{"collection":"philosophy-ethics","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_71278/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_71278","id":"gutenberg_71278","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/71278","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 SECOND.\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 SECOND VOLUME\n\n\n    THE BALANCE OF ASTREA; OR, UPRIGHT ADMINISTRATION OF\n    JUSTICE.                                                 Page 1\n\n    ON THE IMPUNITY OF LYING.                                 p. 41\n\n    ON THE LOVE OF OUR COUNTRY, AND NATIONAL PREJUDICE OR\n    PREPOSSESSION.                                            p. 66\n\n    ON TRUE AND FALSE URBANITY.                              p. 109\n\n    A DEFENCE OR VINDICATION OF THE WOMEN.                   p. 189\n\n    ON CHURCH MUSIC.                                         p. 313\n\n    THE WONDERFUL EFFECTS OF MUSIC, AND A COMPARISON OF THE\n    ANTIENT WITH THE MODERN.                                 p. 357\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration]\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nBALANCE OF ASTREA;\n\nOR,\n\nUpright Administration of Justice:\n\nIn a LETTER from an OLD JUDGE, to his SON who was newly raised to the\nBench.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. I do not know, my Son, whether to congratulate or condole with\nyou on the information you give me, of his Majesty having honoured\nyou with a Judge\u2019s robe. I contemplate you as placed in a state of\nslavery, which, although it is an honourable one, must always remain\nand continue a slavery. Already you are neither mine nor your own, but\nbelong to the public at large. The obligations of this charge should\nnot only emancipate you from your father, but detach you from yourself\nalso. There is an end of your considering your convenience, your\nhealth, or your ease; and you have only now to attend to the duties\nand discharge of your conscience; you should look upon your own good\nas a foreign concern, and regard that of the public as your own. You\nare already divested of neighbours, friends, or kindred; you have no\ncountry, and must have no regard for the tyes of flesh and blood. Do\nyou think I mean to say, you should cease to be a man? No, certainly;\nbut I would have it understood, that the affections of the man should\nlive in such a state of separation from the duties of the Judge, that\nthere should not be the slightest commerce or correspondence between\nthem.\n\nII. I repeat again, that I am at a loss whether to condole with or\ncongratulate you on the event. I view your soul as exposed to the\ncontinual hazard of being lost; and I was on the point of saying, the\noffice of a Judge affords proximate occasions for sinning through the\ncourse of a man\u2019s life. You may say this is a hard proposition; and\nI acknowledge it is; but what other inference can be drawn from the\nterrible sentence of St. John Chrysostom, which is in the following\nwords: _It appears to me impossible that any of those who govern should\nbe saved._ And what other thing could the religious Pontiff, Pius the\nVth, mean, when he said, that while he was a private Religious, he had\ngreat hopes of being saved, though when they made him a Cardinal he\nbegan to fear, but when they made him a Pope he almost despaired of\nsalvation? If this is not a virtual asseveration, that the occupation\nof a ruler furnishes a continual and proximate occasion for sinning, I\ndo not understand the expression. But it is true, that although this\nshould be the case, the crime would be obviated, because the necessity\nof the public makes the exercise of such a function inevitable; but\nthen the crime would only be obviated in such subjects, who feel in\nthemselves, dispositions to perform the duties of such an office with\nrectitude and propriety; as for the others, I will not exculpate them.\nI do not understand that text of the Ecclesiastes as an advice or\ncaution, but as a precept and injunction, which says, Don\u2019t solicit to\nbe made a judge, unless you find yourself possessed with that virtue\nand fortitude, which is necessary to extirpate evil deeds.\n\nIII. He who doubts whether he is endued with a sufficient share of\nknowledge, or a necessary portion of health and constitution, to\nundertake so weighty a charge; he who does not find himself possessed\nof a robust heart, which is invincible to, and proof against the\npromises and threats of the great and powerful; he who feels himself\nenamoured with the beauty of gold; he who knows his sensibility\nliable to be wrought upon by the intreaties of domestics, friends, or\nrelations, cannot, in my opinion, enter upon the office of a magistrate\nwith a good conscience. I do not, although it is indispensably\nnecessary, comprehend in this catalogue of requisites the virtue of\nprudence, because every one fancies he possesses it; but, if a man\nmistakes in this particular, I judge his error to be incurable.\n\nIV. He who is cloathed with a robe, ought to keep his soul well\nfortified at all points, because in a variety of occurrences, there\nis no passion that may not be inimical to justice; and the suitors\nare very solicitous in examining where the defence is weak; even\nlawful affections are sometimes hostile to her. What is more right or\nproper than a man\u2019s tenderness for his wife? But how often has a man\u2019s\naffection for his wife, been the cause of warping the wand of justice!