good kings that had ever been known in the world, might be\ncarved on a ring. Plato, in his Georgiac dialogue, represents kings\nas appearing before Rhadamanthus in hell, loaded for the most part\nwith injustices, perjuries, and other wickedness. Aristotle, in his\nthird book on politics, recognizes as tyrannical, the exercise of the\nregal power, by all, or nearly all, the Asiatic princes; and Livy says,\nthat the most sagacious and penetrating Hannibal, never confided in\nthe promises of kings: _fidei regum nihil sane confisus_; a legate of\nthe Rhodians also, according to the said Livy, observed, that kings\nwere always desirous of making slaves of their subjects. Thus we have\nthe greatest reason to conclude, that it was a common practice with\nthe princes of those times, to pay no regard to any law, whenever an\nopportunity offered of augmenting their authority.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXXII. But we should not conclude that this was all done by main force,\nwithout the intervention of art or stratagem. The same contrivances,\nthe same artifices, which we read of in Machiavel, and which have been\npractised by the most crafty tyrants of these latter ages, were exerted\nin the early ones. Cast your eyes on Romulus, seeking for a specious\npretence of justice for taking away the life of his brother, in order\nto remove this obstacle to his reigning without the danger of a rival,\nand in security: view his successor, Numa Pompilius also, who was a\nmost consummate hypocrite, affecting exteriorly to appear religious\nand devout, and to pay a great respect to rites and ceremonies. He\npretended to receive visions and revelations from the goddess Egeria,\nin order that the Roman people, looking upon him as a man favoured in\nan especial manner by heaven, should not only not dare to entertain\nthoughts of dethroning him, but permit him to aggrandize himself at\nhis discretion; we have another example of the same sort of policy, in\nTullius Hostilius, who succeeded Numa, and introduced with great art,\nthose ostentatious outside appearances, which dazzle the eyes of the\nworld, and are the most efficacious means to make majesty formidable\nand respectable; for he likewise sought out deceitful pretences, for\nmaking war on the neighbouring states: we see Tarquin the Proud also,\navailing himself of the stratagem of his son Sextus, who, under the\npretence of being a fugitive from his father\u2019s cruelty, fled to, and\nentreated refuge among the Gabians, on whom, after their receiving him\nkindly, he artfully prevailed to make him their generalissimo, veiled\nwith an absolute power; in consequence of which, he was enabled to fell\nand betray them. He did so, and they became an easy prey to the Romans.\n\nXXIII. Is not that famous precept of Machiavel\u2019s, that with an enemy\nreduced to great straits or difficulties, you should take no middle\ncourse, but, according as you find it most for your interest, should\neither ruin him totally, or give him your hand to extricate him out\nof his danger; punctually conformable to the advice which Herennius\ngave to his son Pontius, who was general of the Samnites? When this\ngeneral had shut up the Roman army within the Caudine Forks, he sent\ninformation of it to his father, and at the same time desired to have\nhis advice, respecting how he should act by them. The old man answered,\nthat he should generously open the pass, and let them go free, without\nany condition or limitation whatever, that might be injurious to, or\naffect either their lives, their liberty, or their honour. Pontius,\nand all the principal people of the republic who were with the army,\nbelieved, that Herennius had not well understood or considered the\ninformation that had been sent him, nor apprehended, that the whole\nRoman army were entirely at their mercy. They therefore sent other\nmessengers or deputies, with instructions to inform him minutely, of\nthe unhappy situation and state of the Roman army, whose lives, without\nremedy, were at their discretion and disposal. To this he answered,\nthat they should cut all their throats, and not spare a single man of\nthem. Two answers so diametrically opposite, made some of them suspect\nthat the old man was not in his right senses; but notwithstanding this\nsuspicion, as they had for many years respected him as the oracle and\nsoul of the republic, the major part of them began to conjecture, and\nnot without reason, that there was some mystery contained in these\ncontradictory replies, which they did not comprehend, or were not aware\nof; and they therefore desired, that he would come to the camp and\nexplain himself. He came accordingly, and told them his sentiments;\nwhich were, that they should adopt one or other of the extremes,\nand either gain their affections by an heroic act of generosity, or\nextirpate them totally, to prevent their ever being able to revenge\nthemselves for whatever indignity they should impose on them. Pontius\ndid not follow the advice of the old man, but took a middle way, which\nwas, to spare their lives, but dismiss them with the loss of their\nhonour, by obliging consuls, officers, and soldiers, to submit to the\nsignal disgrace of _passing under the yoke_. The result of this was,\nwhat might easily have been foreseen and expected, the Romans, stung\nwith the ignominy they had undergone, could not divert their thoughts\nfrom meditating revenge, which they after a while determined to take;\nand breaking through the stipulated conditions, they renewed the war\nwith stronger army, and totally routed and overthrew the Samnites.\n\nXXIV. We must allow, that the determination Pontius took was imprudent;\nbut it does not follow from thence, that we should approve the advice\nof Herennius; for although the first was insecure, the other was cruel\nin extreme. He might have fallen upon other expedients, better suited\nand proportioned to the nature of the case; such as taking hostages,\nand before permitting the army to depart, obliging them to deliver\ninto their possession, certain towns and districts as pledges, for\nthe faithful performance of their engagements; but the supposing that\nthe faith of stipulations or compacts, would have more influence upon\na vain, proud, warlike people, than the indignation conceived for a\ngross affront offered to their honour, was very idle, and very silly\nconfidence.\n\nXXV. Neither, as I have already said, do I think there was any security\nin the extreme benign advice of Herennius; for with the Romans,\nambition was more powerful than public faith, or the obligations of\ngratitude. A good testimony to this truth, was their behaviour to the\nNumantians, which was a true sample of the politics of those times.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXVI. I say of those times, to avoid censuring the Romans singly; for\nin Greece also, the not performing a promise given, or even sworn to,\nwhen the observance of it clashed with the interest of the state, was\nso common, that a sovereign for having done it, was hardly looked upon\nto have impeached his character as a just prince, or an honest man.\n\nXXVII. Agesilaus, king of Sparta, was one of the most celebrated\nprinces of antiquity; and although he was an eminent warrior, placed\nhis principal glory in being thought a lover of virtue and justice. To\none who called the sovereign of Persia the great monarch, he answered\nsharply, _he who is not better than me, is not a greater king than\nmyself_. He was exceedingly sober, patient of labour, and such a\nrespecter of the Gods, that he would not permit even his enemies, who\nhad taken refuge in the temples, to be forced from their sanctuary;\nand was besides, so averse to dress and finery, that there was scarce\na soldier in his army, more humbly or simply cloathed than himself.\nBut this saint of Paganism, made not the least scruple of violating\nthe public faith, when by the violation he expected to derive some\nadvantage to the state. By means of one of his emissaries he, in\nprofound peace, surprized and seized on the city of Thebes; and\nalthough in Sparta, the justice of the action was somewhat disputed, as\nsoon as it was shewn, that the keeping the place was of importance to\nthe kingdom, they immediately consented to send a garrison to maintain\nthe citadel. In his expedition to Egypt, he abandoned king Taco, in\nwhose pay and service he and his Laced\u00e6monian troops were engaged, and\njoined the rebel Nectanebus, without making any other excuse for this\ntreachery, than that he found it for the interest of his country.\n\nXXVIII. Aristides, the Cato of the Athenians, who by way of eminence\nthey called the Just, having caused his country to swear to a certain\nthing, and having in the name of it sworn to it himself likewise,\npersuaded them afterwards to violate the oath, because the observance\nof it would be productive of some inconvenience to them. Plutarch, who\ncites Theophrastus as his author, adds, that to serve his country he\ndid many iniquitous things. Such were the just men of Greece, and such\nwas their policy.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXIX. I well know, that in the opinion of many people, this political\nmoney is current in our times, and that it is frequently said, the\nwords and promises of those who have the supreme management of affairs,\nshould not remain in force for any longer time than they are found not\nto clash with the interests of the state. I have read of an Italian\nprince, who, when he was negotiating a peace with a powerful monarch,\nrequested among other conditions, the restitution of a large part of\nhis territories, which had been taken from him during the war, to which\nrequest, the ambassador of the monarch answered, _what reliance can\nthe king my master place on the fidelity of your highness, in case he\ngives you all you ask?_ to which the prince replied:--Assure him, that\nI will pledge my word to him to fulfil my engagements, not in quality\nof a sovereign, for in that capacity, whenever favourable opportunities\noffer, it behoves me to sacrifice every thing to my grandeur, and the\ninterests of my state; but as a gentleman, and a man of honour.\n\nXXX. But after all, this assurance contains in it a large portion of\nhyperbole; for I firmly believe, the majority of the princes of this\nday, are scrupulous about breaking the treaties they have entered\ninto; although it be true, that at every turn, you will hear them\nreciprocally accusing each other of being the infringers of them; but\nit seldom happens, that either of the parties can so clearly make\nout the justice of his cause, as not to leave room for a difference\nof opinion on the subject. Thus they both go upon probabilities,\nand also upon the strength of probabilities, accuse each other. If\neither of them happens to be a person of so enlarged a conscience, as\nknowingly, and without scruple, to trample on all the obligations of\nequity, justice, and public faith, he endeavours notwithstanding to\nsave appearances, and to seek some specious pretence for his behaviour.\nThis shews, that he is ashamed of what he does, and would gladly hide\nthe odium of his actions for fear of being pointed at, which would not\nhappen, if breaking their words was so common among princes, and so\nlittle scrupled by them, as some would persuade us.\n\nXXXI. I know very well, that an anonymous French author, asserted a few\nyears ago, that Don Ferdinand the Catholic, being told that Louis the\ntwelfth of France complained he had twice deceived him, replied, _By\nthe Lord! the French man lies, for it was not twice, but ten times that\nI deceived him._ If such a thing ever happened, we may suppose, that\nour Don Ferdinand prided himself in perfidy. But these are mere gossips\ntales, and such as prudent people pay no regard to. I suppose, that\nbefore this joke or tale, could arrive at the ears of the French man\nwho wrote it, from the mouth of Don Ferdinand, it must necessarily pass\nthrough the mouths of a hundred different people; and we may conclude,\nthat out of that hundred, at least ninety of them were more capable of\nframing it, than Don Ferdinand was of uttering it.\n\nXXXII. But admitting this was true, all that can be inferred from it\nis, that among a great number of princes of our times, here and there\none of them, has without shame or blushing, practised lying and deceit\nin the affairs of state; whereas among the antients, this was very\nfrequent and common; for all, or nearly all of them, seem to have\nstamped on their hearts, that sentence of Chorebus: _Dolus, an virtus,\nqius in hoste requirat?_ or some other like it.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nXXXIII. But our surprize will cease at their acting in this manner,\nwhen we reflect, that that great philosopher and oracle of antiquity,\nthe divine Plato, by his doctrine, taught, that it was lawful for\nthose who had the management of public affairs, to lye, whenever it\ncould be of use to the interests of the state. _Igitur rempublicam\nadministrantibus pr\u00e6cipue, si quibus aliis, mentiri licet, vel hostium,\nvel civium, causa ad communem civitatis utilitatem. Reliquis autem \u00e0\nmendacio abstinendum est._ (lib. III. de Repub.) If the princes of\nantiquity had so able a master, and one of so great authority, what\nloss could they be at for want of a Machiavel?\n\nXXXIV. It is true, that Plato only allowed lying to be lawful, in cases\nwhere it might be conducive to advance the public good; Machiavel\nadvises it, whenever it can be useful to serve the particular interests\nof a tyrant. Thus Plato was a bad moralist, and Machiavel a bad man.\nBut this difference in the character of the matters, does not prevent\ntyrants from making the same use of the doctrine of Plato, for the\npurpose of serving their particular conveniencies, that disinterested\nprinces may do for the good of the public, because a tyrant, always\nendeavours to make the people believe, that every thing he does to\nadvance his own grandeur, is transacted with a view of promoting their\ninterest; and if at any time he is detected in a lye, he will pretend\nthat he lyed for the public good, and quote the doctrine of Plato to\njustify his conduct; but in case this doctrine of Plato\u2019s should appear\ntoo limited or confined for tyrants, as in truth it is, they may be\nsupplied with a much more copious and enlarged system, in the writings\nof Plato\u2019s disciple Aristotle.\n\nXXXV. I do not mean to say, that Aristotle was an abettor of perverse\npolicy, or that he wrote with a design of instructing tyrants in the\nmethods by which they might make themselves absolute, and support\nthemselves by tyrannic rule, but only mean to declare, that in the\nfifth book of his Politics, cap. 11. he did it without intending it,\nor without being aware that he was doing it. In this chapter, which\nis a pretty long one, not only those two famous maxims, _Oderint dum\nmetuant, Divide ut imperes_, are exactly pointed out and applied; but\nall, or very near all the others, which are published by the Florentine\nauthor, in his book intitled Il Principe, are to be found in this\nchapter of Aristotle\u2019s. I have never seen Machiavel\u2019s book, but only\nthe capital maxims of it, as they are cited by other authors; but hear\nHermanus Conringius, who has read both that and Aristotle. He says,\nNicholas Machiavel, that trumpeter of political arts, cannot, nor\ndoes not, teach his prince any arcana or secrets, for promoting or\nmaintaining tyrannic dominion, which many hundred years before, had\nnot been taught by Aristotle in his fifth book of Politics; and it is\nnot improbable, but that cunning teacher and promoter of wickedness,\ntranscribed from Aristotle, although he concealed the plagiary, all\nthat he published in his own book; but there is a remarkable difference\nin the application the two masters make of their doctrine, which is,\nthat Machiavel advises all princes without distinction, to pursue\nand practise what he teaches; whereas Aristotle declared more justly\nand frankly, his to be fit and necessary for tyrants only. (Conring.\nIntroduct. ad Politic. Aristotelis, cap. III.)\n\nXXXVI. But let the truth prevail. I say the same of both Aristotle and\nMachiavel, which is, that neither of them were the inventors of systems\nof perverse policy; for that they copied them, from the actions of the\nkings of Persia and Egypt; from the Archelaus\u2019s and Philips of Macedon;\nfrom the Phalaris\u2019s, the Agathocles\u2019s, the Hierones, and Dionysius\u2019s\nof Sicily; from the Perianders, from the Pisistratus\u2019s, and other\npolitical pests of Greece.\n\n\nSECT. X.\n\nXXXVII. Nor can I perceive such profundity or acuteness, in these so\nmuch applauded maxims, either of Aristotle, or Machiavel, as may render\nit worth the while of a politician of special perspicuity, to bestow\nmuch time in reading or studying them; as a moderate understanding,\nwithout their help, will enable a man to acquire all they teach; nor is\nthere any thing necessary to carry them into execution, but a hardened\nand a perverted heart.\n\nXXXVIII. The maxim, that a tyrant must be supported by making himself\nfeared, and not trust to the love of his subjects, is as clear as\nday-light; for how can those, whom he is continually oppressing with a\nhard slavery, have any love for him? And it follows of course, that he\nmust treat them as he would enemies, and endeavour to keep them poor,\nas every one knows, that the more you impoverish your enemy, the more\nyou deprive him of the means of injuring you.\n\nXXXIX. It is also an immediate consequence deducible from the same\nprinciple, that it will be proper for him to put more confidence in\nstrangers, than his own subjects; for who but a stupid person, would\nconfide in one, who he knows is fired with indignation against him?\nThe necessity of keeping a number of emissaries in such a situation,\nto inform him of the words and actions of those whom he suspects are\nnot his friends, would occur to every rustic, and is what is daily\npractised by rustics in their way; for if one of these suspects any\nman to be his enemy, he is continually observing his conduct, watching\nhis motions, and as far as he is able, prying into his designs. The\nadvantages of religious and virtuous appearances, to command respect,\nare manifest to every young girl; and the art of fomenting discords,\nand encouraging opposite factions in a state, in order to preserve the\nbalance of power equal between them, may be learned from the tumblers\nand rope-dancers, who support themselves, by keeping the weights at the\nopposite ends of their poles in equilibrio.\n\nXL. It was said of Catherine of Medicis, who with the nicest caution,\nand greatest vigilance, continued to put this contrivance in practice\nfor a long time, that she studied Machiavel every day, and that she had\nalways his book in her hand, or else laying by her, which occasioned a\nsatyrical writer to call it the New Testament of the queen; but perhaps\nthis was said of her, on account of her being obliged to have recourse\nto the before-named arts. But in order to do this, what necessity\nwas there for her having such a master at her elbow? The posture and\nsituation of affairs, pointed out sufficiently to a person of the\nabilities and penetration of that queen, the utility of dispensing some\nfavours to the heretics, and by conciliating their good-will, causing\ntheir weight to serve as a counterpoize to the power of the catholics,\nof whom she was jealous and apprehensive, but always taking care at\nthe same time to declare and profess, that in point of faith she was a\ncatholic, to prevent the affections of that party from being weaned and\nestranged from her.\n\nXLI. There have not been wanting those, who have attributed the same\npolicy to Constantine the Great, who, at the same time that he was\nfavouring Christianity, kept Gentiles in his ministry, and filled\nposts of importance with them. But this we should suppose was an act\nof necessity, because it was incumbent on him to proceed with caution,\nin so great and arduous a work, as that of the conversion of the whole\nRoman empire. If he had endeavoured to beat down Paganism at a blow,\nand by open force and violence, he might possibly never have been able\nto accomplished it.\n\n\nSECT. XI.\n\nXLII. I say the same, of all the other rules of practices of tyrannic\nand deceitful policy. What ability or penetration does it require,\nto invade with an armed force, the territories of a neighbouring\nprince or republic, and surprize some of the fortified towns of those,\nwho thinking themselves secure, and relying upon the faith of an\nestablished peace, are off their guard, and not prepared to resist\nthe attack? To accomplish this, requires nothing more, than for a man\nto become compleatly callous to the fear of God, and to have lost all\nsense of shame of the world. To find a plausible pretence for doing it,\nis the most easy thing imaginable, for a child of ten years old, is\nnever at a loss for such a one, whenever he is disposed from motives\nof interest, or through fickleness, to break a little friendship or\nconnexion he has engaged in.\n\nXLIII. The barbarous maxim, of getting rid of brothers or relations,\nto remove the most dangerous apprehensions of, or incitements to,\ninsurrections, does not require ingenuity to execute it, but cruelty\nonly. We see the Ottoman emperors have practised it in a variety of\nways; some have taken away the lives of their brothers and relations,\nothers have deprived them of sight, and others of liberty, by shutting\nthem up in close confinement. They were all equally apprized of the\nimportance of preventing the danger, but they were not all equally\nfierce and cruel. Thus in proportion to the degrees of their barbarity,\nor their fears, their rigour in the practice of the maxim, was\ngreater or less. Mahomed the third, when he mounted the throne, not\nsatisfied with putting to death his whole twenty-one brothers, ordered\nten Sultanas, likewise, who were then pregnant, to be thrown into\nthe sea and drowned; whereas others, have contented themselves with\nconfining those who were related to them in a prison, with reasonable\naccommodations appertaining to it. This great difference in their\nconduct, did not proceed from their distinct political ideas, but from\nthe diversity of their tempers and dispositions.\n\nXLIV. As we are now treating on this subject, this seems a proper\noccasion, for taking notice of a common error and opinion, which\nprevails among many people with respect to the Ottoman emperors, viz.\nthat the bloody maxim of sacrificing their own brothers to their\nsafety, in order to their possessing the throne in security, is\npeculiar to the Ottoman race. This barbarous and atrocious policy,\nis much more ancient than the stock of Ottoman princes, and was more\ngenerally practised by other royal families than by them. Plutarch,\nspeaking of those kings who were the successors of Alexander, and\namong whom the vast conquests of that hero were divided, says, that\ncruel maxim was so universally adopted by their descendants, that they\nconsidered it as an invariable political axiom, and as a self-evident\nfirst principle, indispensably necessary to be adhered to, and which\nfollowed of course, with as much certainty as geometrical postulata.\n_Fratrum parricidia, ut petitiones geometr\u00e6 fumunt, sic concedebantur,\nhabitanturque, communis qu\u00e6dam petitio ad securitatem, & Regia._\nPlutarch. in Demetrio.\n\nXLV. I do not know whether the soil and climate of Asia is not more\nnaturally adapted for the production of these political monsters, than\nthat of Europe, for we have seen in all times, the princes of the\nAsiatic regions, more addicted to pursue tyrannic and cruel maxims\nthan those of Europe. By confining one\u2019s attention immediately to\nthe present times, what appears to me is, that the Europeans, who\nfor the most part have some knowledge of Machiavel, commonly found\ntheir governments upon principles of justice and moderation; and that\nthe oriental people, who do not know that there ever was such a man\nas Machiavel in the world, most frequently, practise the very same\nperverse maxims, which this master of wickedness taught; and I think\nthe Chinese, are the only orientals who are an exception to this\ngeneral rule.\n\n\nSECT. XII.\n\nXLVI. I would not have it understood by what I have said, that I think\nthe reading of Machiavel would not be pernicious; for it would without\ndoubt be so to many, and especially if their dispositions incline\nthem to the side of ambition. There have been, and ever will be, an\ninfinite number of tyrants, who never heard of, or read Machiavel\u2019s\nbook, intituled The Prince; but that book may probably have made\ntyrants of many, who never would have been such without perusing it;\nand it would have the same effect in the hands of a weak prince, that\nthe mouth of an evil counsellor would have applied to his ear.\n\nXLVII. One of the most atrocious and treacherous acts ever recorded in\nhistory, and one that has made the greatest noise in the world, was,\nthe unworthy putting to death of the great Pompey, which was occasioned\nintirely, by young Ptolemy who was then king of Egypt, having at the\ntime it was committed, a Machiavel by his side, in the person of the\ndepraved Theodotus.\n\nXLVIII. Pompey, after being routed in the battle of Pharsalia, and\nbecoming a fugitive from C\u00e6sar and his fortune, thought no asylum could\nbe more convenient and safe for him, than the kingdom of Egypt; because\nthe prince who then reigned there, was indebted to him, for the great\nfavour of having reinstated his father on that throne, from whence\nhe had been cast down by his own subjects. On the confidence of this\nservice, he steered for Alexandria, and upon entering the port, sent\nto inform the king of his arrival, and beg that protection from him,\nwhich he had so just a right to demand. The king summoned a council\nto deliberate on the matter, in which the majority of votes, were for\ndoing what was honourable and right, and gave it as their opinion,\nthat the unfortunate hero should be entertained and protected. But\nTheodotus, who had got the ascendency over the young king, and who had\nmore influence with him than every body else, suggested to him, that\nhe should not only not grant Pompey his protection, but that he should\ntake away his life also.\n\nXLIX. But let us hear from Lucan, the reasons of convenience, on which\nthat depraved politician grounded his advice for perpetrating so horrid\nand atrocious an act of treachery, in order, that by comparing them\nwith those of Machiavel, we may discern, whether the principles of\nthe Florentine master were well understood in those times. But it is\nproper to observe, that Lucan makes the eunuch Photinus the author of\nthe advice, instead of Theodotus; whereas other writers do not make\nPhotinus the adviser, but assisted by the general Aquilas, the executor\nof the wickedness; and some others again, attribute to this last, a\ngreat part, if not the whole of the suggestion.\n\nL. But whether Theodotus, Aquilas, or Photinus, was the first who\nsuggested the treacherous cruelty, is not material to the main\nquestion. The arguments used with Ptolemy, to incite him to the\ndeed, were as follow: That great as his father\u2019s obligations were to\nPompey, he ought to consider, that he owed more to himself than he\ndid to him; that Fortune had declared itself in favour of C\u00e6sar, and\nagainst Pompey, and that it would be the height of imprudence to take\npart with that side, to whom Fortune was averse; that although it was\ntrue, the affording Pompey an asylum had the appearance of an honest\naction, still, princes ought not to attend to what was honest, but to\nwhat was useful; that the monarch, who is desirous of confining his\noperations within the limits of justice, is more a slave of the laws,\nthan a master of his dominions; that the supreme power is paramount to\nall law, nor can it acknowledge any subjection; that it was beyond a\ndoubt, the affording Pompey protection in his kingdom, would soon bring\non him, the invincible arms of C\u00e6sar, and the power of the whole Roman\nempire; against which attack, he would be unable to make the slightest\nresistance; that he already, as far as his ability went, had complied\nwith his obligations to Pompey, by wishing that he might be victorious;\nbut now that C\u00e6sar had won the day, he ought to attach himself to\ndie conqueror, and endeavour to court his favour, by taking away the\nlife of Pompey; that pursuing the medium, of neither receiving nor\ndestroying him, would be the worst resolution they could take, for that\nby such a determination, they would lose the useful, without attaining\nthe honest; that C\u00e6sar would always look upon him as an enemy, who\nhaving had it in his power, should neglect to destroy his rival,\nalthough all the rest of the world should regard him as ungrateful,\nfor refusing to protect his benefactor. It was also suggested, that\nit would not be difficult to assign a religious motive for destroying\nPompey, and to cover the cruelty of the action under that pretence; for\nit might be alledged, that he was sacrificed to the goddess of Fortune,\nwho had already declared herself adverse to the unhappy hero; that this\nsacrifice seemed not only to be dictated by religion, but justice also;\nfor that protecting Pompey under such circumstances, in the kingdom\nof Egypt, and in the manner he wished, would infallibly, by provoking\nthe indignation of C\u00e6sar, bring on it ruin and desolation, and that he\nought therefore to be proceeded against with fire and sword, as against\nan avowed enemy of the state.\n\nLI. I ask now, if Nicholas Machiavel, placed at the ear of the king\nof Egypt in that conjuncture, and under the like circumstances, could\nhave said more? Thus there always were Machiavels, and they were always\npernicious and did mischief, when concerned in the administration of\npublic affairs, not only to the people at large, but most commonly to\nthe princes themselves, whose exaltation or security they endeavoured\nto promote, by the practice and adoption of impious and cruel maxims.\n\nLII. I believe, that although all who read the relation we have\njust been discussing, will abominate the advice of Theodotus, as\nbase, tyrannical, violent, inhuman, and atrocious; there are many of\nthose who attend to nothing but temporal convenience, will think it\nsalutary; but observe, that instead of this, it was extremely hurtful\nand injurious. They perpetrated the murder of the great Pompey, by\nadding to the act of cruelty, another of treachery, which was coaxing\nhim to come ashore, by an assurance, that the king had engaged his\nroyal word that his life should be safe. What was the result of all\nthis? That Ptolemy obtained the hoped for friendship of C\u00e6sar? That\nTheodotus, Aquilas, and Photinus, were rewarded for the great service\nthey had done him, by freeing him for ever from the apprehension of\nso formidable an enemy as Pompey? No, nothing of this sort fell out\nin consequence of the base act; but it happened, that in a few days\nafter, Ptolemy in a most tragical manner, lost his kingdom and his\nlife, and that the three authors and executors of the murder of Pompey,\nTheodotus, Aquilas, and Photinus, died miserably; which consequences\nare produced, either by impious maxims tending naturally to bring on\nmisfortunes, or by the interposition of the Supreme Providence, which\nsuperintends and watches over human affairs, and with an especial\ndesign, fulminates his wrath on the authors of such wickedness, in a\nmanner, that serves to make them scarecrows to terrify, as well as\nexamples to warn others.\n\n\nSECT. XIII.\n\nLIII. I am fully persuaded, that if the case on which the council of\nking Ptolemy deliberated, had been referred to the politicians of\nour Europe, and in our age, that not one of them would have advised\nthe putting to death of Pompey; but it is likely there would have\nbeen very few of them so generous, as to recommend the receiving and\nprotecting him. In truth, although not only generous, but hazardous\nresolutions, may be appendages to the punctilios of princes, and may\nspring from that source, they are very rarely suggested to them by\ntheir counsellors. Thus, if a point of this sort was to be discussed\nby the council of a king now-a-days, the consideration of the danger\nof protecting Pompey on the one hand, and the scandal of sacrificing\nhim to the resentment of C\u00e6sar on the other, would most probably have\ndetermined them to pursue the middle way, of neither entertaining\nnor injuring him, and would have left to his own election, the choice\nof another asylum, and to his fortune, the good or bad exit from his\ntroubles; nor do I doubt but that in the court of Ptolemy there were\nsome, and possibly the major part, of this opinion. Notwithstanding\nthis, if I had been a member of that council, I should have given my\nvote for the most benign, not only as the most honest, but the most\nuseful and beneficial resolve they could have fallen upon; and I even\nthink, it would have had great weight with the king, if any one of\nthose who assisted at it, had recommended to him the protection of\nPompey, for the reasons, supported with some such arguments as follow,\nwhich altogether I shall call\n\n    A declamation on behalf of Pompey.\n\nLIV. Whoever tells you, sir, that from an apprehension of C\u00e6sar,\nyou should destroy Pompey, would persuade you to fear men more than\nthe gods. I will suppose C\u00e6sar to be so unjust, as to be capable of\nthanking you for putting Pompey to death, and of being irritated\nagainst you for not doing it. This same act of flattery to C\u00e6sar, is\nso palpable an offence against heaven, that he who advises you to it,\ncannot possibly entertain a doubt of its being such; for if he should\ntell you, that by such a conduct you would conform to the will of the\ngods, who have declared themselves favourable to C\u00e6sar, he would\nadvance a sophistry unworthy to be heard in so august and solemn an\nassembly; for what delirium is it to imagine, that we may continue to\noppress those, who groan under the weight of adverse fortune, upon a\npretence, of co-operating with the Supreme Providence? According to\nthis mode of reasoning, it would be right to give a sick man poison\ninstead of medicine, instead of binding up the sores of the wounded, to\ncut and stab him afresh, and instead of succouring the poor, to take\nfrom him the little he has. The gods are able to make people unhappy,\nfor this is a prerogative annexed to their sovereign power, which\nthey sometimes exert, by way of exercising the patience and constancy\nof those they afflict, and with a view of affording to others an\nopportunity of manifesting their clemency, and of administering to the\nmisfortunes of the distressed. Thus he who lends a compassionate hand\nto assist those whom the gods have thought fit to make unhappy, does\nnot counteract their dispensations, but rather shews a compliance with,\nand an obedience to, the immutable principles of their laws.\n\nLV. To insinuate to you, in order to make Pompey a delinquent, that by\nseeking an asylum here, he sought the ruin of your kingdom, amounts\nto the same thing, as saying he meditates burning the temple, who\nfrom the fury of his enemies, takes refuge at the altars of it. Pompey\ndoes not pretend to compel, but only intreats you; neither, in his\nintreaty, does he point out the bounds to which you should extend your\nprotection to him; nor although he should point them out, could any\nconsequences be deduced from thence to your disadvantage; for that\ncannot take away from you, neither now, nor at any time after he shall\nhave put himself into your hands, the right of deliberating upon, and\nafter a just estimation of your power, your obligation, and your risk,\nof determining to act by him, as the urgency of your affairs may make\nit necessary. Furthermore, if you reflect, you will find that he has a\nright to demand your protection, although it may be dangerous for you\nto afford it him. You owe to him the sceptre you now sway, which he\nrestored to your father; nor is the probable hazard of the same crown,\nwhich was certainly restored to you, an adequate recompence to the man\nwho restored it.\n\nLVI. Having hitherto endeavoured to shew, that it would be just and\nright to protect Pompey; my next argument shall be to prove, that it\nwould be convenient and advantageous also; although I am very well\naware, that in the eyes of an ordinary politician, this will appear an\nextravagant paradox.\n\nLVII. I shall begin with asking, what opinion ought we to entertain of\nC\u00e6sar, to think that he would look with benign eyes, and a grateful\nheart, on a horrible act of perfidy, although it was committed to\ndisincumber him of that enemy, who has already disputed, and may\nperhaps contend again with him for the empire? It seems to me, sir,\nthat this is the light in which it is laboured to represent C\u00e6sar to\nyou; but if he truly is not such a sort of man, the treachery which\nTheodotus proposes to you, will be very useless; but I will add, that\nalthough he is that sort of man, you will not avoid, but rather augment\nthe danger of losing your crown, by being guilty of it. If C\u00e6sar is\nblinded by the passion of ambition to such an extreme degree, that it\nwould excite him, for the sake of gratifying it, to trample every sort\nof duty and obligation under foot; this vile piece of service, will\nnot exempt or protect you from his despoiling you of your kingdom;\nhis ambition, if this is his only idol, will prompt him to extend his\ndominion by all possible ways and means, whether just or unjust; and\nthe opulent kingdom of Egypt, is not so contemptible an acquisition,\nthat an ambitious man will forbear to seize it, for the sake of\nrewarding a perfidious one with its possession.\n\nLVII. The worst is, that by following the advice of Theodotus, you will\nfurnish C\u00e6sar with a specious pretence for usurping your kingdom; and\ntherefore I say, that so far from avoiding the danger of losing it,\nby adopting his plan, you would increase the risk. That C\u00e6sar is very\nsagacious and penetrating, is well known to all the world; and although\nhe might be glad to hear that Pompey was put to death; after the deed\nwas executed, he would affect to lament it. He, in appearance at least,\nwould detest the treachery of receiving Pompey into Egypt, under a\npromise of security upon the royal word, for the purpose of taking\naway his life. From this equivocal or critical state of C\u00e6sar\u2019s mind,\nthere might be but a short transition to his taking the resolution\nof depriving you of your crown, and perhaps your life also. He might\ndo it for the sake of gratifying his ambition, and endeavouring to\npersuade the world, that he was actuated by no other motive than that\nof punishing the treacherous murderer of Pompey; and although he might\nforesee, the Romans would never believe that this was his motive; he\nwell knows they would applaud the action, as they idolized Pompey while\nliving, and will adore his memory when dead. Other nations, who on\naccount of their being less penetrating, may not see into the artful\npolicy of C\u00e6sar, will only contemplate in your ruin, a punishment\ncorrespondent to your crime, and will admire the heroic justice of\nC\u00e6sar, who chastised the wicked act, although the commission of it was\nnever so convenient to him. Consider, sir, whether C\u00e6sar will lose so\nfine an opportunity of flattering the Roman people, of recommending\nhimself to the world for a just man, and of adding to the Imperial\ncrown he is fabricating, the precious gem of this kingdom.\n\nLIX. We know that C\u00e6sar, in all his actions and designs, has proposed\nto himself Alexander of Macedon as the only example he would wish to\nimitate. We are informed, that having in a temple of Spain, seen a\nstatue of that hero, it raised in his imagination a contemplation of\nhis glory, and caused him to shed tears of envy. Attend now, sir, to\nwhat I am about to say to you. Immediately after Darius was defeated by\nAlexander in the battle of Arbela, that unhappy king, who was become\na fugitive from the conqueror, was treacherously murdered by Bessus\nthe governor of Bactria, who thought by putting him to death, that\nhe should gain the favour of Alexander. But what followed? Why, that\nAlexander caused him to be arrested, and torn to pieces by his own\nimmediate order as some tell us, or as others say, delivered him to\nOxathres the brother of Darius, to be dealt with as he thought proper.\nConsider, sir, how great an affinity there is between the battles of\nArbela and Pharsalia, between the fortunes of Pompey and Darius, and\nbetween the genius and tempers of C\u00e6sar and Alexander. How much is it\nto be dreaded, that if you act by Pompey, as Bessus did by Darius, that\nC\u00e6sar will do by you, as Alexander did by Bessus? He will find himself\nprecisely in the same circumstances of Alexander, and will, without\ndoubt, be strangely flattered with the idea of imitating him, and\nespecially in an action, which he knows was applauded by all the world.\nWe find ourselves also in the city of Alexandria, which was founded\nby, and took its name from, Alexander; and even this circumstance, may\ncontribute to augment your danger, because, if ever he should think fit\nto visit this city, it would revive in his imagination the idea of its\nfounder.\n\nLX. I very well know, that although C\u00e6sar should be the man we have\nhitherto supposed him, still the protection of Pompey is not free from\ndanger. The Roman legions, in search of this illustrious fugitive,\nwill naturally present themselves to our imagination, destroying with\nwarlike fury, the country that harbours him. But if, in whatever\ncourse we pursue, we must unavoidably encounter rocks and quicksands,\nwhat does human prudence dictate in such a case? that we should do\nwhat\u2019s right and just, and leave the event to the disposal of the gods.\nIt is beyond a doubt, that the power of C\u00e6sar is great; but his fortune\nis no less dependant on heaven than ours, and the ray of Jupiter\npays no more respect to the proud palace, than to the humble cabin.\nThus those to whom heaven is most propitious, are likely to be most\nsuccessful.\n\nLXI. Nor need we depend solely for our security on the special\nprovidence of the gods, as we have resources in the ordinary course of\nhuman events, and in the common influence of second causes. C\u00e6sar is\nyet at a great distance, and as he will have much to settle both in\nItaly and Greece, in order to secure the fruits of his late victory,\nit will be probably some time before he will find himself at leisure\nto visit Egypt. During that interval, we may be employed in modeling\nand disciplining our troops; they are not few in number, and we may\nadd new recruits to them; and to make the Egyptian troops equal to the\nbest in the world, nothing more is necessary, than that they should be\nproperly trained, and be commanded by a good general; because when we\nhad such a one in the person of our famous Sesostris, they conquered\nand triumphed over the principal regions of Asia, as the ruins of the\ncolumns that prince erected, and which time has thrown down, testify.\nNobody disputes Pompey\u2019s being, if not the greatest soldier in the\nworld, at least equal to the greatest. His victories have acquired\nhim the epithet of great, which is a title C\u00e6sar never attained. We\nhave then in him, the general we want; nor ought his reputation to be\nlessened by the victory C\u00e6sar lately obtained over him; for besides\nhis commanding a motley army, collected from, and composed of various\nnations, he was but little or ill obeyed in that war; and this is an\nevil, for which we have a remedy in our own power, by committing the\nwhole military government to the discretion and direction of Pompey.\nIf he finds himself not in a condition or situation to attack with a\nprospect of victory, he will stand on the defensive, and preserve his\ntroops, which is the conduct he wished to have pursued in Greece. We\nmay also hope for many advantages from time; as in the interval of our\nrecess, succours may arrive to Pompey from all the world; for the whole\nRoman empire, except the troops immediately in his pay, are enemies to\nC\u00e6sar; and although we should not be able to assemble an army, capable\nof resisting C\u00e6sar, his success will not be quite certain. The whole\nRoman republic which commands the world, groans with affliction, under\nthe intolerable sensation, occasioned by the suppression of their\nliberty; and it would be very extraordinary, if among the millions of\npeople of which it is composed, there should not be found some one\ndesperate enough, to sacrifice his own life, for the sake of redeeming\nhis country. Every man who arrives at despising, or setting no value on\nhis own life, may have that of C\u00e6sar in his power; for one concealed\npoignard, or one disguised dose of poison administered at his table,\nwould be more dangerous and fatal to him, than fifty thousand lances in\nthe open field. The instances of Romans, who have offered themselves\nvoluntary victims to the idol of fame, or the good of their country,\nare numerous; and perhaps C\u00e6sar at this time, has some one near his\nperson, waiting for an opportunity to repeat the same sacrifice.\n\nLXII. There remains to us also another crutch of hope whereon to rest,\nthat is, the unwholesomeness of our climate. The air of \u00c6gypt, which\nis very unsalutary to the natives, is much more so to strangers. The\nsoldiers of C\u00e6sar were born under, and have served in climates, which\nwere very different from ours. How natural then is it to suppose, that\nby being detained some time in this country, the visitation of an\nepidemical disorder may either demolish or incapacitate them!\n\nLXIII. If by all, or any of these means, which are very probable\nones, you should be enabled to protect and preserve Pompey, you would\nmake yourself, sir, the most glorious prince in the world. The Romans\nwould adore you, as the vindicator and defender of their liberty, and\nwould look upon this kingdom, as the only temple which has afforded\nsanctuary to, and preserved their idol. Other nations will applaud your\ngenerous gratitude, and seeing how faithfully you have behaved to your\nbenefactor, there is no prince whatever, who will not be ready and\ndesirous to render you his services. What you may expect from Pompey,\nis not in my power to express, nor in my imagination to conceive.\n\nLXIV. But admitting, sir, that these well founded hopes should be\nfrustrated, and that heaven should continue to prosper the arms of\nC\u00e6sar, that Fortune should regulate the motions of its inconstant\nwheel, so as that it shall always turn in his favour; that we\nshould see the Roman legions batter down the walls of Alexandria,\nand afterwards be witnesses to the demolition of those of Memphis,\nand behold all the other cities of Lower \u00c6gypt in danger of being\ndestroyed; and that in consequence of this, we find ourselves under an\nabsolute necessity of capitulating with C\u00e6sar; which is the greatest\ndifficulty and distress, to which we can be driven by Fortune; but\nplease to observe, sir, that although you should be reduced to this\nnecessity, you would even then find your affairs in a better state,\nthan there is any probability of your finding them, provided you\nfollow the advice that has been given you by Theodotus. C\u00e6sar would\nrequire you to deliver up Pompey, and it is most likely would offer\nyou in return, the restitution of all he has conquered; for the whole\ncountry that is inundated by the Nile, would be of but little value\nto him, compared to the possession of a person, who by a thousand\naccidents, might have it in his power to overturn his whole empire.\nYou might then make this exchange, and remain master of your kingdom,\nand might justify yourself to all the world, by pleading the hard law\nof necessity as an excuse for what you did. But what infatuation, what\nmadness would it be, sir, for you to persuade yourself, that it would\nbe right at this time to put Pompey treacherously to death, without\nmore advantage to yourself, than what you might obtain hereafter, by\ndelivering him up without infamy? I have said without more advantage,\nand I ought to add to it with greater danger. If you commit so base an\naction, it is probable that C\u00e6sar, either from motives of virtue, or\nexcited to it by hypocrisy, will punish you severely. If you think\nhim generous, you must conclude that he will be extremely irritated\nagainst you, both for your cruelty, and your ingratitude, and because\nyou offered him a provoking indignity, by supposing him capable of\naccepting a treachery for a compliment; and because also, you deprived\nhim of a precious opportunity, of manifesting his clemency to Pompey\nin distress. If you consider him only as an ambitious and profound\npolitician, you may suppose he will act the same part from motives of\ndissimulation, that he would have acted from motives of generosity, and\nto gain credit with the world, would treat you as a delinquent. You\nwill have none of this to apprehend, when, forced to it by necessity,\nyou find yourself obliged to deliver up Pompey, because in this last\ncase, the reasons for treating you in the manner we have just been\ndescribing will not exist, and because also it was never known, that\nC\u00e6sar failed to preserve the faith of his engagements, or that he\ntreated with cruelty, those he had vanquished.\n\nLXV. Nor should we omit, that C\u00e6sar\u2019s good opinion of your personal\nconduct to Pompey, may co-operate with his virtue, and have an\ninfluence on his policy. C\u00e6sar is not ignorant, that you have always\nbeen well affected to Pompey and his cause, and when C\u00e6sar finds Pompey\nhas perished by your hands, he will readily conclude, that you would\nhave dealt the same treatment to him, and with a better will, provided\nthe victor had been the vanquished. Consider now, what sort of an\nopinion C\u00e6sar must entertain of you, when he reflects, that your not\ncommitting the same treachery by him, is owing to his fortune, and not\nyour good-will, but that in spite of your malevolent disposition, his\nfortune has insured his safety.\n\nLXVI. The arguments, sir, with which I have proved, that without\nattending to the justice of the case, it was more for your interest\nto protect than to destroy Pompey, will serve to prove, that it will\nbe more beneficial to you to entertain him than to send him away. The\nsending him away, will not oblige C\u00e6sar, but will offend Pompey, and\nwill also make you appear ungrateful in the eyes of the whole world.\nPompey driven from this coast, will become a wanderer by sea and by\nland, in search of some safe hole or corner, wherein to hide himself,\ntill the desperation of one, or the conspiracy of many, shall deprive\nC\u00e6sar of his life; and in all probability, it will not be long, before\nthis contingent happens. If this event should fall out, Pompey would\nthen be master in much greater security than he ever was, of all\nthat C\u00e6sar at present enjoys. Consider now, if this should ever be\nthe case, what you would have reason to expect from his hands for\ndriving him out of your kingdom, after he had fixed the crown on the\nhead of your father. C\u00e6sar while he rules, as he is not ignorant that\nyou are disaffected to him, will always consider you as an enemy, who\nonly wants power or resolution to act openly as such. The service of\nyour abandoning Pompey, will not oblige him, and will debase you,\nfor he cannot fail to see clearly, that you did it through fear. His\ndislike to you will continue, and you will add to it, his contempt and\ndisesteem.