\n\nV. I don\u2019t mean to inculcate, that a judge should be fierce,\nunfeeling, and harsh; but that he should be firm, spirited, and a man\nof integrity. It is rare, but not impossible, for a man to possess\na soul of wax for the duties of private life, and a mind of brass\nfor the administration of public ones; although the heart may be\nsusceptible of its tendernesses, the sacred castle of justice should\nbe inaccessible to such feelings. It is said, that friendships may be\npermitted to approach even to the altar; but they should not be so much\nas suffered to enter the doors of the temple of Astrea.\n\nVI. I contemplate you, my Son, as having some advantageous dispositions\nfor exercising this office; you are disinterested, an important quality\nin a judge; but that does not quiet my fears; for how can I be certain\nyou will continue so in future? Disinterestedness, like beauty, is\nan endowment and ornament of youth, and rarely accompanies life in\nold age. I have read but of two women who preserved their beauty\ntill seventy; the one was Diana of Poitiers, Dutchess of Valentine,\nwho lived in the reign of Henry the IId. King of France; the other\nwas Aspasia of Miletus, concubine of Cyrus King of Persia. I do not\nknow whether you can reckon many more men, who left totally to their\nnatural dispositions, without the invention or assistance of other\nhelps, preserved their contempt for gold till they arrived at that age.\nThe soul fades with the body, and the narrowness and contractions of\navarice are its wrinkles.\n\nVII. The danger of people in exalted stations in the law, falling\ninto this vice, is greater, because they are exposed to more frequent\ntemptations. Elizabeth of England used to say, that the office of a\nJudge at his first elevation, seemed to fit on him like new cloaths,\nwhich appear tight and strait at the beginning, but after a little\ntime they stretch and become easy and familiar. The same may be said\nof Judges in all other kingdoms. Many, who at first scruple to accept\nan apple, in the course of a few years, are capable of swallowing\nthe whole orchard of the Hesperides; and you know the apples of that\norchard were golden ones. The same thing happens to them that happens\nto rivulets, which rarely fall into, and are swallowed by the sea, with\nthe scanty stock they contained in their first passages.\n\nVIII. Let no caution, my Son, appear too great, to guard you against\nthe treacherous attacks of avarice; this serpent, whose bulk in time\nincreases without limits, is at first no bigger than a hair; I mean to\nsay, they commonly begin with presents of such trifling value, that\nthe refusing to accept them would be blamed by the world as affected\nnicety. But what follows? Why, that when they are once admitted, by\nthe exertion of their power in the first entrances of the door of the\nwill, they proceed to widen it by little and little, so that every\nday it becomes capable of receiving more and more. God defend us from\na magistrate\u2019s setting about to enrich himself! because in such a\ncase, he may be compared to the element of water, whose stock bears\nproportion to the contribution it receives; while it is a brook, it\nonly receives fountains; afterwards becoming a river, it receives\nbrooks; and when it arrives at being a sea, it receives rivers.\n\nIX. It is not sufficient that you keep your own hands clean; but it is\nalso necessary that you examine those of your domestics. The integrity\nof a magistrate requires, that he should adopt the practice of an\nactive and vigilant matron, who not only takes care of the cleanliness\nof her own person, but looks also to the cleanliness of the rest of her\nhousehold. This is not only an obligation you owe to your conscience,\nbut is likewise a matter that concerns your reputation, because it\nis generally understood, that the inferior part of the family is a\nsubterraneous conduit-pipe, through which, supplies are conveyed to\nthe hand of the master; but in truth it happens in point of regale or\nrefreshment, as it happened to the fountain of Arethusa, which although\nit was received by a cavern in Greece, the place it fertilized was the\nland of Sicily. We read in Daniel, that the ministers of the temple\nare the dainties which were presented to the idol; in the house of\na magistrate, the idol eats the dainties which are presented to his\nministers.\n\nX. The apprehensions I am under, that you may one day be betrayed into\nthis corruption, move me at present to give you an excellent caution,\nas a preservative against the temptation of gifts, which is, that you\nshould consider any one who attempts to gain your favour in this way,\nas a person who offers a direct affront to your honour; for it is\nclear, that by such an action, he gives it to be understood, that you\nhold in your hands the scales of venal justice. There are two sorts of\npeople in the world, who fall into the dangerous error, of mistaking\ninjuries for courtesies; women who receive presents from gallants, and\nministers of justice who permit the reception of them from suitors: for\nwith respect to the givers, every present is meant as a subornation;\notherwise, why is not their liberality manifested to other people as\nwell as to those from whom they entertain expectations? It can only\nbe, because they consider what they give as an offering made to their\ninterest; and that, to which they affect giving the appearance of\na courtesy, is at bottom nothing better than a bribe. He who makes\npresents to a lady, or a minister of justice, attempts their corruption\nby the act, and in his imagination supposes he has effected it. You\nought, therefore, my Son, to consider every one who attempts to gain\nyour favour by such means, as an enemy to your conscience, and as a\nperson dangerous to, and one who would injure your honour; and you\nshould look upon him as a man, more deserving of your contempt and\nindignation, than your courtesy.