\n\nLXVII. Further, if you receive and entertain Pompey benignly, you\nmay in consequence of doing it, give yourself credit to a certain\namount, for having both Pompey and C\u00e6sar in some degree under your\ninfluence, Pompey, in virtue of having him within your dominions; and\nC\u00e6sar, because he would be disposed to grant you very advantageous\nconditions, to prevail on you to deliver Pompey up. But I would not\nhave it understood, that I mean to recommend this, as what you ought\nto do; for my opinion is, that you should absolutely risk every thing\nto preserve Pompey, because you owe every thing to him. This is what\ntrue virtue dictates; but the predicament we are in at present, is that\nof consulting and considering, the reasons of state and policy for\nreceiving Pompey with a determination of defending him, and at the same\ntime not to extend that defence so far as to endanger the loss of your\nkingdom. It is true, this would not be doing enough to entitle you to\nthe applause of the world as a generous man; but it would be sufficient\nto prevent your being condemned as an unjust one. You would save your\nhonour, and not neglect your interest; and the judgment of heaven,\nwith respect to such a conduct, would coincide with that of the world.\nPompey would find himself under great obligations to you: C\u00e6sar might\nperhaps be irritated against you; but the emotions of his anger, would\nsoon give way to his own convenience, and even to yours. If the gods,\nas they are able to do, should prosper our arms under the command of\nPompey, all the world will respect your person, your virtue, and your\npower; and in spite of all C\u00e6sar can do, after you have sustained the\nlosses enumerated, which will be sufficient to excuse your conduct in\nthe eye of the world, you will at last, by delivering up Pompey, be\nable to repair all your damage.\n\nLXVIII. This speech appeared to me proper to introduce here, not\nonly for the entertainment of the reader, but for his benefit and\ncaution also; for having in this discourse set forth so many maxims\nand examples of tyrannic policy, I was apprehensive, that some\npeople of weak understandings, might persuade themselves, it would\nbe convenient and useful to practise them, if I did not at the same\ntime, together with the poison, administer the antidote, and shew by\nsuch an example, that the violent expedients which Machiavelianism\nproposes as convenient, are in general hurtful and pernicious, or at\nleast insecure and not to be relied on, and that in the very cases\nin which they are represented to be necessary, there are others that\nmight be hit upon, which would answer the purpose much better, and\nwhich would admit of reconciling the useful with the honest, provided\nthere is an upright will to adopt them, and a clear understanding to\nsearch out and apply them; so that what they call refined policy,\nis nothing more than a political dross or scum, and the production\nof gross geniuses, who do not search deeper than the superficies of\nthings. The Machiavelians, seldom attend to more than the immediate\neffect of the blow their malice meditates, without reflecting, that\nthe political machine is many times disposed to move in such a variety\nof directions, that it often runs back on, and crushes him who first\nset it in motion. I have said before, and I repeat it again, that the\ninstances of perverse politicians who have been happy for any length\nof time, are very few, and that those few, have seldom been blessed\nwith more than a transient ray of the splendor of fortune; and have\nbeen almost all shipwrecked by a sudden change of the wind, when they\nthought themselves sailing on with a favourable gale, and in the most\nprosperous manner. What infatuation then is it, to pursue a course,\nwhere all the rocks in the track of it, are stained with the blood of\nunhappy sufferers? Or who, with any reasonable expectation of success,\ncan hope to make his fortune, by following and adopting the maxims of\nMachiavel, knowing the author of them lived poor and despised, and\ndied miserable and abhorred? Perhaps this impious politician, may not\nimproperly be compared to the unhappy Phlegyas described by Virgil,\nwho was not undeceived, till his being convinced of the delusion he\nhad been under could be of no service to him, and who with bitter\nexpressions of lamentation, and in a hideous tone of voice, proclaimed\nthe error of his detestable maxims, to the whole miserable group of the\ndamned:\n\n        _--Phlegyasque miserrimus omnes_\n    _Admonet, & magna testatur voce per umbras:_\n    _Discite justitiam, moniti, & non temnere Divos._\n\n\n\n\nAMBITION IN SOVEREIGNS.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. The most unjust adoration the world bestows, is that which is given\nto, and received by conquering Princes, they being only deserving of\nthe public hatred; while living, mankind pay them a forced obedience,\nand when dead a courteous applause; the first is necessity, the second\nfolly.\n\nII. What is a conqueror but a scourge, which the divine anger has sent\namong us for our chastisement? What, but an animated pestilence, both\nto his own kingdom, and those of the Princes his neighbours also;\na malignant star, which rules and influences nought but murders,\nrobberies, desolations, and conflagrations; a comet, which equally\nthreatens the destruction of cottages and of palaces; and, to sum up\nthe whole, a man who is the enemy of all other men, because in the\nprosecution of his ambitious views, he would deprive all mankind of\ntheir liberty, and take from many their lives and fortunes?\n\nIII. In this, as in many other things, I admire the superior judgment\nof the Chinese. Isaac Vossius affirms, that in the annals of those\npeople, they do not celebrate warlike, but pacific Princes; neither do\nthey triumph in future ages, or acquire the applauses of posterity, who\nhave by their arms added new dominions to the state, but those who have\ngoverned with justice and moderation the territories which descended to\nthem by inheritance. This is applauding with judgment.\n\nIV. I don\u2019t deny, that valour, military skill, and other endowments\npeculiar to conquerors, are estimable; but only mean to inculcate, that\nwhen they are accompanied with a tyrannic use, they cause those who\nmake such an application of them, to become objects of abhorrence and\ndetestation. There never was any man eminent for feats of wickedness,\nwho was not endued with great qualities of body and mind; at least,\nthey are rarely deficient in those of robustness, industry, and\nbravery: but who, on this account, would employ himself in celebrating,\nor becoming the panegyrist of malefactors?\n\nV. It is not comparison, but identity, which I mean to propound and\nenforce; for truly those great heroes, who are so celebrated by the\ntrumpets of fame, were in reality nothing better than malefactors in a\nhigh form. If I was to set about writing a catalogue of the most famous\nrogues who have figured on the theatre of the world, I should place at\nthe head of it, Alexander the Great, and Julius C\u00e6sar.\n\nVI. No one had a juster sense of his situation in this respect, nor\nmade a more candid acknowledgment of his profession and occupation,\nthan Antigonus King of Asia. When he was in the zenith of his\nconquests, a philosopher dedicated a book to him which he had just\nfinished, the subject-matter of which was, an encomium on the virtue of\njustice. As soon as Antigonus read the title of the book, he smiled,\nand said, \u201cIt is certainly very _\u00e0 propos_, to dedicate a treatise in\ncommemoration of the virtue of justice to me, who am robbing all the\nworld of every thing I can.\u201d\n\nVII. And although, neither Alexander, nor C\u00e6sar, ever made so candid\na confession, they manifested sufficiently, that they were stung with\nthe remorse, and affected with the bitings of their own consciences.\nThe first, shewed the influence these feelings had over him, in the\ninstance of the temper and forbearance, with which he suffered the\npirate who fell into his hands, to upbraid him with being a greater\nand more scandalous pirate than himself; for if Alexander had not been\nconscious that the man spoke truth, the consequence of his boldness\nwould have been very terrible to him. The second displayed it, in\nhis perplexities at the crisis of passing the Rubicon; it being\nmost probable, that intrepid soul was not withheld so much by the\ncontemplation of the dangerous undertaking he was going to engage in,\nas by the sense of the crime he was about to commit.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nVIII. In reality, conquering Princes are so totally bad, that they are\nnot even good to themselves. They are bad neighbours, as is notorious;\nthey are bad to their subjects, who in the end are equal sufferers with\nthe others; because by the excessive contributions that are extorted\nfrom them, they are drained of their property, and in the obstinate\nwars in which their Princes engage, are deprived of their lives. It is\ntrue they conquer; but ten battles gained cost more men to a nation\nthan two or three lost. If we were to add to this, the loss incurred in\nconsequence of the neglect and decay of arts, manufactures, commerce,\nand agriculture; at winding up the bottom you will find, that with the\nexception of a few military men, who have been exceedingly fortunate\nand successful, or whose services have been liberally rewarded, and\nalso with that of a few others, who have enriched themselves by\nplunder, or the spoils of their own country; the conquerors are left in\nas bad a situation as the vanquished.\n\nIX. These ambitious spirits bring on their subjects another injury,\nwhich is sufficiently serious, though less noticed than the former;\nand that is, that being totally occupied with the idea of aggrandizing\ntheir power by all possible ways and means, they do not only endeavour\nto augment it externally, and among strangers, but also internally, and\namong their own subjects. They are not only desirous of ruling over\nthe most vassals they can, but are also anxious to domineer the most\nthey can over their own subjects. It is not so easy to satisfy ambition\nin this second way, as in the first; for by adopting it, without\nan addition of subjects, he, who will disembarrass himself of the\nrestriction of laws, may form an empire without limits; and an empire\nreduced to despotism, if, instead of estimating it by the number of\nthose who are to obey, you make the computation according to the number\nof things that may be commanded, is an infinite one.\n\nX. Finally, conquering Princes are evils to themselves; for as the\ndropsical thirst of accumulating new subjects is never satiated, the\nanxieties of their hearts are never quieted: _Plusque cupit, quo plura\nsuam demittit in alvum._ Their backs are turned on all they have\nacquired, and they turn their eyes on what remains for them to acquire.\nFrom hence it follows, that this last being always in their view,\nhas more power to inquiet their minds by irritating their appetite,\nthan the other has to calm their souls by insinuating the happiness\nof possession, and the pleasure of enjoyment; and we may add to this\nanxiety, the dread of poison or the knife, which are the ordinary\nfinishers of the lives of conquerors.\n\nXI. There only remains to them, as the fruit of all their labours and\ntoils, a single good, which they cannot enjoy, and therefore should\nnot be reckoned to them as a benefit; that is, their names being\ncelebrated in future ages; a tribute, which is paid to their ashes by\nthe folly of mankind, and than which no tribute is more unjust. If the\nremembrance of conquerors was to be recorded in phrases dictated by\nthe understanding, they would be described in terms of execration, not\napplause. Whoever sets about celebrating a Nimrod, an Alexander, or a\nRomulus, may with equal reason, employ himself in celebrating a tiger,\na dragon, or a basilisk. I find the same qualities in the three eminent\nheroes, as in the three furious wild beasts, to wit, a great strength\nand power to commit mischief, and a great inclination to do it.\n\nXII. I can\u2019t refrain from laughter, when I reflect on the Romans, who\nwere masters of the world, being vain of fixing the origin of their\nempire in Romulus. There was nothing in the deeds or character of this\nman, which could reflect lustre on his descendants. If you look to his\nbirth, you will find that his mother was nothing better than a common\nprostitute. If you consider his life and profession, you will find\nthat he was a daring and enterprising robber, who, being made captain\nof others like himself, erected his infamous gang into a republic. The\nrape of the Sabines, if the story is true, proves that Romulus, and\nall his followers, were looked upon as despicable and vile, and as\na nuisance, by all Italy, because no other people chose to give them\nwives, or to intermarry with them; and it was necessary, in order to\nhave women, that they should steal, and take them by violence. The life\nof Romulus was taken away by the same ministers he himself had raised,\nthey not being able to bear with, or endure him. But such is the\nblindness of the world, that the same person who was deemed unworthy to\nlive among men, and who was put to death on that account, is presently\nafterwards placed among the deities.\n\nXIII. Other great conquerors met with the same lot; they were abhorred\nwhile living, and worshipped when dead. Nimrod was the first object\nof idolatry. They changed the name Nimrod, which signified rebel,\ninto that of Bel, Baal, or Baalim, which signifies Lord. This is the\nJupiter Belus of antiquity. Alexander fell a victim to poison, from the\nresentment of Antipater, and presently there were victims sacrificed on\nthe altars to Alexander. They had scarce murdered C\u00e6sar in the capital,\nas an enemy to his country, when they venerated him in Heaven, as the\ntutelar deity of the republic. The raising men to the rank of deities,\nwas a great error in the Gentiles; but the raising those to that rank,\nwho on account of their vices should have been degraded from the rank\nof men, was a much greater.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXIV. Those who have a just idea of the Deity, cannot fall into so gross\nan error; but we don\u2019t on that account cease to err. It is true, we do\nnot worship conquerors as deities, but we celebrate them as heroes.\nWhat is this, but debasing so noble an epithet? True heroes are wrought\nand fashioned by virtue, and therefore we should reject all those\nas spurious and ill-made, which are fabricated in the workshops of\nambition. A great and a bad man are contradictions in terms. Agesilaus\nanswered wisely, to one who was extolling the greatness of the King of\nPersia, and at the same time took occasion to insinuate a remark on the\nsmallness of the kingdom of Sparta, compared to the Persian empire. His\nreply was: _He only can be greater than me, who is better than me._ He\ncould not have spoke more to the purpose, if he had read the celebrated\nsaying of St. Austin, in the following words: _In his, qu\u00e6 non mole,\nsed virtute, pr\u00e6stant, idem est majus esse, quod melius esse. With\nregard to those things, which are estimated, not by the bulk, but by\nthe virtue or excellence of them, that is greatest, which is best._\n\nXV. Let a Theodosius, a Charles the Great, a Godfrey of Bulloign, a\nGeorge Castriotus, be celebrated as heroes; and, in fine, all those in\nwhom Fortune assisted Valour, and Valour Justice; those, who only drew\ntheir swords in the cause of Heaven, or for the good of the public;\nthose, who in wars take to themselves the toil and the danger only, and\nleave untouched as the property of others, the fruits and acquisitions;\nthose, who are pacific by inclination, and warriors through necessity;\nfinally, all those, who, as an example to posterity, have by their\nactions, impressed an idea on the minds of men, that they were just,\nclement, wise, and animated Princes, in whose sceptres justice reigned,\nand whose swords never wounded their own consciences.\n\nXVI. But discard from the stock of heroes, those crowned Tigers called\nconquering Princes, and let them be numbered with the delinquents.\nThrow down their statues, and translate their images, from the Palace\nto the dens of wild beasts, that the copies at least may be placed\namong company, and in such a situation, as suited the characters of the\noriginals. I will in this place give a general trait or description of\nall conquering Princes, which I find delineated in very lively colours,\nin the words of a Prince on his death-bed, to whom they gave this\nepithet, which was William the First of England.\n\nXVII. This prince, in that last stage of life, in which a man finding\nhimself on the verge of eternity, begins to see things in their true\nlight; and at the period of time, when the eyes of the soul open,\nwith the same pace with which those of the body proceed to shut;\nand when the thoughts of his past victories gnawed his conscience,\nwithout feeding his ambition. At this crisis, either from motives of\nrepentance, despair, or from a desire to unburthen himself, after\nreflecting with horror on the sum of his past actions, in the presence\nof many nobles who surrounded his bed--He made this confession: _I have\nhated the English, I have dishonoured their Nobility, I have mortified\nand oppressed the people, and have been the cause of the death of\ninfinite numbers, by famine and the sword; and to sum up the whole, I\nhave desolated this fine and illustrious kingdom, by the murder and\ndestruction of thousands and tens of thousands of its inhabitants._ In\nthese few lines, are painted, in their true colours, the exploits of\nthat conqueror; and the same tints, would serve to delineate those of\nmost others who have been dignified with that epithet.\n\nXVIII. I had almost said all; for as I observed before, the dropsical\nthirst of rule and dominion, which is a disease common to all\nconquerors, inclines them to aggrandise and extend their empire with\nrespect to foreigners; and also, to enlarge and increase their power\namong their own subjects. The ambition that agitates them, not only\nmakes them pant to beat down the boundaries of the crown, but those of\njustice also. Not content to govern by law, they aspire at despotism.\nThey look upon equity as an impediment to, and a restriction of their\ngrandeur, and can only find enlargements proportioned to the views of\ntheir souls, in tyranny. That kingdom is in an unhappy state, where he\nwho rules and presides over it, has his head filled with this caprice.\nThe misfortune is, that many are poisoned with these notions and\ndispositions, who are no conquerors, nor entertain the least thoughts\nof being such, unless it is in the subjugation of their own subjects.\n\nXIX. This is a species of conquest, the most odious, and the most\ncheap; for it is not acquired by valour, but by craft and cunning; not\nby the fatigues of the field, but by the cabals of the cabinet. But\nnotwithstanding they conquer their own subjects, and render them more\nsubmissive, and by binding liberty with stronger and heavier chains,\nconvert vassalage to slavery; they should remember, that dominion is\nonly hereditary, for so long as it is conducted with justice; but\nthat when it comes to be exercised with violence, it is usurpation.\nBut that is an unhappy harvest, which ambition reaps by such means.\nHow is a Prince benefited, if, by putting the bodies of his subjects\nunder a hard state of servitude, he loses their souls, and alienates\ntheir affections? He loses the best part of his subjects, which is\ntheir love, and gets in return for it a small portion more of fear;\nand he estranges from him their hearts, by oppressing their breasts.\nHe deprives himself of the greatest sweet or pleasure of reigning,\nwhich consists in seeing his legal commands obeyed with chearfulness\nand inclination. What delight can the prospect of a government afford,\nwhere you contemplate every vassal, as a fierce animal, who supports\nwith indignation the chain that confines him? What security can a\nPrince have against the invasions of foreign powers, who has made his\nsubjects disaffected to him? Or what security against the intrigues and\nresentment of his own people, whom, by his absurd conduct, he has made\nangry, and weaned of their affections for him? The monarchs of the east\ncan best answer these queries, and tell, how by affecting to be so much\nthe arbiters of the lives of their subjects, the subjects frequently\nhave erected themselves into being the arbiters of the lives of their\nPrinces.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXX. The blame of this abuse, whenever it happens, lies at the doors of\nill-intentioned ministers and vile flatterers. These are interested\nin extending the acts of government beyond their bounds, because they\nexpect to be partakers in the sway and emoluments resulting from a\nstretch of power; and they endeavour to gain the favour of the Prince,\nby insinuating to him, that government being all force or seduction,\nthe most easy and eligible method of ruling, is by the King\u2019s pleasure,\nand that this at the same time, would be the most likely means of\nraising the King\u2019s authority to the highest pitch of elevation and\nperfection. With this view, they also are continually representing to\nhim, that total independance is essential to a crown, and that laws and\ncustoms are unworthy restrictions upon sovereigns; that a monarch is\nthe more respectable, the more absolute he reigns; and that the just\nmedium of the King\u2019s authority, is the King\u2019s will. That the dignity\nof the crown is by so much the more exalted, by so much the more the\npeople are depressed and kept under. And to sum up the whole: that a\nKing is a deity upon earth, which maxim they enforce so strongly, that\nas far as it is in their power, they would make him forget there is\nanother superior in Heaven.\n\nXXI. A story related by John Reynaldo de Segrais in his anecdotes, is\nvery applicable to the present purpose. When Louis the XIVth of France\nwas but fifteen years old, some flatterers were one day entertaining\nhim at court, with a recital of, and endeavouring to instill into him,\nsuch maxims of tyrannic policy as we have been just mentioning, though\nI believe if he had been five or six years older, the least punishment\nhe would have inflicted on them for it, would have been banishing them\nfrom his presence and court for ever; but the want of experience,\njoined to his judgment not being then matured, and the ardour of his\nlively spirit, occasioned him to listen to them with pleasure, as their\nrelations were suited to the grandeur of his heart, and his ideas of\nunlimited power. Marechal d\u2019Etr\u00e9, an antient man, of great wisdom and\nexperience, was at the same time standing at a little distance from\nthe King, and listening with the highest indignation, to the language\nof those flatterers. In the course of their conversation, they came\nto talk of the Ottoman Emperors, and spoke with great approbation of\nthose monarchs being the despotic masters of the lives and fortunes of\ntheir vassals. This is reigning in the true sense of the word, said\nLouis; they must certainly be happy Princes; and he spoke this in a\nmanner, which indicated his good liking of that mode of government. His\nwords pierced through the heart of the good Marechal, who, reflecting\non the pernicious consequences that would result from his adopting such\nprinciples, advanced quickly up to the King, and intrepidly said to\nhim: _But, Sir, I must inform your Majesty, that within my remembrance,\ntwo or three of these Emperors have been strangled by the hands of\ntheir own subjects._ Marechal Villeroi, the worthy guardian and\ngovernor of the young King, who was at some distance, but had overheard\nall that passed; in a transport of joy, broke through the crowd to get\nat d\u2019Etr\u00e9, whom he publicly embraced, and gave him the most cordial\nthanks for so opportune and useful a caution. Would to God that there\nwas always ready at the side of Princes, some man of such generous\nand liberal sentiments, to apply the antidote, when flattery in the\nalluring gilded cup of grandeur presents to them the poison of tyranny!\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXXII. The tender age of Princes is the most susceptible of imbibing\nsalutary or pernicious maxims, and the impressions of childhood take\ndeep root in the soul, which, according to the cultivation it receives\nthen, produces fruit in future; and it very seldom happens, that this\nrule is known to fail; for the good or bad images which are impressed\nat that time, are scarce ever effaced.\n\nXXIII. Therefore the election of guardians, who are to direct and\nregulate the management of Princes in their infancy, is a matter of\nthe utmost importance to kingdoms; and the choice of proper maxims,\nwherewith to inspire their pupils, demands the most serious attention\nof the guardians.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXXIV. The soul then, in the state of nonage, receiving impressions\nlike wax, and retaining them like brass; I repeat once more, that the\ninspiring young people with wholesome maxims in their tender years,\nis a thing of the utmost importance. The method of education should\nbe thus laid out: to begin with religion, to proceed next to ethics\nor morality, and to finish with politics. In these three parts, there\nis an admirable connection. Religion (which we don\u2019t speak of here as\na special virtue, but only with relation to the firm faith contained\nin it, and the truths it persuades) informs the understanding of the\ngreatness and goodness of God, and disposes the heart to love him.\nEthics, or moral instruction, directs all our actions, and causes them\nto conspire unanimously to promote this end, serving at the same time,\nas a vehicle to convey, and as an ultimate disposer to the practice\nof the most sound policy; or, to speak more properly, the morality\nof a King, with relation to his kingly office, is no other thing but\npolicy itself, taken in general and comprehensive sense; because that\nconsists, in a combination or assemblage of all those virtues, which\nconduce or lead to the exercise of good government.\n\nXXV. The reading of good books is very useful, to instruct Princes in\nthe maxims of sound policy. But which are the good books? I believe\nvery few. Those which contain sound doctrine are infinite; but what\nsignifies their informing, if they don\u2019t stimulate or move? The most\ndifficult part of morality, does not so much consist in coming at a\nknowledge of what is right, as in exciting and moving an effectual\ninclination to practise it. There are books of short sentences, and\nabounding with affectation, (in the stile of Seneca, which a certain\nEmperor called sand without lime) which tingle in the ear, but their\necho never reaches the heart. There are others, filled with texts and\npulpit conceits, which, instead of illustrating, confound, and instead\nof moving, become tiresome and surfeiting. There are others again,\nwhich abound with the sentences of Thucydides, Polybius, Tacitus, Livy,\nand Sallust, intermixed with a number of historical passages. I shall\nsay of all these, as Apelles said of a pupil of his, who had painted\nHelen with very little beauty, but in a very costly dress stuck full of\njewels: _Cum non posses facere pulchram, fecisti divitem. As you was\nunable to make her handsome, you have made her rich._ These forced and\nunnatural ornaments, with which erudition in the books that treat of\nit, dress virtue, do not conduce to fire the minds of those who read\nthem, with the love of her. He only will accomplish this end, who has\nthe art of painting in lively colours her native beauty; and who has\nthe address and genius, to impress on the understanding, a clear and\nagreeable idea, of the magnificence of her charms.\n\nXXVI. But better than the best books, is good conversation. The\ninstruction which is communicated by means of the voice, is natural,\nthat which is conveyed by writing, is artificial; the one is animated,\nthe other dead; consequently, the first will be efficacious and active,\nthe second languid and faint. The tongue writes on the soul, as the\nhand on paper. That which we hear, is conveyed to us immediately and\nin the first instance, from the mind of him from whom the instruction\nproceeds; that which we read, is the copy of a copy. If princes in\ntheir childhood, were daily attended by discreet and good-intentioned\npeople, who under the colour of amusing and entertaining them, were to\ninstruct them; any one might venture to be bound, for their future good\nbehaviour and wise conduct. The learning insinuates itself deepest,\nwhich is conveyed under the veil of diversion; and as that nourishes\nthe body best, which we eat with desire and an appetite, so that which\nwe listen to with delight, is most improving to the soul. The word\ninstruction is unpleasing to children, therefore it is necessary as\nfar as we are able, to take away the name, and leave or preserve the\nsubstance of the thing; and this is much more necessary to be done in\nthe case of Princes, because from their early time of life, either\ntheir own vanity, or the flattery of other people, inspires them with\na notion, that persons of their rank and station have no need of\nlearning. The rules of equity and civil jurisprudence, conveyed under\nthe disguise of engaging and entertaining relations of the conduct\nand management of just Princes, who by acting well, attained the\naccomplishment of all their wishes with respect to foreign concerns,\nand acquired the adoration of their own subjects at home, and the\nadmiration of all strangers; I say, if improvement was insinuated\ninto them in this way, by some person whose conversation was pleasing\nto them, and who had the address to introduce it, not as if he was\ninstructing, but entertaining, them; it would be the best method of\ningrafting in their minds, plants of the choicest quality, from whence\nin time you might expect to gather excellent fruit. For this reason,\nthe wise Bishop of Cambray composed for the education of the Duke of\nBurgundy, whose preceptor he was, a collection of pleasing fables, in\nthe stile and manner of such tales, with which old women are accustomed\nto entertain children, and which children for their amusement are used\nto relate to one another; in these, he in natural and easy language,\nsuited to their capacities and comprehensions, conveyed all the\nprecepts which compose the most Christian policy.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXVII. All the lessons however, which are given to Princes, should\nbe calculated to train them to, and make them enamoured with those\nvirtues, which may be of the most consequence, and the most useful\nto them, both as Princes and men; above all, regard should be had,\nas a matter of the utmost importance, to implanting in them, the\nfeelings of humanity and moderation of spirit, which virtues, as being\ndiametrically opposite to, are the best counterpoises to the vice of\nambition. Other vices may be prejudicial to themselves, or injurious\nto particular individuals; but ambition, or the inordinate lust of\ndominion and controul, are pernicious, and evils to a whole kingdom.\nThere is no doubt, but an unjust or a cruel Prince, is extremely\nabhorrent, though with all this, if you attend to the mischief these\nvices produce, you will find, that that occasioned by ambition, far\nexceeds the other; for on account of its being most generally felt,\nit is by far the greatest. Injustice and cruelty are exercised on\ndetermined individuals, but ambition oppresses all. Or we should\nexpress it better, by saying, the unjust and cruel, is cruel and unjust\nto some particular people; but the ambitious is unjust and cruel to\nthe whole community. These are the ordinary steps and progressions\nof ambition. It begins by injustice, goes on to rigour, and ends\nwith cruelty. The Prince is unjust to a state, who, by extending his\ndemands beyond the limits of right reason, is desirous of burthening\nhis subjects more than the rules of equity permit. But what follows\nthis oppressive mode of conduct? Why that the subjects, as soon as\nit is introduced, begin to be dissatisfied and complain; and that\nthe Prince, regarding their complaints and applications for redress,\nthough couched in never so submissive terms, as affronts and injuries,\nbegins to direct chastisements. Measures of rigour are now determined\non; and what follows the execution of them? Why, that the clamours and\ncomplaints grow louder, and that the cries of the oppressed in the ears\nof the King, sound like the voice of rebellion. Upon this, the rigour,\nunder the colour of law and justice, is augmented, till it ascends\nto the degree of cruelty; but in case things do not arrive at this\nextremity, because fear suffocates in the breasts of the afflicted, the\nvoice of murmur; yet what greater torment can a man undergo, than that\nof supporting a heavy yoke on his shoulders, and having at the same\ntime a cord drawn so tight round his neck, as to obstruct the relief of\na sigh? This then being a great martyrdom, the oppression which is the\ncause of it, can\u2019t fail of being a great cruelty.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXVIII. I am not surprized that some Princes have gone to this\nextreme, but rather wonder that all have not proceeded to it. The\nthirsty desire of domineering, which is never satiated, is natural\nto the heart of man; and this principle which is born with us, in\nPrinces, is stimulated and inflamed by flattery. We frequently hear\nthem addressed, in terms which are exquisitely hyperbolical, some to\nblazon the perfections of their characters, others those of their\npersons. They represent to them their superiority in a manner, that\ntends to persuade them, they are more than men, and that other people\nare less. This ostentatious image of grandeur is very grateful to their\nfeelings, and therefore it is not wonderful, they should set it up\nas an idol, for the people who are under them to offer as sacrifices\nto, all they possess which is most valuable. Some politicians have\nthought it expedient, in order to give Princes a higher idea of their\nown excellence, and fill them with more exalted notions, to place\nflatterers about their persons; and I have no doubt but this may\nbe proper, when you perceive them to be very pusillanimous. But in\ngeneral, the thing of most consequence in their education, ought to\nbe taking care to impress on their minds, such maxims only, as are\ndictated by religion, virtue, and humanity. And this is the manner in\nwhich they should be propounded to them.\n\nXXIX. That a King is a man, as other men are, son like them, of the\nsame common father, equal by nature, and only unequal in fortune.\n\nXXX. That this fortune, imagine it to be great as you will, he owes all\nto God, who has power to place one of another race on the throne; and\nno man, if he pleases to do it, has a right to find fault or complain\nof injustice, even though he should raise to the rank of Majesty a\nperson of the most humble station in the kingdom, and reduce to the\nlowest class, him, who the day before was seated on a throne.\n\nXXXI. That so much the greater the idea of his own grandeur is, by so\nmuch the greater ought his gratitude and thankfulness to be to the\nDivine Majesty, who has conferred it upon him; and that in proportion\nto the superiority of his rank, are his obligations to serve and obey\nGod as an example to other men.\n\nXXXII. That God did not make the kingdom for the King, but the King\nfor the kingdom. Therefore the object of his government should not be\ndirected to support his own private interest or convenience, but that\nof the republic. For this reason, Aristotle points out the essential\ndistinction between a King and a tyrant, that the first only attends to\nhis own convenience, the other to the public good.\n\nXXXIII. That consequently, the expression used in edicts, that such is\nthe King\u2019s pleasure, he having thought fit to order the thing specified\nto be done for the advancement or good of his service, should be\nunderstood to imply, that he is pleased with ordaining such things only\nas are for the good of the public. It is the duty of the subjects to\nobey the King; and it is the duty of the King to command such things\nonly, as are for the benefit and advantage of his subjects.\n\nXXXIV. That as the subjects are obliged to obey and execute what\nthe King is pleased to direct, the King is obliged to order such\nthings only as are pleasing to God, and consistent with his laws and\ncommandments.\n\nXXXV. That the power of ordering only what is right and just, does not\ndiminish his authority, but rather aggrandizes it; for although it is\nimpossible for God to do any act which is not right and just, he does\nnot on that account cease to be omnipotent.\n\nXXXVI. That a King, having risen to the summit of human glory, cannot\nascend to a superior degree of altitude, but by the arduous path of\nvirtue; that is, he can only be greater by being better.\n\nXXXVII. That the most difficult and most glorious part of the exercise\nof the kingly office, consists, not in a Prince\u2019s conquering new\nkingdoms, but in his good government of that he possesses. A Courtier\nin the presence of Augustus said, that Alexander, at thirty-two years\nof age, upon reflecting that in a little time he should subjugate all\nthe world, was at a loss to think how he should employ himself when\nthat was done: _Alexander at that rate_, replied Augustus, _must have\nbeen very simple; for the most arduous and difficult part of the work\nremained still to be executed, which was, governing well the kingdoms\nhe had conquered._\n\nXXXVIII. If we were to take an account of the Princes who were great\nwarriors, and of those who were eminent for their virtue, we should\nfind the number of the last much smaller than that of the first; so\nthat although virtue should not be so much admired in Kings as military\nglory, its being more scarce, is sufficient to make it more valuable.\nFlavius Vopiscus relates, that a buffoon, to express the smallness of\nthe number of the good Princes who had been known in he world, said,\nthe effigies of them all might be carved on a ring. As he talked of\nidolatrous Kings, for he knew no others, he may be supposed to have\nspoken the truth; but things are quite otherwise at present, although\nthe numbers of the warlike and political ones, may be reckoned in all\ntimes to have exceeded those of the pious ones.\n\nXXXIX. That as the subjects owe to their King their obedience and\nrespect, he owes to them his tender care and protection. A King has two\nsorts of children, some as a man, others as a Prince; those of the one\nsort are natural, those of the other political; but they are all his\nsubjects, and as such he ought to love them. The inhabitants of Sichem,\nof whom Hamor was Prince, are called in scripture the children of Hamor.\n\nXL. That this love should not impede, but rather stimulate him to\npunish delinquents; because the greatest benefit a King can confer on\nhis subjects, is to root out from among them evil-doers.\n\nXLI. That the effects of his love should be more felt by his subjects\nat large, than by his ministers, and especially those who are nearest\nhis person; for to these, he should dispense the tokens of his regard,\nin proportion to their merit; and it is of the utmost importance, that\nhe should not extend his esteem for them beyond those limits. It is\ngood that ministers should love their Prince; but I judge it would be\nmore beneficial to the public, that they should fear him. That kingdom\nis in a most happy state, where the subjects fear the ministers, the\nministers the King, and the King God.\n\nXLII. Those above all should experience him terrible, who are found\nwanting to the truth in any informations they give him relating\nto important public affairs, or even concerning private ones; for\nthere are few Princes, who would not wish to do what is most for the\nadvantage of their subjects; but it happens, that they fail to attain\nthis end, on account of the indirect and fallacious informations which\ncome to their ears.\n\nXLIII. That in order to insure the receiving them pure, there is no\nother method to be pursued, but that of admitting easy access to all\nmen; some would then remove the deceptions, which others had imposed;\nor no one would venture to deceive, for fear that some other should\ndetect him. If any one arrives at the sole possession of the King\u2019s\near, he, without using further industry, becomes the sole master of\nthe King and his kingdom.\n\nXLIV. That he should listen courteously to all who address him, but\nshould be more particularly gracious to those in humble stations of\nlife, because these, as more timorous and bashful, stand in most need\nof encouragement to enable them to express themselves. Augustus, with a\nmost humane air, asked a man who approached him with fear and trembling\nto deliver a petition, if he thought he was addressing himself\nto a lion or a tiger. This courteous manner in a Prince, besides\nconciliating the love of his subjects, facilitates to those who obtain\nan audience, a clear and entire exposition of all they have to say; for\na tremulous tongue can never articulate plainly, and fear cuts off the\ncommunication between the lips and the breast.\n\nXLV. That he should shew himself so zealous a lover of justice, as even\nfor the sake of it, to dispense with his own interest or convenience;\nand he should give the judges to understand, that whenever his concerns\ncome in question, and that any thing which is supposed to be his is\nclaimed by one of his subjects, if the merits of the case are not on\nhis side, they would not recommend themselves to him, by pronouncing\nsentence in his favour. This was the great lesson, which, among others,\nwas given on his death-bed by the pious King Louis to his heir and\nsuccessor Philip. The Senescal Joinville, the beloved minister of that\nPrince, relates the advice to have been conceived in the following\nterms: _If any one shall have a dispute or litigation with you, shew\nyourself favourably disposed to the suit of your opponent, till the\ntruth can with certainty be established. By pursuing this method, you\nwill ensure, that your ministers and counsellors will always act in\nfavour of justice._ A caution worthy to be written and preserved in\nletters of gold.\n\nXLVI. That whenever it is evidentally established, that some resolution\nis necessary to be taken for the good of the public, maugre the\ncompassion, benignity, and love, which are so much recommended; it\nshould not be omitted to be carried into execution, on account of the\ncomplaints or injury it may occasion to some particular people; for\nthey sometimes are not aware of the importance of the measure; and\nsometimes it is also necessary, to suffer a grievance to be born by a\nsmall part of a kingdom, for the good of the whole.\n\nXLVII. That when he consults the lawyer, the divine, or the politician,\nhe should conceal the inclinations of his own mind, and hear their\nanswers with perfect indifference. If he does not act thus, but on the\ncontrary rewards him who coincides with his wishes, and frowns on the\nman who speaks with christian freedom and integrity; the precaution of\na consultation will not remove from him the guilt of any miscarriage\nthat may happen; for it is very well known, that a King is never at a\nloss for politicians, divines, and lawyers, to say that is right and\nproper, which he is desirous of doing.\n\nXLVIII. That in the end, he must one day die, and that at the instant\nof his dissolution, he must appear upon a level with the most humble\nsinner of the earth before the King of Kings, to give an account of all\nhis actions. I contemplate the appearance of a King at that tremendous\ntribunal, in a terrible light. Private delinquents are charged with\nhere and there a homicide, and here and there a theft; but to the\naccount of an iniquitous King, homicides and robberies are charged by\nthousands and by millions. In one unjust war which he commences, all\nthose who die on one side and the other have their deaths charged to\nhis account, which although they should be estimated at a few, will\nalways be found to amount to several thousands. All the diminutions\nwhich the subjects of both kingdoms sustain in their properties, in\norder to support the expences of the war, are imputed to him as the\nauthor and cause of the mischief; and the number of people injured\namounting to millions, the account of his injustices amounts to\nmillions also.\n\nXLIX. It appears just and proper to me, to instill into the minds of\nPrinces in their tender age, these and such like admonitions, taking\ncare not to propound them with that dryness, and in the bald and naked\nshape, in which they appear in this writing; but observing to combine\nand interweave them, into such conversations on political subjects,\nas may naturally present themselves. In the doing this, all odious\nmagisterial affectation should be avoided, and the instruction should\nbe conveyed under the form, and habited in the dress of rational\namusement.\n\nL. I am not ignorant, that if Princes are pusillanimous, it will be\nnecessary in various instances, in order to enlarge their minds, to\neducate them with less severe maxims; but those who are appointed\nto instruct them in their youth, need not be very attentive to this\nconsideration; for they may naturally conclude, that when their pupils\nmount the throne, there will always be people enough at their elbows\nready to supply this defect.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nLI. What we have written in this discourse, if we attend precisely\nto the present state of Spain, can produce no other benefit to him\nwho reads it, but that of an honest amusement; or at most, can only\nfurnish the people here with a knowledge of some moral truths, the\neffects of which do not reach them, nor have they any experience of the\nconsequences resulting from them; for neither the royal children of\nthis day, who for the good of this kingdom proceed to grow and increase\nin virtue, nor those who are appointed to instruct them, stand in need\nof my advice; but rather, my theory is marked out by their steps,\nand copied from their practice. Besides, it is the general condition\nof all cautions and admonitions which are written to warn Princes,\nthat they are only printed when they are not necessary. Nobody writes\nagainst tyranny, when a tyrant is seated on the throne; nobody against\nambition, while an ambitious Prince reigns; nobody against avarice,\nwhile a covetous prince sways the sceptre. All maxims that issue from\nthe press, which are opposite to the existing mode of ruling, are\nreputed satires upon government, so that the author by publishing them\nincurs the indignation of the Prince, and fails to benefit the public.\nHis work is suppressed as offensive, and by that means his labour is\ntotally lost, because the fruits of it can never be enjoyed, neither\nthen, nor in any future time.\n\nLII. From hence it follows, that the most opportune time to exhibit to\nthe world treatises upon just and right policy, is that in which such\npolicy is practised. It is then you should sow, for then you have a\nfavourable prospect, that the seed will produce a good crop hereafter;\nand even then you may enjoy the produce in part; for the reigning\nPrince being confirmed that the road he pursues is right, is fortified\nin his good purposes. To him such doctrine serves as a cordial, and to\nfuture ages it acts as a preservative.\n\n\n\n\nTHE VALUE OR SUPERIOR EXCELLENCE OF NOBILITY.\n\nWith some Remarks on the Power or Influence of HIGH BLOOD.\n\n\nI. He would do great service to the nobility, who could separate their\nvanity from their quality; for it is almost as difficult to find this\ndignity free from that vice, as it is to find silver in the mines\nwithout a mixture of earth. Splendour of ancestry is a fire, which\nproduces much smoke in descendants. There is nothing of which people\nshould be less vain than their high origin, and there is nothing of\nwhich they are more so. The best pens in all ages, both sacred and\nprofane, have laboured to persuade, that there is no pride worse\nfounded than that which is built upon high birth. The world perseveres\nin its error, and there is no flattery better received, than that\nwhich compliments a man on the grandeur of his race; nor is there any\nadulation more hacknied and transcendent; to be convinced of which, you\nneed only read epistles dedicatory to books. Flattery in them, commonly\nguides the pen, and you will hardly find one, which omits to lay great\nstress on the nobleness and antiquity of the family of the person to\nwhom he consigns the protection of his book; and they do this, because\nit is pretty well known, there is scarce any man so candid or modest,\nas not to be pleased with this eulogium.\n\nII. From hence spring those wild and extravagant genealogies,\nfabricated by some flatterers, in order to compliment, and by that\nmeans, cultivate the favour and protection of great and powerful\npeople. Basil the first, emperor of the East, was a man of obscure\nbirth. The patriarch Phocio, finding himself out of his good graces,\nendeavoured to regain his favour, by forming a genealogical chain,\nwhich made him descended from Tiridates king of Armenia, who reigned\nin that country eight centuries anterior to Basil. The descent which\nAbraham Bzovius gives to pope Sylvester the second, which began in\nTimenus king of Argos, who flourished more than a thousand years before\nChrist, in all likelihood was not fabricated by Bzovius, but was\nprobably found among some papers written in the life-time of that pope,\nby some person who composed the thing to flatter him. Roderig Flaharti\nwrote, a little while since, the history of some transactions relating\nto Ireland, in which he assigns two thousand seven hundred years of\nantiquity to the kings of England in their possession of the throne.\n\nIII. If you ascend two generations anterior to Rodulfus count of\nAugsburg, there is no family of more doubtful origin than that of\nthe house of Austria. Upon coming to the grandfather of Rodulfus,\nhistorians find themselves surrounded with such thick darkness, that\nthey don\u2019t know which way to turn themselves; nor is it a point beyond\ncontest, who the grandfather of Rodulfus was. Notwithstanding this,\nthere have not been wanting Spanish historians, who, by running up the\nline of their ancestors, have, without touching or tripping, traced\nthem to the destruction of Troy. Penafiel de Contreras, an author\nof Grenada, went further than this; for, as Mothe le Vayer informs\nus, he fabricated a genealogical chain of one hundred and eighteen\nsuccessions, and made Philip the third descend in a right line from\nAdam; and because the duke of Lerma, Philip\u2019s favourite at that time,\nshould not be under less obligations to his pen, he formed another of a\nhundred and twenty-one from Adam to the duke, entwining the sovereign\nand favourite with two kings of Troy and with \u00c6neas, by means of\ntheir two sons Iulus and Asaracus, from one of which he made the king\ndescend, and from the other the duke.\n\nIV. There have not been wanting in other nations those who have\nflattered their princes to the same excess. John Messanius derived the\nsuccession of the kings of Sweden, without the least interruption, from\nthe primitive father of mankind; and William Slater did the same thing,\nin compliment to James the first of England.\n\nV. Truly one would be apt to think, that such fulsome incense must\nstink in the nose of the idol to which it is offered; for Vespasian\ndespised some flatterers, who derived him from the stock of Hercules;\nand Cardinal Mazarin treated with great scorn, one who traced his\norigin to Titus Geganius Macerinus, and Proculus Geganius Macerinus,\nancient consuls of Rome. Thus those lose the fruits of their adulation,\nwho pour it forth without bounds.\n\nVI. But to return to our subject: I repeat, that there is no\npre-eminence people have less reason to boast of, than that of\nnobility; every other is personal, and proper to a man\u2019s self; this is\nderived, and may be deemed the reflection of a borrowed light. Nobility\nis a mere extrinsic denomination, and if you would make it an intrinsic\none, it must be done by rational means. The virtue of our forefathers\nwas their own, not ours; and Ovid, in the following compendious\nsentence, expressed all that is capable of being said on the subject:\n\n    _Nam genus, & proavos, & qu\u00e6 non fecimus ipsi,_\n    _Vix ea nostra voco._\n\nVII. It is true, that in a certain manner the excellencies of our\nprogenitors illustrate us, but they illustrate us as the sun does the\nmoon, by exposing our spots and blemishes if we degenerate from them.\nI have seen, in some coats of arms, stars quartered, which seems as\nif he who acquired this blazon gained it by his merit; because, after\nthe manner of a star, he shone by his own light. It is probable,\nthat in many of his successors they should take away the stars, and\nsubstitute moons in their places, to denote that they only shine like\nthis luminary by virtue of a borrowed light. The following eulogium,\nwhich Velleius Paterculus bestowed on Cicero, always appeared to me\nextremely elegant and magnificent: _Per h\u00e6c tempora Marcus Cicero,\nqui omnia incrementa sua sibi debuit, vir novitatis nobilissim\u00e6, &c._\nCicero owed all his fortune to himself, because although he sprung from\nan obscure family, he without any other support but that of his own\nmerit ascended to the first honours of Rome. I would much rather this\nshould be said of me, than that I was descended in a right line from\nAugustus C\u00e6sar.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nVIII. But there is no necessity for dwelling upon a subject which is\ncommon, and on which so many and so fine things have been written, that\nall I could add to them would be like contributing a small fountain to\nthe ocean, or a little stone to the mountain of Mercury. My intention\nis only to banish a vulgar error which is entertained of this matter,\nand which ferments greatly in the imaginations of people of quality.\n\nIX. It is commonly said, that good or bad blood has its occult\ninfluence on thoughts and actions, and that as in the ordinary course\nof nature the genus of the tree follows that of the seed, and the fruit\nthat of the tree; so it is with mankind, who, according to the stock\nfrom whence they are derived, copy after the customs and manners of\ntheir ancestors. This prepossession in favour of nobility is so general\namong the vulgar, that there are several adages made use of in their\ncommon conversation to express it; and you will at every turn, when a\nman well born has done a bad action, hear them say, he has not behaved\nlike what he is; as on the contrary, if the same thing is related\nof a poor man, they answer, you could not expect any better of him,\nconsidering from whence he sprung.\n\nX. If this was really so, the estimation the nobility enjoy might with\ngreat justice be said to belong to them; but this is so far from being\nthe case, that there is scarce any other erroneous opinion that has so\nmany, and so evident testimonies to contradict it. In what kingdom of\nthe world do we not at present see the same thing come to pass, which\nformerly happened at Rome? a Cicero of obscure extraction, ennobling\nhimself and his country with illustrious actions; and, by way of\ncontrast to him, a most noble Catiline, debasing himself and family by\nlicentiousness and treachery? or the same which was heretofore seen\nat Athens, a Socrates the son of a blacksmith, replete with virtues,\ncontrasted with a Critias, who was the worthless disciple of so\ngreat a master, and an unworthy descendant of a brother of Solon\u2019s,\nwhom neither nobility nor philosophy, could withhold or refrain from\nbehaving like a monster, compounded or made up of abominable vices?\n\nXI. What Plutarch says of the kings, who were the successors of those\ncaptains, among whom the empire of Alexander was divided, is very\nremarkable. What progenitors could be more illustrious than those\nheroes, to whom, in a great measure, the Macedonian chief owed such\nglorious conquests? But all the descendants, says Plutarch, of these\ngenerous leaders, were people of evil, and perverse customs and\nmanners. All? Yes, all without the least reserve: _Omnes parricidiis,\net incestis libidinibus, infames fuere._ Let the nobility contemplate\nthis, and then say, what dependence they can place on the future virtue\nof their race.\n\nXII. The reflection of Elius Spartianus is still stronger. This writer\nsays, that by casting your eyes over history, you will see clearly,\nthat there is scarce a great man who has figured in the world, that\nhas left a son who was a worthy successor of his father, that is, one\nwho proved equally good and useful to the state: _Et reputanti mihi,\nneminem prope magnorum virorum optimum, et utilem filium reliquisse,\nsatis liquet._ (Spartian, in vita Severi.)\n\nXIII. There is no doubt but you will frequently meet in history,\naccounts of unworthy children, who were descended from good parents.\nGermanicus is so generously disinterested, that he refuses the empire\nwhen it is offered him by the army; and his daughter Agrippina so\ndeterminedly ambitious, that she sacrifices shame, and even life\nitself, to the thirst of dominion. Octavianus is modest and reserved,\nand besides possesses many other excellent qualities; his daughter\nJuliana, scandalizes Rome with her indecencies. Cicero, view, him on\nwhich side you will, is a most elevated genius; the son, who only\nresembled his father in name, was heavy, stupid, and a man of no other\nability, but that of drinking a great deal of wine. Quintus Hortensius,\nwas the competitor of Cicero, in oratory, political talents, and zeal\nfor his country; his son departed so widely from the foot-steps of\nhis father, that he was in danger of being disinherited, but, bad as\nthe son was, the grandson was still worse. Septimus Severus, with the\nexception of his excessive rigour, was an accomplished prince; his son\nAntoninus Caracalla, neither deserved the name of a prince, nor to\nbe called a man. To the prudent and wise Marcus Aurelius, succeeded\nthe brutal and unbridled Commodus; to the glorious Constantine, the\nunworthy Constantius; to the magnanimous Theodosius, the timorous\nArcadius, and the pusillanimous Honorius. But endeavouring to establish\ngeneral rules upon these and such like examples, is giving a large\nscope to the pen.\n\nXIV. Although we may with certainty affirm, that being allied in blood\ndoes not produce a similitude of manners, as this truth is invincibly\nproved, by the great variance of dispositions we frequently meet in\nbrothers. If the children of the same father were to be like him,\nthey would also be like one another. How then can we account for the\ngreat difference that is so frequently observed between them? One\nis courageous, another timid; one liberal, another avaricious; one\ningenious, another dull; one rakish, another reserved; and the same in\nevery other instance.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXV. Of this variety of defects and virtues in the same blood, we have\na striking example in the Antonian family, who were people of note\nand fame in ancient Rome. Marcus Antonius, called the orator, may be\nsaid to be the man who raised this house; for the Antonian family,\nwhich was so well known in the first ages of Rome, became divided\ninto two branches; the one that was called Patrician became extinct;\nand from the other, which was called Plebeian, although it is not\nknown by what accident they fell from their ancient splendour, sprung\nMarcus Antonius. This man, who was of humble extraction, by his rare\nand excellent qualities, raised himself to the first charges in the\nrepublic, and exercised them gloriously; but his two sons Marcus\nAntonius, called Creticus, and Caius Antonius, degenerated entirely\nfrom the excellencies of their great father, and were men without\nvirtue, without conduct, and without valour. To Marcus Antonius\nCreticus, succeeded Marcus Antonius the triumvir, in whom the vices of\nhis father were augmented, although he inherited part of the virtues\nof his grandfather, for he was a good soldier, and no bad politician,\nbut a glutton, a drunkard, and lascivious, and this last failing,\ncaused him to sacrifice his life and his fortune to the beauty of the\ndishonest Cleopatra. From so bad a father, descended an admirable\ndaughter, the wise, beautiful, modest, prudent, and spirited Antonia.\nThis eminent woman, who was beyond doubt the ornament of Rome in\nher day, had two sons and a daughter, which differed as greatly in\ntheir dispositions and manners, as if their blood and education had\nbeen diametrically opposite. Germanicus the eldest, turned out an\nable, discreet, mild, generous, and modest prince. Claudius, who was\nafterwards emperor, was so stupid, and differed so greatly from his\nbrother and mother, that she was used to say her son Claudius was a\nmonster, for that nature had begun to make him a man, but had never\nfinished the work. Livilla, the sister of these two, was another\nspecies of monster, for she was convicted of adultery, and murdering\nher own husband. But the dissimilitude which we have hitherto remarked\namong the individuals of this family, may be called trivial, compared\nto that which appeared between Germanicus and his son Caligula; the\nfirst, was an harmonious compound of virtues and graces, the last the\ntail or fag-end of abominations; in fine, he was so bad, that people\nwere used to say, nature had made him as he was to shew to what a\ndegree mankind could be formed perverse. I have exposed to view, the\nsignal inequality, which in native disposition and manners, there was\nbetween the individuals of the Antonian family, in order to illustrate,\nthe little dependance that is to be placed on how the children will\nturn out, by conjectures, founded on the influence or example of the\nparents. If we were to make the same analysis of other families, we\nshould find the same inequality with but little or no difference.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXVI. I am aware, however, of the argument that may be used in favour\nof the vulgar opinion. I may be told, that customs and manners are\ncommonly derived from the genius or disposition, and the genius\nor disposition from temperament. How else could the constitution\nof parents be communicated to their children, by means of which\ncommunication we see them inherit their infirmities? In the same manner\nthen, may their geniuses and dispositions be communicated.\n\nXVII. But this argument fails in many parts of it; first, because by\nthe commixture of the two sexes, which is indispensable in generation,\nthere may result to the children a third temperament, unlike to that of\nboth father and mother. Secondly, because it is not probable, that the\nseminal matter is in all its parts homogeneous; and to this principle,\nI think, should chiefly be attributed the notable dissimilarity that\nwe find in some brothers. Thirdly, because many different principles\nhave their influence on the temperament; for example, the accidental\ndisposition of the parents at the time of generation, the various\naffections of the mother during the formation of the f\u0153tus, the\nalterations of the atmosphere in this period, childrens aliment in\ntheir infancy, and many other things.\n\nXVIII. From hence I conclude, the vulgar prognostic, that the short\nor long lives of children, depend upon the much or little time\ntheir parents lived, is to the last degree fallible and void of all\nprobability; because from all the principles we have pointed out,\nthe temperament of the parents with respect to the children, may be\nvitiated or amended; for we every day see healthy children born of\nsickly parents, and sickly children born of healthy ones. It is true,\nthat there are some diseases which have the stamp or mark of hereditary\nones; but I conclude, this originates, or is derived from a vitiated\nquality which pervades the whole seminal matter; but this is proper\nor confined to very few diseases, nor is it so proper or certain with\nregard to those few, as not to be many times falsified. My father was\ngouty, but I am not so, neither is any one of my brothers.\n\nXIX. I add, that even admitting some communication of genius or manners\nfrom parents to children, this argument in no shape favours the ancient\nnobility, who are descended from a very remote origin; the reason is,\nbecause in every generation there is a sensible alteration, sufficient\nto introduce some dissimilitude with respect to the immediate\nprogenitor, and in the accumulation of many, the unlikeness becomes so\ngreat, as in a manner to efface all appearance of kindred or relation\nbetween them. What expectation then can a man entertain, of inheriting\neven a small portion of the generosity of his illustrious progenitors,\nthe heroes from whom he derived the lustre of his house, and to whom\nhe looks up, at the remote distance of many centuries? By so many\nmore grandfathers he reckons, by so many more degrees is he removed\nfrom the original generous influence. In every generation he goes on\nto lose a part of it; and when they become very numerous, he at last\narrives at losing it intirely. It is most likely that the Thespiades,\nor sons which Hercules had by the daughters of Thespis, inherited a\ngood portion of the strength of their father; and that, in the sons of\nthe Thespiades, the robustness of the grandfather was more curtailed,\nand that the descendants of these, in the course of two or three\ngenerations, would come to be no stronger that the ordinary race of men.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXX. I should here conclude this discourse, if none but the nobility\nwere to read it; but as it is my intention to cure the nobles of their\nvanity, without exempting the humble from paying them all due respect,\nit is necessary to advert to, and guard against the inconvenience that\nmay result from these last omitting to do it; for although it is just\nto restrain pride in the nobility, it is right and fit, that the common\npeople should behave to them with respect.\n\nXXI. But strong as the reasons may be, which we have alledged against\nthe intrinsic worth of nobility, it cannot be denied, that the\nauthority which favours it is of more force than all our arguments.\nEvery cultivated and well regulated nation in the world, adopts\nand countenances this pre-eminence, which amounts to little less,\nthan its being generally assented to by the bulk of mankind; and a\nuniversal opinion, rises superior to an ordinary one, and ought to\nprevail against every thing which is not self-evident, or supported by\nundeniable testimony.\n\nXXII. The vanity (says the famous Magdalen Scudery, in the fourth\nvolume of her Cyrus) which is derived only from our progenitors, is\nnot well founded; but for all this, this illustrious chimera, which\nso sooths and flatters the hearts of all mankind, is so universally\nestablished throughout the world, that it cannot fail to obtain\nveneration and regard. It is certain, that in many things common\nusage hurries us on against reason, but in others, reason dictates\nto us, that we should conform to the common practice, and this is the\npredicament with respect to the subject we are treating of, that we\nfind ourselves in at present.\n\nXXIII. It is however true, that I have my doubts, whether this common\nestimation of nobility has arose of itself, or whether it is derived\nfrom an adjunct quality that is annexed to it, which is power. Noblemen\nare generally rich, and it may be doubted, whether the adoration that\nis paid to this idol called nobility, was introduced by the respect\npeople bore to the image or figure, or the gold of which it was made.\nWhat we see is, that the nobles who fall off in riches, proceed with\nthe same pace that they decrease in these, to lose the estimation in\nwhich they were held; and although there will always remain to them\nsome respect, who can determine, whether this proceeds from the occult\ninfluence of their generous race, or from a common habit we are in of\nholding them in esteem? It may also happen, that a noble reduced from\nopulence to poverty, may be venerated as the relic of an idol, which\nheretofore had been worshiped.\n\nXXIV. It is therefore necessary, to seek for some more solid ground\nthan any we have hitherto gone over, whereon to build the estimation\nwhich should be enjoyed by the nobility, and such, no doubt, is to be\nfound in reason, abstracted from the support of authority. It is a\nfixed maxim in ethics, that to every kind of excellence some honour\nis due; the general consent then of mankind, the regard shewn them by\nprinces, and the privileges allowed them by the laws; having placed the\nnobility in a degree of superiority above that of other people; I say\nthese considerations, ought to make us look upon nobility as a kind of\nexcellence, to which, in consequence of its being such, we owe respect\nand honour.\n\nXXV. And here it will be proper to remark, that this debt is not barred\nor cancelled by any uncertainty that may arise concerning the origin\nof those who are accepted as nobles. The reason is, because their\nbeing generally acknowledged and received as such, is sufficient to\nplace them in that degree of superiority; for we cannot require more\nexamination of their descent, in order to respect them, than the laws\nrequire which favour them. He would be a very extraordinary man, who\ncould arrive at giving physical proof of who is his father; but his not\nbeing able to do this, does not absolve any one from the indispensable\nobligation of reverencing the man as such, who is generally esteemed\nand reputed to be his father.\n\nXXVI. This debt of veneration to the nobility, should be understood in\nall cases, with a reservation of what is due, and properly appertains\nto virtue, which, according to the constant doctrine of Aristotle, and\nSt. Thomas, is much more worthy of honour than nobility; therefore,\neven with that civil and extrinsic honour, which in their ethics those\ntwo great masters speak of, we ought more to reverence a virtuous\nPlebeian, than a Nobleman without virtue. Our cardinal Aguirre, when\nhe is explaining philosophy, in the third chapter of his fourth book\nof ethics, says, that a vicious nobleman is unworthy of all honour and\nrespect; to which sentiment I subscribe, because it is conformable to\na maxim of the angelic doctor, who (22 qu\u00e6st. 145. art. I.) having\nsaid, that honour properly and principally was only due to virtue,\nadmits, that other qualities and excellences inferior to her, such as\nnobility, riches, and power, are only honourable in proportion as they\nconduce to, and assist the operations of virtue: _Alia vero, qu\u00e6 sunt\ninfra virtutem, honorantur in quantum coadjuvant ad opera virtutis,\nsicut nobilitas, potentia, & diviti\u00e6._ If the nobility then do not\nassist virtue, but rather foment vanity and nourish pride, by lending\ntheir suffrages to vices which obstruct virtue, they render themselves\ntotally unworthy of the least respect.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXXVII. But how shall we reconcile what we have just now said against\nthe nobility, with what we said but a little before in their favour?\nEasily, by saying this prerogative is not laudable, but honourable.\nThe arguments we have just urged impugn its laudabillty, those we are\nabout to use are affirmative of its honour. This is a distinction\npointed out by Aristotle, between virtue and all the other excellences\nwhich illustrate the human race. Virtue, he says, is laudable; riches,\nnobility, and power, deserve no praise, but have a pretension to be\nhonoured. So that there is nothing in nobility which a man should\nboast or be vain of; but there is something in it, which those who are\ninferior to them in rank should reverence and respect. This distinction\nwill reconcile all difficulties, and assure to the nobility esteem,\nwithout fomenting their vanity.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXVIII. The subject of this discourse, especially that part of it\nwhich is contained in the second, third, and fourth paragraphs, leads\nme opportunely to banish an error which is exceedingly vulgarized.\nThe world is so filled with the caprice of the occult influence of\nthe blood, that many people are led away with a notion, that children\nby the force of it, not only inherit from thence those passions which\ndepend on the temperament, but also a propensity for the religion of\ntheir ancestors. They don\u2019t even stop here, for the lower sort extend\nthis influence to the milk with which children are nourished in their\ninfancy, giving credit to this ridiculous maxim, from here and there an\nuncertain or fabulous experiment or instance, such for example, as a\nperson when he came to the state of manhood having turned Jew, which he\nimbibed a disposition to do, by having sucked a Jew nurse.\n\nXXIX. There is no error more void of all probability than this. If we\nspeak of the true religion, not only the assent which the understanding\ngives to its dogmas, but also the pious affection which precedes\nthis assent, are both supernatural; consequently, according to sound\ntheology, neither the blood nor the aliment, nor any other natural\ncause, can have connexion, either with the assent or pious affection.\nThis is all the work of the divine grace, as a substitute for which,\nthere is not the most remote disposition to be found in the whole\nsphere of nature, and you can only admit negative natural ones, which\nconcur merely to remove impediments, such as a good understanding, and\na good native turn of mind. But these good dispositions, in those who\npossess them, do not depend upon their fathers having professed the\ntrue religion; for if this was the case, all the catholics would have\ngood understandings, and would be naturally good-disposed people.\n\nXXX. The assent to false religions, is beyond a doubt absolutely\nnatural, because error cannot be derived from a supernatural cause.\nUpon the whole then it is certain, that this assent does not depend, in\nany manner whatever, either on the temperament, or on the organization,\nwhich are the only things, on which the paternal seed, or the infant\naliment, can have any influence; the reason is, because giving assent\nto an error, depends upon the shape or light in which objects appear or\nare represented to the understanding, which in different temperaments\nand organizations may be the same, and in such as are alike different.\nWhat doubt can there be, that in the great city of Constantinople,\nthere are vast numbers of men unlike in these and other natural\ndispositions? Notwithstanding which, they have all faith in the same\nerrors.\n\nXXXI. He who will not yield to these arguments, let the experience or\nexample of the Janisaries convince. This military corps, who are the\nGrand Seignor\u2019s guards, and the best troops in the Ottoman empire,\nalthough they at present admit among them people of every nation, were\noriginally all composed of the children of Christians, who in their\ninfancy were either made prisoners of war, or were paid to the Grand\nSeignor by way of tribute, by the poor Christians who resided in his\ndominions. These soldiers, who notwithstanding their being the children\nof Christians, and their having been nourished in their infancy with\nChristian milk, were always as staunch professors of Mahometism as the\nchildren of the Turks themselves; and in the wars in which they were\nengaged against the Christians, so far was the occult influence of the\nblood, or the milk they sucked, from restraining their arms, that they\nfought, I don\u2019t know whether to call it with more valour, or with more\nfury and rage, than the other Mahometans.\n\nXXXII. The same reflection, may be made on the slaves which are\nbrought from Africa to America to work in the mines, or on the sugar\nplantations; for they, when educated in the Christian religion, don\u2019t\nentertain the most distant thoughts of returning to idolatry, which\nwas the religion professed by their ancestors.\n\nXXXIII. What now and then happens is, that some one, who in his infancy\nwas instructed in a religion different from that of his parents, after\nbeing arrived at a state of manhood, coming to understand that they\nprofessed another faith, has found himself inclined to follow their\nsteps. But it is clear, this was not produced by the seeds of his\npaternal religion which circulated within his veins, but was rather a\nproof, that his love and veneration for his progenitors, disposed him\nto imitate them, and I believe it proceeds from want of reflection,\nthat these examples are not more frequent, for it is natural to\nsuppose, that the example of those who gave people birth, would have\nmore weight with thinking persons, than that of those who had deprived\nthem of their liberty; but such is the force of education, habit,\nand intercourse, that they prevail over all other considerations and\nattentions.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXXIV. It will also be proper in this place, to touch on a complaint\nvery common among poor gentlemen: These frequently say, that now-a-days\nmoney is more esteemed than men of family, and that riches are more\nrespected than nobility. This sentence is hardly out of their mouths,\nbefore it is followed by a deep sigh, that seems to express their\nsorrow for the corruption of the times, which has altered and mistaken\nthe true value of things.\n\nXXXV. But they are greatly deceived, who think the world ever was, or\never will be otherwise in this particular, for they always did, and\nalways will, make more professions of esteem and respect to a rich man\nof humble origin, than to a poor one descended from an illustrious\nfamily. This is a consequence attendant on, and naturally produced by\nthe condition of humanity. Men are seldom obsequious or attentive to\nothers, from mere motives of courtesy, and without an eye to their\ninterests, but are generally solicitous to please those, who have\nit in their power either to favour or injure them. Nobility is not\nan active quality, but wealth is. A nobleman, merely as a person\nennobled, can do neither good nor harm; but a rich man, holds in one\nhand the thunderbolt of Jupiter, and in the other the cornucopia of\nAmalthea. Simonides being asked which was most estimable, riches or\nlearning, replied that he was puzzled to give an answer, because he\nfrequently saw the learned running to pay their court to the rich and\npowerful, but that he never remarked the same attention of the rich\nto the learned; so that if in those ancient times the learned paid\nhomage to the rich, what must the vulgar have done? Hope and fear,\nare the two main springs, which give motion to the human heart, but\ndisinterested love, operates in very few individuals. There are at this\nday idolatrous nations, who worship both God and the Devil; God, that\nhe should bestow benefits on them, and the Devil, because he should\nnot injure them. He then who can neither do good nor harm, must expect\nno adoration or attention paid to him. The only and most effectual\ninstrument wherewith to do service or injury, is money; thus those who\nare masters of that, will also be masters of, and command the common\nrespect and homage. Gold is the idol of the rich, and the rich are the\nidols of the poor; it always was so, and ever will be so.\n\nXXXVI. Let the neglected nobles, however, comfort themselves with the\nreflection, that the adoration and court which is paid to the rich\nand powerful, is not sincere. The incense which is offered to them,\ndoes not arise from the fire of love, but the blaze of concupiscence;\nand the breast is always giving the lie to whatever is pronounced by\nthe lips. The body bends with submissive cong\u00e9es, but the will does\nnot incline or stoop to the idol. Obsequies, or the outward shew of\nrespect, is all the invention of art, not the work of nature. What\nprice or value can you set upon adulations, that are articulated by a\ntongue, which is the vile slave of interest? I don\u2019t deny but there are\nsome men of opulence and power, who have merited their fortune; and\nthat these, on account of the intrinsic worth of their good qualities,\nmay be sincerely and consistently honoured and respected by good men;\nbut such as these are the fewest in number, and the misfortune is, that\nthere is no rich man whatever, who has not been persuaded by the voice\nof flattery, that he is one of those few.\n\nXXXVII. It may be also necessary to apprize the complaining gentlemen,\nthat the rich, merely as rich people, are in some degree intitled to\nthe respect that is shewn them. The blessing of the Lord, says Solomon\nin the Proverbs, makes men rich, so that riches is a gift from heaven,\nand such a gift, as according to the common estimation and opinion of\nthe world, constitutes those who possess it worthy to be honoured and\nrespected. St. Thomas affirms this to be the case in the following\nsentence: _Secundum vulgarem opinionem, excellentia divitiarum facit\nhominem dignum honore._ (22. qu\u00e6st. 45. art. 1.) The common estimation\nin this particular, founds a right: and although that judgment should\nbe erroneous, it would be prudent for us to wait till the world is\nundeceived, before we exempt ourselves from conforming to the usages\nof it. But this happy time will hardly ever arrive, till God, with\nhis powerful hand, shall bend and incline the hearts of men to esteem\nvirtue, and that only; though if this happy day should arrive, the\nnobility may probably find a falling-off in the estimation they are at\npresent held in; for every one then, would be respected according to\nhis own deeds, and not according to those of his ancestors. This mode\nof rating things, would be exceedingly beneficial to the state; for\nhow well would it be served, and what good citizens would it consist\nof, if there was no other road but that of virtue, whereby to arrive\nat the public esteem! but as the case stands at present, the merit, or\neven the fortune of an individual, makes all his descendants glorious\nand honourable, and when those who succeed in that line, find that\nby virtue of their birth the public veneration is attached to their\nfamily, great numbers of them will consider themselves as excused from\nnegotiating it by some honourable application.\n\nXXXVIII. From hence I infer, that what is speciously urged in favour\nof the nobility, to wit, that it is just and right to reward in the\ndescendants the virtue of their ancestors, although it may sound well\nin theory, will have but a bad effect in practice. If only personal\nvirtue was to be rewarded, in the course of twenty descendants, there\nmight probably be ten or a dozen of them, who would labour to acquire\nglory. But if the first of the twenty gains it for all the rest, he\nonly would be useful to the state. He would serve the public, and the\npublic would become the servants of all the rest.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nXXXIX. What we have just said, was not intended as an objection against\ngiving the preference to the nobility in appointments to places of\ndignity and honour, but was only meant, as an argument against their\nbeing conferred on them, as a reward for the merits of their ancestors.\nI do not oppose the thing, but the motive for doing it; for I am rather\nof opinion, the public utility, the advancement of which, and not\nrewarding the services of others, should be the leading consideration\nto direct in making those appointments, would be better answered, by\nprefering the nobleman to the person of inferior rank, not only in\ncases of equality of virtue between the parties, but also where their\ndifference in birth is great, and the disproportion in point of virtue\nbut small; and this, for four weighty and important reasons.\n\nXL. The first is, you would avoid by this means, multiplying the number\nof priviledged persons within a state. If it was frequent and common,\nto fill posts of consequence with people of humble birth, because they\nwere virtuous and able; as from the elevation of these, would result\nthat of their posterity; in the course of a century and a half, you\nwould create a great multitude of fresh nobility, which is extremely\nprejudicial to a community; because in proportion as you lessen the\nnumber of those, who should apply themselves to business, and the\nimprovement and cultivation of land; you would lessen the assistance of\nuseful people; or what is worse, you would over-load with the burden of\nthe others, such as were dedicated to these employments.\n\nXLI. The second is, because in posts of dignity, a nobleman is obeyed\nwith more resignation, readiness, and good-will, than a person of\nhumble extraction; which is a matter of great importance in every\nkind of government. What disturbances have been occasioned, by the\nrepugnance men find in obeying the commands of him, who they saw\nyesterday wear a plain coarse coat, and they see to-day cloath\u2019d with\npurple; their obedience is sometimes slow, at others ill exerted, and\nat others not performed at all. The love, or at least the interior\ncondescension with which those who serve, obey him who commands, is\nextremely useful and necessary in every kind of business. Many fine\nprojects have vanished in smoke, because the instruments appointed to\napply the means of executing them, have, stimulated by an occult envy\nof their superior, wished they should not succeed.\n\nThe want of sufferance and condescension in the inferiors, is succeeded\nby abhorrence and hatred in him who commands, with respect to them; and\nwhen he and they, reciprocally come to regard each other as enemies,\nthere is no sort of confusion and danger, that may not be considered as\nnear at hand.\n\nXLII. The third is, because it is much more to be apprehended, that\nthe virtue of an humble person is feigned, than that of a nobleman.\nThe vice of hypocrisy may be said to be allied, or in a manner annexed\nto narrow fortune; for poor people are under a necessity of concealing\ntheir defects; and are obliged, in order to better their lot, to have\nrecourse to the trivial expedient, of putting on the semblance of\nvirtue. On the contrary, opulence and illustrious birth, naturally\ngive relief and enlargement to the mind. People that are ennobled, are\ngenerally what they appear to be, because neither necessity nor fear,\nobliges them to make ostentation of virtues they do not possess.\n\nXLIII. The fourth and last is, that admitting there should not be\nthe least doubt of the truth and reality of an humble man\u2019s virtue,\nthere is always great danger of his losing it by his exaltation. Great\nleaps of fortune are exceedingly perilous. Those from lofty stations\ndownwards are very hazardous, because in consequence of them, the\nhonour and properties of men may be dashed to pieces; but those from\nbelow upwards are more to be dreaded, for they are commonly attended\nwith the destruction and loss of the soul. Every virtuous man, before\nhe is raised from the dust to dignities, should find sureties for his\ncontinuing to act uprightly; for the soul by such a transition, is\ntranslated to a very different climate; and a very unwholesome one for\ncustoms and manners. Many have the seeds of various vices so deeply\nburied in their temperaments, as even to be concealed from their own\neyes, till opportunities and occasions cause them to grow and sprout\nout. It is rare to find a man of low extraction, who is cruel and\nproud; and very rare to meet with one who is covetous; for he is so far\nfrom being excited by vices which he has no materials to supply the\ncravings of, that he scarce ever thinks of them; and how should he fix\nhis attention on the superfluous, who is in want of what is precisely\nnecessary for him? To find out whether such a person is tainted with\nthe two first vices, you should place him in authority; and to discover\nwhether he is infected with the third, you should give him a portion of\nriches. In fact, these three vices have been most frequently remarked\nin those, who were raised from humble to exalted fortune, although\nbefore their elevation, they did not shew the least signs of being\ntainted with them, or any others.\n\nXLIV. For these reasons, I am of opinion, that a person of humble\nextraction, should never be preferred to a nobleman or man of family,\nto fill posts of dignity and honour, except, where the excess of\nvirtue in the first shall be found to be very great. But in the\nmilitary line, we should make an exception to this rule, for valour,\nand skill in the art of war, are requisites of great importance in\nexecuting and conducting military business; nor can they be lost by a\nman\u2019s advancement, or counterfeited by hypocrisy. On the other hand,\nthese endowments, for the purpose of exciting respect and obedience\nin those who are to be commanded, sufficiently supply the want of\nsplendid origin in him who commands; and finally, a great warrior\nmakes double amends to a state for the injury that is sustained by it,\nby planting therein a new stock of nobility. So that by adverting to\nthese precautions, the four inconveniences we have pointed out would be\navoided.\n\n\n\n\nTHE SEMBLANCE OF VIRTUE; OR, VIRTUE IN APPEARANCE.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. Virtue and Wickedness fly with nearly the same velocity from the\nhuman eye, and are both almost equally concealed from the discernment\nand penetration of mankind. The first lies hid under the veil of\nmodesty, the second behind the parapet of hypocrisy. The vicious\ndisguises himself with the colouring of virtue, the virtuous disdains\nand effaces all false tints or glosses.\n\nII. The number of hypocrites in the world is much greater than is\ngenerally imagined. There is no vice so transcendant, for all bad\npeople are hypocrites. This may seem a paradox, and you may say to me,\nare there no men who make parade and ostentation of vice? I answer yes,\nbut not of all their vices. They endeavour by their boasting to hide\ntheir confusion, and discover that part of their soul which they are\nunable to conceal. They place a crown on the image of vice, in order\nto give dignity to the figure; and although arrogant wickedness is\nworse than timid, the last is despised, and the first feared. An unruly\npassion breaks down all the fences of reserve, and the delinquent,\nnot being able to conceal his shame and disgrace by dissimulation,\nendeavours by his pride and arrogance to make himself dreaded. This\nis practising a new hypocrisy, with which he belies and endeavours to\nput a trick on his own conscience. The crime appears odious in his\neyes, therefore by putting on a false semblance and air of gallantry,\nhe attempts to dazzle the eyes of other people. To protect from\npublic insult, him, who is a notorious bad man, no other method is so\neffectual, as that of openly exposing his faults to the world with\ndaring impudence.\n\nIII. But observe attentively these very people, and you will find, that\nalthough they behave with this audacity, they at the very time they\nare doing it, endeavour to conceal other vices they are infected with,\nand also to make ostentation of virtues which they do not possess. They\nwill own they are incontinent, prodigals, ambitious, and audacious;\nbut they blazon their gratitude to their benefactors, their steadiness\nin their friendships, and their fidelity to their promises. It is\ncertain, that the vice of ingratitude is one of the most common and\nmost vulgarised in all the world; but with all this, you will not find\nany man who does not take pains to justify himself on this head; and\nI say the same of lying, of perfidy, and of other vices. It follows\nthen, that upon a critical enquiry, you will not find a vicious man\nwho is not a hypocrite. We should not suppose that open and avowed\nprofligates, or debauchees, have no other blemishes, than such as shew\nthemselves outwardly. There is no virtue such a man would not trample\nupon, if it was an impediment to his pursuits, nor an opposite vice to\nthat virtue, which he would not employ as an instrument, to gratify his\nruling passion. Do you think a very lewd man, for all the boastings of\nhis innocence in matters of justice, and in points of _meum_ and _tuum_\nhonesty, would not, if he found himself without money of his own, make\nuse of that of another person which was confided to his keeping, to\npurchase the enjoyment of his favourite object? or that the ardently\nambitious man, for all the vociferations of his gratitude, would not\nturn his back on his benefactor, whenever this baseness would be a\nmeans of recommending him to the good graces of one, who could advance\nhim to a higher degree of preferment, than it was in the power of his\nold friend to procure for him?\n\nIV. So that it is very rare to find a perverse person, who, over and\nabove those glaring vices which manifest themselves so palpably, is not\ntainted with others, which he affects to hide; and in case there do\nnot predominate in him other passions besides those, which on account\nof their vehemence are so very conspicuous, these of themselves are\nsufficient to betray him into faults, which arise from, and are the\noffspring of other distinct passions, when the committing those faults\nis indispensably necessary for attaining the objects or purposes of the\nruling passion. Alexander in his natural disposition, was certainly not\na cruel man, notwithstanding which, he was guilty of cruel actions; for\nsuch were the putting to death his friend Clytus, and the philosopher\nCalisthenes. His predominant passions were vain-glory and pride.\nClytus fell a victim to the first, for having preferred the actions of\nAlexander\u2019s father Philip to his; and Calisthenes fell a victim to the\nlast, for having deterred people from idolizing Alexander as the son of\nJupiter.\n\nV. Sometimes the false appearance of a vice is put on politically, or\nwith a view of deriving some advantage from it. A man feigns himself\nvindictive, when in reality he is not so, in order that the fear of\nhis vengeance may deter people from offending. This most frequently\nhappens, when the vice affected is meritorious in the eyes of him who\nrules. Sejanus would never have obtained the favour of Tiberius, by\nappearing a lover of justice; nor Tigilinus, nor Petronius, that of\nNero, by seeming modest and continent.\n\nVI. It is probable, that from the motive of falling in with the humour\nof wayward and evil-minded princes, there have been politicians who\nwere contradictory hypocrites, and have wore the semblance of vices\nwhich their natures revolted at; and what is worse, in order to prove\nthey were tainted with them, have put a violence on their inclinations,\nand although it was with reluctance, have brought themselves to commit\ndisorders which their dispositions abhorred. When people make a merit\nof delinquency, instead of that hypocrisy which is properly such on\naccount of its counteracting virtue, they study another which is the\nreverse of it, because it feigns vice.\n\nVII. But these very persons will affect to appear sincere, constant,\ngrateful, and men of veracity. There never was any man, who was not\ndesirous of dissembling or concealing those vices, which were opposite\nto the virtues, which constitute what is commonly called a good man,\nand therefore, the hypocrites who affect the shew of these virtues are\ninnumerable.\n\nVIII. I do not deny, that a man\u2019s being more under the dominion of some\nvices than others, depends in a great measure on his constitution,\nwhich may be compared to a soil, where some passions take deeper root,\nand grow more vigorous than others. This man, without attempting to\nrestrain it, suffers himself to be carried away by incontinence, but\nabhors cheating: another gives himself up to gluttony and drunkenness,\nbut looks upon perfidy with horror and indignation. Thus it is; but\nhis enmity to these vices, lasts no longer than till he has occasion\nfor their assistance to indulge his passion for the others. Catiline,\nin the early part of his life, appeared to have no other passions than\nthose of incontinence, ostentation, and prodigality; but these vices\nhaving reduced him to poverty, and he on that account not being able\nto continue his pursuits of them, formed the design of tyrannizing\nover the republic, in order to extricate himself from indigence. In\nconsequence of this, he became ambitious, fierce, cruel, relentless,\nand perfidious.\n\nIX. I am of opinion, that nobody should put much confidence in those,\nwho are called good sort of men, if they see them much impressed\nwith, or under the influence of particular passions. That vice which\ndomineers over them, is to themselves the ultimate end or object, to\nwhich they direct all their attentions; or the idol, to which, if their\noccasions required it, they would sacrifice all other considerations. I\ndo not pretend that there are no exceptions to this rule; the natural\nabhorrence of one vice, may predominate over the inclination to commit\nanother. But I in all cases, and at all events, would sooner place my\nconfidence in him, who from a religious fear of God has a regard to\nhis conscience in all his actions, than in the man, who only from his\nnatural disposition and temperament, or from a punctilio of honour,\npractises those virtues, which are commonly understood to constitute\nthe character of what the world calls a good man; temperament lets\ngo the rein, when the ruling passion becomes impetuous, and shews an\neagerness to press forward; and honour loses its influence, when it is\nbelieved the commission of the bad act will not be known. The fear of\nGod never ceases to operate.\n\nX. The famous Magdalen Scudery, in her book, intituled, Moral\nConversations, relates a remarkable story of a man, who risqued his\nlife for a friend in three duels; but this friend afterwards, having\noccasion to beg he would lend him a small sum of money which he stood\nin need of, he refused to comply with his request. Who would believe,\nthat a man who on repeated occasions, had hazarded his life for his\nfriend, would have failed him in a thing of so much less consequence?\nHe was both covetous and intrepid, but his avarice made him consider\nhis life as less valuable than his money. His friendship contended with\nhis ruling passion, and the last, as the most prevalent, pressed down\nand stifled the finer feelings.\n\nXI. One of the greatest mistakes which men commit in their confidences,\nis that of trusting those, whom they have known to be unfaithful to\nothers. This is an error which all men condemn, and which almost\nevery one falls into. I confide my secret to him, who has recommended\nhimself to my favour, by revealing that of another person. I give\nmy friendship to the man, who in compliment to me has abandoned the\npatron who before protected him. This is the effect of our love for,\nand the superior conceit we entertain of ourselves. Every one fancies,\nthat he has in himself a most powerful attraction, that will keep the\nheart of a person fixed and attached to him, who has been unfaithful\nto other people. He thinks, that it was the power of his singular\nmerit, which made the man abandon his benefactor or friend, for the\nsake of allying himself to him. He is so full of his own consequence\nand rare qualities, that it never enters his imagination, nor does\nhe even harbour the least suspicion, that this very person may see,\nor pretend to see, a higher degree of merit in another man, to which\nhe might make the same sacrifice of his friendship. Princes and\ngreat men, whom the habit of being flattered is apt to make the most\npresumptuous, are those who are most liable to fall into this snare.\nHow often do we see in courts, treachery rewarded with promotion! The\nmaxim that we love the treason, but hate the traitor, is received by\nall the world in theory, but has very few votaries in practice. The\ntraitor is displeasing to him, who dislikes the treason; but he who\ninterests himself in the treason, looks on the traitor with favourable\neyes. This is derived in a great measure, from calling things by\nwrong names. Treason is termed obsequiousness, and a traitor called\nfriend; and jointly with this, they are apt to interpret, that some\nhonest motive intervened to excite to the action; and in case they\ncan\u2019t find out any other than that of interest or convenience, they\napplaud the ability displayed in chusing the most beneficial side.\nQueen Elizabeth of England was a striking exception to this rule. An\nunfaithful Spaniard, sold to her for a stipulated price, a town in the\nLow Countries; and after he had so done, to avoid the punishment due to\nhis demerit, went over to, and resided in England, where he offered his\nservice to the Queen as an able military officer; to which she replied,\n\u201cGo your ways, when I have occasion for any one to commit an act of\ntreachery, I will make use of you.\u201d\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nXII. The perfect hypocrites are few in number. I call those perfect\nhypocrites, whose outside is all devotion, and who within, are all\nbaseness and iniquity, or such as answer the description of the\nsatyrist:\n\n    _Qui curios simulant, et bacchanalia vivunt._\n\nUpon serious reflection, it will not appear wonderful these are so\nfew, for notwithstanding the road of hypocrisy is the shortest a man\ncan pursue, to arrive at the temple of Fortune; still we rarely see\nmen endued with a sufficient degree of perseverance, to engage in so\nlaborious an undertaking; for conceive the practice of virtue to be\never so arduous, the pursuit of the feigned, is much more painful\nthan that of the true. In order to carry it on, there is need of a\nconstant studiousness, joined to a continual anxiety, and also an\nindefatigable watchfulness, to suppress the sallies of the soul, which\nwithout intermission is making efforts to disclose herself. There is\nno passion, which, like a wild beast chained, strives more forcibly\nto break its confinement, than that of dissimulation. The animal\nfaculty of the heart is as plainly reflected on the countenance, as\nthe vital is manifested in the artery. The tokens of their internal\nmovements, may be compared to those of a clock, which has a bell that\nproclaims them, and a hand that points them out. There is not a word,\nnor an action, if not restrained by a contrary impetus, which would\nnot follow the impulse of that animated machine. Curiosity and lust,\nimportune and tempt a man\u2019s eyes by turns; he is anxious to give vent\nto his bosom by his voice, and his brow manifests his impatience to\ndo it; a pleasant jest provokes to laughter; an injury calls for\nvengeance; and the tongue and the ear are averse to silence. There\nis not a member which is not put under painful restrictions, nor a\nfaculty that is not constrained, by being thus compelled to wear the\nforced appearance of composure. The strings, of which the harmony of\nan exterior modesty are composed, are infinite, and ought always to be\nkept violently on the stretch; the desires also of possessing beloved\nobjects, are continually tapping at the doors of the senses. What force\nis sufficient to resist so many impulses? or what address, equal to\nmanaging so many reins at a time?\n\nXIII. Add to this, the apprehension of their deceit being detected;\nfor they look upon all the eyes that surround them as so many spies of\ntheir enemies; and they are very well aware, with all their caution,\nof the difficulty of always preserving their souls impenetrable to\nforeign inspection; for let them be never so careful in shutting up\ntheir windows, there will ever remain, by imperceptible omissions,\ninnumerable crevices; and although they may succeed in deceiving the\nmultitude, there are never wanting transcendent spirits, who can\ndiscern and distinguish, whereever they meet with it, the natural\nfrom the artificial. Let affection strive to imitate reality never so\nindustriously; one or another will make his remarks, which, although\nthey cannot be explained, may be conceived, and may be compared to the\ncharacter of a language, which, notwithstanding you comprehend it, you\ncan\u2019t pronounce. The very means that are taken to conceal the soul,\nmanifest and disclose it, because the reserve or caution that is used\nfor this purpose is visible, and it is also visible and well known,\nthat innocent people have no need of this disguise. Every man who uses\ngreat circumspection, makes himself suspected. He who is confirmed\nthat he possesses a good conscience, acts and speaks with openness;\nnor would it avail a hypocrite, to endeavour at imitating that native\nfrankness; for he never could hit upon the true criterion of the\ncharacter. Those of experience and penetration, would always be able to\ndistinguish the copy from the original; therefore I believe, that to\nthis day, there never was a hypocrite who succeeded in deceiving all\nthe world.\n\nXIV. O how much less toilsome would it be, for hypocrites to tread the\npath of true virtue, than to pursue that of false! The first affords\nintervals of ease and tranquillity to the mind, and also administers to\nit many comforts; but the fiction of virtue, demands a constant labour\nof thought, and a continual stretch of invention to save appearances.\nIt is like a fabric built in the air, which would fall to the ground,\nif you neglect to keep it propped up a minute.\n\nXV. I may be told, that with time and practice, fiction would become\nhabitual, and then a man would find no difficulty in dissembling.\nTruly I doubt whether habit has power to effect so much. When art\nfights against the whole bent or force of nature, I don\u2019t think\nthe case ever happened, of the first obtaining a complete triumph;\nbut judge rather, that the last always remains with a residue of\nstrength, sufficient to renew the combat. It sometimes falls out with\na consummate hypocrite, as it happened to the cat converted to a fine\nlady in the fable of \u00c6sop. She continued to sit with much studied\ncomposure at the table, till a rat entered the room; but instantly\nupon the animal\u2019s appearing, hurried away by that native impulse which\nsupersedes all caution, she with all her might threw herself on her\nbeloved prey, and exposed her nature to the bye-standers.\n\nXVI. But admitting, that, by long practice in deceit, a man could\novercome all difficulties; this does not obviate the mistake of the\nhypocrites; for with a great deal less labour, and in a much less time,\nhe could have made virtue more familiar to him than dissimulation.\nThe first is most conformable to the inclination of man as a rational\ncreature, and he only acts in contradiction to this principle as a\nsensitive one; the last is a violence on his nature, both as a rational\nand as a sensitive one. In a land of virtue, the soul may be said to\nlive at home; in that of deceit, she resides as a total stranger. She\ncertainly then must find more fatigue and trouble in familiarizing\nherself to deceit, and more difficulty in making dissimulation seem\nnatural to her than virtue.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXVII. There are notwithstanding, a certain species of hypocrites, who\nlive without fatigue, and deceive with little trouble; because the\nappearances they wear of virtue, are partly owing to study, and partly\nto temperament or constitution. They want some vices, and conceal\nothers; or the few virtues they possess, serve as a cloak or covering\nto hide greater vices. Thus it may be said, that the hypocrites of whom\nwe spoke before, are always labouring against wind and tide, and never\nget on, but by the force of hard rowing. Those of whom we are about to\nspeak now, are frequently assisted with a gale in their favour.\n\nXVIII. Truly the pains the public take, to inform themselves of\nthe virtues of mankind, are very slight and trivial; he who stands\nunimpeached in some determined particulars, may easily dispense with\na great number of virtues. Emilius, for example, is regular and\nmoderate in his diet, and is also modest in his conversation. He goes\nfrequently to, and behaves devoutly at church, and abstains from all\nillicit commerce with the other sex. He needs nothing more, to make his\nvirtue conspicuous and reverenced by the whole town; notwithstanding\nthis, I know that this same Emilius, vexes his neighbours with unjust\nand litigious prosecutions, and I also see him anxious after, and\nsolicitous to acquire honours and riches by all sorts of means.\nWhatever little injury he receives, is stamped on his memory in\nindelible characters; and although there is great plenty in his house,\nno poor are ever seen at his door. He assists with great pleasure in\nall murmurs and cabals, and especially if they are against some man\nof conspicuous merit, who is likely to rival him in the estimation of\nthe public. He favours the unjust pretensions of his associates and\ndependants; and, when applauding or condemning the actions of others\nis the subject of conversation, his tongue is always guided by his\nprejudices or partialities. He sets no value on the virtues of others;\nand if he finds they are in any shape inconvenient or incommodious to\nhimself, he depreciates them. I observe his fawnings on, and cringings\nto the great, and his slights and contempt of the poor. In fine, I\ndon\u2019t see a movement in this man, that does not point directly or\nindirectly to his own particular interest, which he seems determined to\npursue, although in the road that lends to it, he should trample under\nfoot, the rights and properties of other people.\n\nXIX. With all this, the vulgar esteem him, as a just, religious, and\ndevout man. Those few virtues are a skreen or shelter to a great number\nof vices. Ambition, avarice, envy, malice, and hatred, have built their\nnests in his breast; but all this is overlooked. The false brilliancy\nwhich glitters on the surface of his continence, and his temperance,\ndazzle the eyes of the public. This seems, as if the world thought all\nsin consisted in the criminal indulgence of corporeal inclinations, and\nthat all wickedness, was confined to the operation or exercise of two\nor three senses. The devil is neither lascivious, nor a glutton, nor is\nhe capable of perpetrating either of those vices, because the execution\nof them depends on the exertion of material powers; but he does not on\nthis account cease in a moral sense, to be the worst of all creatures.\n\nXX. The injustice of this opinion, and the evils arising from it, are\nmost visible in the other sex. A woman by being chaste, thinks she has\ncomplied with, and fulfilled all the duties appertaining to virtue,\nand that, in consequence of her possessing this single good quality,\nshe may without impeachment of her conduct, be allowed to commit\nevery other vice with impunity. Thus having established the proofs of\nher chastity, she concludes she has a right to be arrogant, envious,\npassionate, and proud; and there even are women, whom the confirmation\nof their fame in point of chastity has made savage and insufferable.\nWhat plagues are such to their poor husbands, for they sell them that\nfidelity at an exorbitant price, which they owe to them as a just\ndebt. Some authors have assigned this, as the motive of Paulus \u00c6milius\nhaving procured himself to be divorced from his first wife, the noble,\nchaste, beautiful, and prolific Papiria. Plutarch tells us of a Roman,\nwho, when his friends blamed him for having got himself divorced from a\nchaste woman of great endowments, both of body and mind, pulled off one\nof his shoes, and shewing it to them, said, _You see this shoe is new,\nhandsome, and well made; but perhaps that is the very reason why it\nwrings and pinches my foot_. By which he meant to insinuate, that the\naccomplishments of his wife made her proud and insufferable.\n\nXXI. I must confess, that I have no patience with the distinction\nthe world makes between vices appertaining to the same species, only\nbecause of the different methods which are used in the execution of\nthem. He is not only esteemed a thief, but a most vile and base man,\nwho clandestinely enters another\u2019s house, and robs it of money and\ngoods; and why does not he deserve to be stigmatized with the same\nepithets, who by making an unjust demand, or by using frauds, usurps\nanother\u2019s property. The trader, for instance, who takes more than a\nfair profit on his goods, or deceives with regard to the quality of\nwhat he sells; or the man in office, who demands or receives more than\nhis due, or than his trouble deserves; and, above all, the judge who\nsuffers himself to be bribed; I say, what difference is there between\nthis first and last class of people? They are all cheats and robbers;\nand God will punish them all in the same manner, not regarding the\nmeans they used to impose on, but in proportion to the injury they\ndid their neighbours. Notwithstanding all this, vast numbers of these\npeople pass for very good christians; and not only so, but if they pray\nmuch, and count over many rosaries, hear mass every day, and have the\ninsolence to frequent the sacraments, they are venerated as illustrious\npatterns of virtue.\n\nXXII. But for all these may appear an heterogeneous or monstrous\ncompound of virtue and vice, there is nothing belonging to them, which\nmay not be supposed conformable to nature. Virtues and vices have\nthe same root or origin, that is, the temperament or constitutions\nof mankind. Thus as there is no soil so inhospitable as to produce\nnothing but poisonous plants, neither is there any disposition so\nvitiated as to nourish nothing but perverse inclinations. In no\nindividual is nature such an enemy to reason, as to oppose it in every\nthing. This man is urged by gluttony, but not incited by incontinence.\nAnother burns with impatience to be rich, and knows no other happiness\nthan that of possessing vast treasure. A third is swayed by pride and\nvain-glory; and provided he receives the homage he expects, no other\npassion disturbs him.\n\nXXIII. To this we may add, that vice being very ugly and deformed,\nevery one abhors those vices, that do not correspond, or fall in with\nhis own inclinations, and is consequently led to admire those virtues\nwith which they are contrasted. From hence it is common for men to be\nreciprocally offended and scandalized with the actions of each other.\nWe see the faults of others in their proper shape and colours, and\nour own in the delusive form in which our appetites represent them to\nus. In the first we view the horrible, in the second the delectable.\nThe picture which passion draws of vice, resembles that which was\npainted by Apelles of Antigonus. That monarch had but one eye, and\nthe ingenious painter, to hide the blemish, drew him in profile, and\nexhibited only that part of his face in which there was no defect.\nThus passion exposes to our view the flattering side only of our own\nvices; and conceals the deformed, but takes a quite opposite method in\ninspecting those of other people.\n\nXXIV. I contemplate sometimes, but not without emotions of laughter,\nhow the covetous man appears disgusted with, and to nauseate the\nincontinent one; and how the incontinent man, looks with horror and\nabomination on the avaricious one. All this happens, by the first not\nbeing stimulated by carnal desires; and the second not being diseased\nwith the dropsical thirst of gold. Every man has his strong and his\nweak side, or may be said to be made of brass in one part, and glass\nin another; but every man, by excusing himself on the pretext of hiss\nown fragility, is not aware, that all others have the same right to\ndisculpate themselves in the same manner; and if we were to make\nthe proper reflection on this matter, we should not be such severe\ncritics on the actions of our neighbours. Envy would be converted to\ncompassion, and that which at present inflames hatred, would beget\ncharity.\n\nXXV. It is a common error, to apply to determined or particular\nspecies of sins only, the excuse of the frailty of human nature. This\nfrailty as transcendent in all the passions, intervenes in all kinds\nof slips. There is no vice, which has not its natural fermentation in\nthe complexion of the individual. The disorders which are the most\ndistant from, or opposite to the reasonable faculties, find their\npatronage in the sensible ones. I confess I cannot comprehend, how in\nour nature, there can be contained geniuses so perverse, that they\nshould take pleasure in doing mischief to other people, when by the\nact, no sensible good can result to themselves. With all this, it is\ncertain that there are such people, and it is also certain, they behave\nin this manner, because they are under the dominion of this villainous\ndisposition. But observe of what this frailty is compounded. If their\nmalignant conduct did not afford them some considerable delight, they\nwould not for the sake of indulging it run the hazard of incurring the\npublic hatred.\n\nXXVI. But it is proper to remark, that these men of whom we have\nbeen speaking, and who are compounded of virtue and vice, are not\nwhat they seem to be by their outside appearance. I mean, that even\nthe virtues they are supposed to possess, will upon enquiry be found\nnot so properly to deserve the name of virtues, as that of the mere\nwant or absence of vices. Observe Chrysantus: he abstains from\nall commerce with the other sex; and you may be led to think, this\nabstinence proceeds from virtue; but you would mistake, for it is\nthe effect of insensibility; he has no stimulus which incites him to\ndesire women, and therefore we may conclude, there is no more merit\nin his continence, than may be imputed to the trunk of a tree. If\nhis abstinence had been the effect of his fear of God, he would not\nhave been so inattentive to his conscience in other respects. Observe\nAurelius: he is very sparing and moderate in his diet, both with regard\nto eating and drinking. You may conclude this proceeds from temperance;\nno such thing: Aurelius wants an appetite; the case of him, in this\nrespect, is like that of a man in a fever, who forbears to eat, because\nhe is not able; but you see, he is capable of swallowing all the goods\nand money he can lay his hands on; from whence we may suppose, that\nif his stomach was as voracious as his heart, he would be another\nHeliogabalus.\n\nXXVII. These are hypocrites by constitution; and temperament compleats\nin them, what study does in other people; theirs is not virtue, but\nonly the semblance or image of it, although it is an image which is not\nformed by art, but nature.\n\nXXVIII. I have heard it said, that in the court of Rome, when they\ndeliberate about the canonization of a saint, the point they examine\nwith, the greatest caution and nicety, is that of disinterestedness,\nbut when the proof of this excellence is once established, they are\nnot so prolix in their other enquiries; but abstracted from whether\nthis is, or is not their mode of proceeding, it appears to me a very\nrational one on two accounts; the first is, that disinterestedness\ndoes not depend, or depends very little and remotely, on constitution;\nand therefore we should conclude, this good quality is more an\nacquisition of virtue, than a gift of nature. The second is, because\nthis excellence may be supposed to imply or contain in it many others.\nThe reason is, money being the means with which men gratify all their\npassions, it may be said to serve as an auxiliary and assistant to\nevery kind of vice; and a man\u2019s not being greedy of money, is a token\nthat he is of greatly under the dominion of vice. Avarice is under the\ncontroul of, and made the hackney implement of all other vices. The\nincontinent man seeks money to indulge his carnal desires; the glutton\nto satiate his intemperate and beastly appetite; the ambitious man to\nattain promotion; and the vindictive one to revenge himself of, and\ndestroy his enemy. The same may be said of all other things. He then\nwho is not anxious for money, we may conclude, is not tainted with\nthose vices; or we may at least take disinterestedness, to be the best\nand most certain indication of virtue.\n\nXXIX. Those who are idolizers of applause, are not good, but great\nspirits. Enamoured with the beauty of human glory, they either are not\ndiseased or infected with the other passions, or disdain to subject\nthemselves to their controul. In the republic of vices also, there are\ndistinctions of classes, and some usurp to themselves, without any just\npretension to it, the rank of nobility. This presumption produces the\nutility, of their disdaining to mix with others of inferior order. As\none of this last sort we may reckon avarice, and thus the vain-glorious\nman will always be upon his guard to avoid falling into this meanness.\n\nXXX. I am persuaded, that if we were to investigate nicely, the cause\nor origin, of all the heroic actions that are to be met with in the\nprofane annals, we should find many more children of vice, than of\nvirtue among them. The anxious hope of reward, has been the occasion\nof winning more battles, than the love we bear to our country. How\nmany triumphs have been owing to emulation and envy! Alexander was\nstimulated by the glory of Achilles, C\u00e6sar by that of Alexander; and\nPompey, when he gave battle, had his attention more fixed on the\nvictories of C\u00e6sar, than the troops of the enemy. Many have done\ngreat things, from much more criminal incitements; for they have made\ntheir obsequies a ladder, wherewith to ascend to tyranny. How many\nhave served a state, with a view of making the state subservient to\nthemselves, and have first made it victorious, in order afterwards to\nenslave it! This was frequent and common among the most celebrated men\nof Greece. For this reason, eminent services to the republic became\nso suspicious in Athens, that they devised the law of ostracism to\npunish them as crimes; and they condemned to banishment, those who\ndistinguished themselves by their great and conspicuous actions.\n\nXXXI. You see the same thing happen with regard to services done to\nprivate people, that you do in those rendered to a state, which is,\nthat we frequently attribute to motives of fidelity and affection, what\nthe person employed, executed only with an eye to his own interest;\nbut when the dependence ceases, the real or true motive immediately\ndisplays itself.\n\nXXXII. So that upon making it just estimate of things, we shall find,\nthat the world is full of hypocrites; some who wear the deceitful\nappearance of particular virtues, and others who are dissemblers with\nrespect to all of them. The emperor Frederic the third said, as we are\ntold by \u00c6neas Silvius, that there was not any man whatever, who had not\na spice of the hypocrite in his composition.\n\nXXXIII. We should not approve, or adopt so severe a judgment; but it\nwould be necessary in my opinion, that all princes should partake of\nthe doubt or distrust of Frederic; for they are those who are most\nabused by, and the least aware of hypocrites. There is scarce any one,\nwho lays himself quite open when he is before them. The same who are\nfree and unreserved among their equals, are hypocrites in the presence\nof their superiors; and there is hardly a man, who, prior to his\nappearing before the person who commands him, does not daub his soul\nall over with washes, and give false colourings to his spirit, in the\nsame manner, that a strumpet paints her face before the goes abroad,\nand exhibits herself to public view. Momus wished there was a window\nin the breast of man, whereby to discover the secrets of the bosom;\nbut I should be contented with a door, of which the owner should keep\none key, and his superior the other. These however are all flights of\nfancy. What reason dictates is, that the works of God are perfect.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXXXIV. It would affect me much, if, because I proceed to take off the\nmufflings and coverings of vice, the world should think me one of those\nsuspicious geniuses, who will not give any person credit for acting\nfrom good motives, and who am always endeavouring to put sinister\ninterpretations on the causes of other peoples conduct. Those who\nare intimate with me, well know, that my spirit is not diseased with\nthat truly malignant malady; and some have remarked in me a contrary\ndefect, to wit, that of too benevolent and charitable a criticism on\nthe behaviour of other men. Perhaps the experience of the deceits and\nimpositions that have been put upon me, from my easiness in crediting\nthe appearances of virtue, have made these few reflections more\nobvious to me; which nevertheless, shall always rest with me in mere\ntheory; for I am persuaded that in the practice, my natural genius,\nand disposition would ever prevail over them, as also my remembrance,\nthat in the moral, it is better to err through compassion, than to\ndo right from motives of spite and envy. I would wish to conduct my\npen so delicately, that it should wound hypocrisy, without offending\ncharity; and I would expose the artifices of hypocrites in such a way,\nas should not alarm or disturb the quiet of the innocent and simple.\n\nXXXV. I will also acknowledge, that as time has helped me to discover\nin some people many vices, which I could not have believed; it has\nalso assisted me to discern many virtues in others, which I had no\nconception of. Thus the judgment of a good-intentioned man being poised\nin equilibrio between reason and experience, it is easy to imagine,\nthat his genius and disposition will incline the balance to the\ncharitable side.\n\nXXXVI. I have taken notice of a thing which is a little remarkable,\nand that is, that great virtues are less perceptible than small ones.\nThis is derived from the exercise of them not being so frequent, and\nthe value of them, not being generally understood. The going regularly\nto church, exterior modest deportment, taciturnity and fasting, are\nvirtues, which strike the eyes of every one, because they are daily\npractised, and every body knows them. There are other virtues, that\nare more substantial, and which spring from more noble roots, that the\nvulgar are unacquainted with, because they are carried about by those\nwho are masters of them, like ladies who go abroad _incog._ without\nthe ostentatious parade and show of equipage. There are men (would to\nGod there were more of them!) who with an open carriage, and the free\ncorrespondence and intercourse of an ordinary life, and who do not seem\nthe least sensible or affected with mysterious niceties, that nourish\nwithin their breasts, a robust virtue and solid piety, impenetrable\nto the most furious batteries of the three enemies of the soul. Let\nSir Thomas More, that just, wise, and prudent Englishman, whom I have\nalways regarded with profound respect, and a tenderness approaching to\ndevotion; I say let this man serve as an example to all men, and stand\nas a pattern to future ages, of all the virtues and excellencies I have\nbeen describing.\n\nXXXVII. If we view the exterior part of the life of Sir Thomas More,\nwe only see an able politician, simple in his manners, engaged in a\ndepartment of the state, and attentive to the affairs of the king\nand kingdom, always suffering himself to be wafted by the gale of\nfortune, without soliciting honours, and without refusing to accept\nof them; in private life, open, courteous, gentle, cheerful, and\neven fond of a convivial song, frequently partaking in the halls of\nmirth, of the jovial relaxations of the mind, and in the circulation\nof wit and pleasantry; always innocent, but never shewing the least\nsymptom of austerity. His application in literature was directed,\nindifferently and alternately, to the study of sacred and profane\nlearning, and he made great advances in both the one and the other.\nHis great application to, and proficiency in the living languages of\nEurope, represent him as a genius desirous of accommodating himself to\nthe world at large. His works, except such as he composed in prison\nduring the last year of his life, seemed more to savour of politics\nthan religion. I speak of the subject of them, not of the motive with\nwhich he wrote them. In his description of Utopia, which was truly\ningenious, delicate, and entertaining, he lets his pen run so much on\nthe interests of the state, as makes it seem as if he was indifferent\nabout the concerns of religion.\n\nXXXVIII. Who, in this image or description of Sir Thomas More, would\nrecognize that glorious martyr of Christ, and that generous hero,\nwhose constancy to the obligations of his religion could not be\nbent or warped, neither by the threats or promises of Henry VIII.\nnor a hard imprisonment of fourteen months, nor the persuasions and\nintreaties of his wife, nor by the sad prospect of seeing his family\nand children reduced to misery and beggary, nor by the privation of\nall human comfort, in taking from him all his books, nor finally by\nthe terrors of a scaffold placed before his eyes? So certain is it,\nthat the qualities of great souls are not to be discovered, but by the\ntouch-stone of great occasions and hard trials, and may be compared to\nlarge flints, which only manifest their smooth or shining surfaces by\nthe execution of hard blows.\n\nXXXIX. Sir Thomas More was the same while he was a prisoner of state,\nas when he was High Chancellor of England; the same in adverse, as in\nprosperous fortune; the same ill treated, as in high favour; the same\nin the prison, as seated at the head of the Court of Chancery; but\nadversity, manifested and made visible his whole heart, of which the\ngreatest and best part had before lain hid. This great man, used to\ngive to his own virtues an air of humanity and condescension, which in\nthe eyes of the vulgar abated their splendour; but in proportion as it\nobscured the lustre of them to their view, it augmented it in the sight\nof all men of discernment and penetration. It once happened when he\nwas High Chancellor, that a gentleman, who had a suit depending before\nhim, made him a present of two silver bottles: it was inconsistent\nwith his dignity or integrity to accept the present; and how did Sir\nThomas conduct himself? Did he fall into a passion against the suitor\nfor having offered an affront to his reputation? Did he punish the\ncriminal audacity of the man, for attempting to corrupt and make venal\nthe functions of his duty? Did he manifest before his domestics any\ndisinterested delicacy, or appear scandalized at the temptation? No; he\ndid none of all this, because nothing of this sort was correspondent\nto the nobleness or generous turn of his mind. He received the bottles\nwith a good grace, and immediately gave orders to one of his servants\nto fill them with the best wine he had in his cellar, and carry\nthem back to the gentleman, together with this courteous message,\n_That it gave him great pleasure to have an opportunity of obliging\nhim, and that any sort of wine he had in his house was much at his\nservice_. Expressing, by this prudent seeming insensibility or want\nof apprehension, that he supposed that was the purpose for which the\ngentleman sent the bottles. In this manner, he joined integrity to\ngentleness of reproof, and correction with courteous behaviour; and by\nso much the less parade he made of his own purity, by so much the more\nwas the confusion of the gentleman diminished.\n\nXL. It is clear, that the heroic constancy with which he supported his\nadherence to his religion, was not the effect of a strained violence\non his nature, but proceeded from innate virtue, which acts in all\nthings, and on all occasions, according to the habitual dispositions\nof the mind; for always, to the very crisis of his suffering, he\npreserved the native cheerfulness of his disposition. He did not\nappear less festive, nor less tranquil in chains, than he had before\nappeared in the banquet room. During the time of his trial he was\nall composure, and when it was drawing near a conclusion, and those\niniquitous judges, who had already sacrificed their consciences to the\nwill of their sovereign, were on the point, to please and flatter him,\nof delivering that innocent man, as a victim to his resentment, the\nbarber came to shave him, and just as he was going to begin his work,\nSir Thomas recollected himself, and said _Hold, as the King and I at\npresent are contending to whom this head belongs, in case it should\nbe adjudged to him, it would be wrong for me to rob him of the beard,\nso you must desist_. Being about to ascend the scaffold, and finding\nhimself feeble, he begged one who was near to aid him in getting up\nthe ladder, saying to him at the same time, _Assist me to get up, for\nbe assured I shan\u2019t trouble you to help me down again_. O eminent\nvirtue! O spirit truly sublime, who mounted the scaffold with the same\nfestive cheerfulness, that he would sit down to a banquet! Let men of\nlittle minds and narrow souls contemplate this example, and learn to\nknow, that true virtue does not consist in the observance of forms and\nscrupulous niceties.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXLI. O how many antipodes in morality to Sir Thomas More are to be\nfound in every state! for both in the east and the west, you will meet\nwith many of those ridiculous scarecrows, who lead a kind of hermetic\nlife, and are called sanctified or holy men; but those of this day do\nnot mortify themselves so much, but offend other people more, than\nthose of former times were used to do. With a displeasing gravity,\nand forbidding look that amounts to sour sternness; a conversation\nso opposite to the cheerful, that it borders on the extreme of\nclownish surliness; a zeal so harsh and severe, that it degenerates\ninto cruelty; a scrupulous observance of rites and ceremonies, that\napproaches to superstition; and by the mere want or absence of a few\nvices; I say, that with the help of these appearances, they, without\nmore cost or trouble, set themselves up as patterns or images of\nultimate perfection; and they are truly images in the strict sense of\nthe word, for their whole value consists in their external shape and\nfigure; and I besides call them images, because they are not endued\nor informed with a true, but with the sham semblance of a spirit. I\nrepeat again that they are images, because they are hard as marble,\nand insensible and unfeeling as the trunks of trees. In the morality\nthat directs them, gentleness of manners, affability, and pity, are\nblotted out of the catalogue of virtues. I have not even yet said\nenough. Those two sensible characteristics of charity, pointed out by\nSt. Paul, that is to say, patience and benevolence, are so foreign to\ntheir dispositions, that they are inclined to consider them as signs\nof relaxation of discipline, or at least of lukewarmness. They assume\nthe figure of saints, without possessing more sanctity than the stock\nor stone images of such, and would number themselves among the blessed,\nwanting the requisites which the gospel expresses to constitute them\nsuch, and make them deserving of being inserted in that catalogue,\nwhich are meekness, compassion, and a conciliatory spirit. _Beati\nmites, beati misericordes, beati pacifici._\n\nXLII. It is also certain, that virtue is tinctured with, or wears a\ndifferent hue, according to the genius or disposition of the subject\nin whom it exists, and on this account, in different individuals it\nappears in different colours. Notwithstanding this, we ought in the\nmixture or combination, to distinguish what is derived solely from\nvirtue, and what is produced by the intervention of constitution. There\nare men of a harsh, choleric, unpleasant cast of mind, who at the same\ntime are virtuous; but their virtue on this account is not harsh,\ncholeric, and displeasing, but rather in its operations, by means of\nits innate good qualities, corrects those defects. The misfortune is,\nthat these defects of temper, confound the understanding and pervert\nthe judgment; and in consequence of this perversion of the judgment,\nvirtue is prevented from amending the defects of the genius. A virtuous\nman, who is of an impetuous, violent disposition, and inclining to\nthe morose, when placed in command, is easily brought to think; he\nfinds himself in circumstances where prudence dictates that he should\nuse rigour; whereas one of an excessive gentle and mild genius, can\nnever persuade himself that contingent is arrived. Both one and the\nother discharge and preserve their consciences, and the public are the\nsufferers by their mistakes, but in a very different degree, according\nto the diversity of the employments or destinations of such people.\nThe very gentle man is most pernicious in external policy, and the\nrigorous in internal. An excess of clemency, and forbearing to put in\nexecution criminal laws, in cases where the offences committed are\ninjurious to the public at large, is a very great evil. In matters that\nconcern the reformation, or internal amendment of souls, rigour is not\nonly useless, but prejudicial, because the fear of temporal punishment\ndoes not make penitents, but hypocrites; it only removes the external\nexecution of vice, and concentrates the evil intention within the\nsoul, where it produces a new sin, in the hatred it excites against the\njudge.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXLIII. I have observed, that for the sincere conversion or turning\nof mens hearts, benignity and gentle treatment has done miracles, in\ncases where rigour has been found ineffectual. Two illustrious examples\nof this sort, which in different ages have been exhibited on the\ntheatre of France, occur to me at present. The first is that of Peter\nAbelard, a most subtle logician, and famous broacher of heresies in\nthe twelfth century. The adventures of this man were extraordinary,\nand he for the most part experienced adverse fortune. He suffered\nmany persecutions, some of which were unjust ones; but neither the\njust nor the unjust were capable of subduing his mind, or mitigating\nthe contentious vivacity of his spirit. His errors, after innumerable\ndebates, were condemned by the council of Sens, at which St. Bernard\nassisted. He appealed from the sentence to Pope innocent the Second,\nwho confirmed the decision of the council; and added to it, that his\nbooks should be burnt, and the author imprisoned for life. Abelard had\nan infinite number of enemies, many of whom were not so from their\nzeal to religion, but from many other very different motives. As an\naugmentation of his misfortunes, there was scarce any one who did not\nexclaim against him, and cry aloud for the execution of the sentence.\nIn this deplorable situation of Abelard, there was only one man who\nhad generosity enough to take the favourable side of the question,\nand interest himself on his behalf. This was that most pious and wise\nperson St. Peter the Venerable, abbot of the great monastery of Cluny,\nwho solicited and obtained of the Pope, Abelard\u2019s pardon. He also\nreconciled him with St. Bernard, which amounted to the same thing as\nindemnifying him against the public hatred. Besides this, as a remedy\nfor all his reverses of fortune, he offered him an asylum in his\nmonastery of Cluny, which monastery received him in its arms like a\nloving father, and gave him the habit of a monk.\n\nIt will be proper to observe here, that Eloisa, a sensible, beautiful,\nand noble French lady, was in her youth in love with, and beloved by\nAbelard, to such an excess, that their love broke through all the\nfences of honour. Historians relate a very singular circumstance of\nthis woman, which is, that Abelard being desirous of marrying her,\nshe, notwithstanding her prodigious fondness for him, rejected the\nproposal, and chose rather to continue his concubine than be his wife,\nalledging as her motive for this conduct, that she would not, by\nher marriage, deprive the church of the great lustre that might be\nreflected on it by the sublime genius of Abelard, although in the end,\nshe, by the importunities and threats of her friends and relations,\nwas prevailed on to espouse him. She afterwards took the veil, and\nbecame an exemplary religious. She always maintained a very tender and\naffectionate correspondence with Abelard, but at the same time in very\nchaste terms, and such as were conformable to the rules of virtue and\ndecorum. As soon as she was informed of Abelard\u2019s death, she begged of\nSt. Peter the Venerable, that he would let her have his body, that she\nmight bury it in the convent where she was prelate; and the pious abbot\ngranted her request. It appears by the epistles of Abelard, that Eloisa\nwas universally beloved and respected for her virtue and discretion. He\nsays, the bishops loved her as a daughter, the abbesses as a sister,\nand the seculars a mother.\n\nThe effect which this generous benignity of St. Peter the Venerable\nhad upon Abelard, was admirable. He not only became a monk, but a most\nexemplary one, and a shining pattern of all kinds of virtues, of which\nSt. Peter the Venerable gives irrefragable testimony in his letter to\nEloisa on the occasion of his death, which letter is filled with the\nhighest eulogiums on the virtues of Abelard. He says in one part of\nit, that he does not remember to have seen a man so humble as him; and\nin another, that it was matter of admiration, to observe a person so\nfamous and of so great a name, have so lowly an opinion of himself.\nIn another, he says, his understanding, his tongue, and his works,\nwere always employed on celestial objects. And in another, he compares\nhim to the great Gregory in the following words: _Nec (sicut de magno\nGregorio legitur) momentum aliquod pr\u00e6terire sinebat, quin semper aut\noraret, aut legeret, aut scriberet, aut dictaret_. These eulogiums are\nconfirmed, and if possible exceeded, in the Chronicle of the Monastery\nof Cluny, which says, that, from the time of his taking the habit of a\nmonk, his thoughts, words, and actions, were always divine: _Et deinde\nmens ejus, lingua ejus, opus ejus, semper divina fuere_.\n\nXLIV. So that this man, who could not be made to bend to the most\nlearned men of France, who were engaged in continual controversies\nwith him; nor to the force of the civil power, exerted against him\nvarious times at the instance of his enemies; nor to the ecclesiastical\nprelates, nor to the authority of a council, nor to the zeal and\nlearning of a St. Bernard: This man, I say, on whom all these\nexertions had no influence, submitted to the gentle, compassionate,\nand benevolent spirit of St. Peter the Venerable. The estimation and\ntenderness, with which this saint always regarded Abelard after his\nconversion, was very great, as is evident from two epitaphs he wrote to\ngrace his tomb. I shall insert a part of each of them here, by which\nmay be seen the high opinion he entertained of the learning and wisdom\nof this eminent man.\n\n\nFirst Epitaph.\n\n    _Gallorum Socrates, Plato maximus Hesperiarum,_\n    _Noster Aristoteles, Logicis, quicumque fuerunt,_\n    _Aut par, aut melior, studiorum cognitus orbi_\n    _Princeps, ingenio varius, subtilis, & acer._\n\n\nSecond Epitaph.\n\n    _Petrus in hac petra latitat, quem mundus Homerum_\n      _Clamabat, sed jam sidera sidus habent._\n    _Sol erat hic Gallis, sed eum jam fata tulerunt:_\n      _Ergo caret Regio Gallica sole sua._\n    _Ille sciens quidquid fuit ulli scibile, vicit_\n      _Artifices, artes absque docente docens._\n\nXLV. The second example, which is still more striking and illustrious\nthan the first, is that of the Huguenots in the reign of Charles the\nninth, in the diocese of Lisieux in Normandy. The learned Dominican\nJohn Henuyer, who had been confessor to Henry the second, was bishop\nof that diocese, when orders came from the king to the governor of\nNormandy, to put to the sword all the Huguenots of that province. The\nvenerable prelate opposed the execution of the order as far as it\nrelated to his own diocese efficaciously, by declaring that he would\nsooner submit his own throat to the knife, than consent to the death\nof those heretics, whom he had always considered as sheep of his\nflock, although they had gone astray; and used such other arguments,\nas prevailed on the governor to suspend the execution of the orders;\nand the king, moved with the firmness and zeal of the pious bishop,\nrevoked the decree with respect to the Huguenots of that bishopric. The\nhand of Omnipotence heaped blessings on the paternal affection which\nbishop Henuyer manifested to his flock, and on the pious exertion he\nmade to save their lives at all events; and (O wonderful to relate!)\nin none of the other parts of France, where rivers of Huguenot blood\nhad been spilt in the execution of the king\u2019s orders, was the heresy\nextinguished; but on the diocese of Lisieux only, did God confer this\ngreat blessing. The experience of the paternal bowels and feeling of\ntheir prelate for them, made such an impression on the hearts of the\nHuguenots of that district, that they all, without a single exception,\nbecame converts to the catholic faith. Thus does benignity triumph\nover the most stubborn hearts, when managed and conducted with a pious\nzeal and consummate prudence.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXLVI. But to return to our subject, as all that was introduced in the\npreceding section was by way of digression: I say, that among the\ngroupe of those severe saturnine geniuses, of whom we were just before\nspeaking, are to be found the worst species of hypocrites. I speak of\nthose censurers of other people\u2019s conduct and behaviour, who pretend to\ndo it out of zeal, and to promote the welfare of those they fall upon.\nThese act as if they were ministers vested with full powers from Hell,\nor were a _quid pro quo_ of the Devil, because their whole occupation\nis pointing out the sins of mankind; a race so diabolical, that they\nare at variance with their neighbours, and friends with their vices.\nThey pretend they love the first, and abhor the last, but it is quite\nthe reverse. They are always busied in throwing biting reflections\non their neighbours, and at the same time licking their chops with a\nlonging desire to taste of their sins. There is no news so pleasing to\nthem, as this or that person having made such and such a slip. This is\ntheir favourite little aliment, because it affords pabulum to feed and\nnourish their malevolence.\n\nThey exclaim furiously, and with all their might, against sinful\nand sensual practices, and wreck their inventions for hyperboles to\nexaggerate the wickedness of them; and after they have glutted their\nrevenge on a miserable individual they have been abusing, they direct\nthe rage of their thunder against the public at large, and cry out,\nThe people are all going the high road to perdition: God defend us,\nsure the like never was seen! Their daily text is the _O tempora! O\nmores!_ of Cicero. The matter of their ordinary conversations is truly\nand properly matter, as it is all putrefaction and corruption; for they\ntalk of nothing but turpitudes and uncleanness. They reserve for their\nown use and purposes Satan\u2019s Gazette, where the news is distributed\nin articles and paragraphs received from different quarters; as for\nexample: \u201cWe hear by an express arrived from such a street, dated\nsuch a day of the month, which was brought by an herb woman, that Mr.\nA---- has made great advances in his negotiations with Madam B----;\nand although in the beginning he met with some difficulties, by\nproposing more advantageous and agreeable terms, was at last admitted\nto a private audience.\u201d In this manner it proceeds to give an account\nof various other matters, and always, as is customary, tells us\nsomething about the court; as for instance; \u201cHis majesty Pluto and\nall his family, although they cannot fail to be incommoded with the\nexcessive heats which prevail in his territories, continue for all\nthat to pass their time very jollily, by the entertainment they find\nin hunting all sorts of sins, which is a game that is found in great\nabundance in every quarter of his infernal majesty\u2019s dominions.\u201d But\nto be serious: Those who blazon or aggravate the vices that are most\nfrequent or prevailing in a place or town, do a great injury which they\nare not aware of, which is removing from many a certain impediment,\nwhich withholds or restrains them from falling into those very vices.\nWhen speaking of the vice of incontinence for example, a man exclaims,\n\u201cThe city in this respect is in a total state of depravity; that the\ndissoluteness which pervades it is horrid and unbridled; that already,\nwith a little reserve, or without any at all, you can scarce find a\nman that is continent, or a woman that is chaste; and truly this is\nthe vice, against which they most frequently make such declamations.\u201d\nSome hear this, who till then had entertained no such idea of the\nthing, and who were continent from the apprehension of being exposed,\nand the fear of being repulsed by this or that woman. This, to those\nwho are withheld from being incontinent, principally or solely by\nthe shame of being remarked, or that of being ignominiously repulsed,\ntakes away in part, or removes totally, the chief impediment which\nretrained them from rushing into criminal amours. If all, says each\nof these to himself, or nearly all the men in the town, are guilty of\nthis vice, my share of disgrace by falling into it will be but small,\nas I shall only bear my proportion as one among so large a number; and\nif all, or nearly all the women, are disposed to be lewd and wanton,\nit will rarely happen that I shall meet with one that will not yield\nto my solicitations. Some, from not foreseeing the inconvenience, are\nbetrayed into this absurdity by their zeal, and commit the mistake with\nthe best intentions. I have many times heard preachers exclaim with\ngreat fervour, that the town is filled with scandals and turpitudes;\nthat there is scarce a house, which in every corner of it is not\nburning with the infernal fire of lust. I entreat most earnestly all\nthose who exercise this sacred function, and God is the judge of the\nsincerity and pious intention with which I make the request, that\nthey would abstain from such-like declamations, for the mischief they\nproduce, is greater than the benefits which are derived from them.\n\nXLVII. But to resume the thread of our discourse, what we have just\nfinished saying being rather an addition to, or digression from, our\nmain or principal subject. The hypocrites we mentioned last, are such\nas conceal their malice under the cloak or pretence of zeal; but there\nare others, who are such at their own expence, because in order to\nappear virtuous they punish themselves, by abstaining from many things\ntheir appetites prompt them to desire; whereas all the cost of the\nfirst sort, is defrayed at the expence of their neighbour\u2019s honour. It\nis true that this rule admits of some exceptions, for there are those\nso malignant, who, to wound with certainty another\u2019s fame, would many\ntimes commit a violence on their own inclinations. They would abstain\nfrom the external exercise of those vices which they point out in\nothers, be it ever so painful to them, in order that they may censure\nthem with the greater freedom. Unhappy passion! Detestable hypocrisy!\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXLVIII. There remains for us to say something on two particulars, by\nthe intervention of which, vice is frequently reverenced as virtue:\nThe first is the exterior resemblance of certain vices to certain\nvirtues; for as every virtue is placed between two vicious extremes,\nmany of these last wear the appearance of the first. Thus prodigality\noften passes for liberality, rashness for valour, obstinacy for\nfirmness, cunning for prudence, and pusillanimity for moderation. It is\nalso the same with respect to many other things.\n\nXXIX. The second is, the material commission of an act, abstracted from\nthe turpitude of the end it was done to answer. If we were to explore\nthe motives that intervene in an infinite number of actions, which are\nright to outward appearance; we should perceive, they were derived from\nindirect principles, and performed to answer perverse purposes. It is\nvery common for one vice to be an obstacle to the external operation\nor execution of another. This man is continent to avoid spending his\nmoney; that, because he is terrified by the danger of the enterprize.\nIn the first, continence is the child of avarice; in the second, of\npusillanimity. This one puts on the shew of humility, because he is\na candidate for favour and promotion; another, to avoid the exposing\nhimself to a quarrel. In the first, humility springs from ambition, in\nthe second it is derived from cowardice. Much, more might be said on\nthese two heads; but, as the subject matter of them has been largely\ntreated of in various other books, we shall rest the thing here, and\ncontent ourselves with the slight observations we have already made.\n\n\nEND OF VOL. I.\n\n\n\n\nERRATUM.\n\n\nP. 11. 1. 1. _read_ matter; for he declares, [Transcriber\u2019s note:\nrather than \u201cmatter, he declares\u201d].\n\n\n\n\nFOOTNOTES.\n\n\n[1] Feyjoo, in the supplement to his Teatro Critico, says, the relation\nof the Earl of Leicester\u2019s being guilty of the horrid crime of\nmurdering his wife in order to remove all impediments to his marrying\nQueen Elizabeth, which he had entertained hopes of doing, was taken\nfrom Nicholas Sanders, and another person whose name he has forgot;\nhe says further, he has since found reason to doubt the truth of that\naccusation, and condemns the mistaken zeal of Sanders, who he owns was\nmuch addicted to give credit to any thing he heard against the enemies\nof the Catholic Religion. He declares that Protestants have the same\nright to natural justice as Catholics, and that they should not be\npositively and unjustly charged with crimes, upon false rumours, or\ndubious reports.\n\n[2] The son of Pope Alexander the sixth.\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber\u2019s Notes\n\n\nReferences to \u201cTheatrico-Critico\u201d corrected to \u201cTeatro Critico\u201d\n\nThe erratum is corrected in place.\n\nObvious typographical errors have been silently corrected. Variations\nin hyphenation and accents have been standardised but all other\nspelling and punctuation remains unchanged.\n\nNumbering errors/omissions from the original are left unaltered. As\nsuch there are missing/skipped section numbers and paragraph numbers\nin the text.\n\nItalics are represented thus _italic_.","title":"Essays, or discourses, vol. 1 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the Spanish","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":78013}