\n\nXI. I have given the name of preservative to the foregoing reflection,\nbecause it is rather calculated to prevent the infection from getting\nfooting in those, who are sound and in health, than to cure the\ndisease, after it has once taken root. He who has contracted a habit of\ngorging himself with presents, is callous to the reproach of having put\nhis decisions to sale.\n\nXII. I am inclined to think, Spain is more free from this pestilence\nthan other kingdoms; at least in ministers of your class, this meanness\nhas rarely been observed. It has ever been remarked, that with us,\nthe higher people have been raised on the seats of justice, they have\nseemed the further removed from the baseness of avarice.\n\nXIII. Would to God, our tribunals were as deaf to recommendations,\nas they are untainted with bribes! It is on this side, their credit\nis most tarnished in the public opinion. There is scarce a sentence\ngiven in a civil controversy, which the malice of grumblers, and the\nvoice of neutral people, does not impute to have been the effect of\nsome powerful recommendation. The presumption of the influence, which\nthe protection of men of weight has with the Judges, is so prevalent,\nthat many who have been despoiled by an unfair decision, and who are\npersuaded of the justness of their cause, are afraid to appeal, if they\nknow their opponent has great connections.\n\nXIV. We should hope, the world is greatly mistaken in this matter. The\nministers of justice, as far as they are able, and they most commonly\ncan do this, must discharge and comply with the duties of their\nfunction in judicial phrases, and according to the words of the law;\nand although there may have been positive promises made, when they\ncome to the sentence, they must consult and conform to the books of\njurisprudence, and not the letters of recommendation. God defend us,\nhowever, from the serious misfortune of the protector of either party,\nhaving, or ever being able to have, influence in the seats of justice!\nFor then we may have reason to apprehend, that to the shame of the\nlaw, the motive of the conduct of the partial Judge may be betrayed\nby his countenance, and that the dread of such motive being known,\nmay be the torturer who presses out and exposes the secret, or else,\nthat the thing may be unravelled by conjectures, or proved by some\ntransactions in the business; and these are the sort of cases, which,\nafter many years study, make people understand the law in a sense they\nnever understood it before, and which, in the same instant, increases\nand lessens their esteem for the same authors, and causes the breath\nof favour to incline the balance, with which they weigh probabilities,\nto the side where there is the least weight in the scale. I remember\nthat great lawyer, Alexander of the family of the Alexanders, in his\ntreatise called _Dias Geniales_, says of himself, that he abandoned the\nprofession of an advocate in disgust, from having observed in his own\npractice, that neither the wisdom or abilities of a counsellor, nor the\ngoodness of a cause, were of any avail in courts, when the opposite\nparties were espoused by people of power.\n\nXV. But excepting these instances, which have weight with those only,\nwho had rather rise to the highest seats on the bench than ascend to\nheaven, other modes of favour in courts are trifling and of little use\nor consequence; but to speak the truth, we ourselves give occasion\nto their being thought useful and of consequence. If when a person\nof authority intercedes on behalf of a suitor, we give him hopes and\nencouragement; or if our answers to such applications, are in terms\nwhich exceed what is necessary in a judicial reply; and if afterwards,\nwhen that person obtains a sentence in his favour, we seem desirous, or\nbehave so as to make it be thought, our suffrage was a compliment to\nthe great man who interested himself in the suitor\u2019s behalf, in order\nthat he should think he was obliged to us; we are the authors of this\nerror in mankind, and the cause of the injury, which, in consequence of\nit, our credit suffers with the world.\n\nXVI. This notion of the utility of recommendations, is an impediment\nto our business, as well as injurious to our reputation; for it is the\noccasion of our being interrupted with visits, and puts us under the\nnecessity of answering letters of intercession, by which means we waste\na great part of that time, which we ought to employ in study. If they\nknew they were taking all this pains to no purpose, they would not\nembarrass us with their applications, nor rob us of our time.\n\nXVII. How then are we to act? That is easily determined; speak plain,\nand undeceive all the world. Let them know, that the sentence depends\nupon, and is ruled by the law, and not by solicitations and private\nfriendships; that we can serve no man at the expence of justice and\nour conscience; and that that which they call being favourable, the\npretence with which they cover all their petitions, upon a practical\nexamination of things, is a chimera; for a Judge can never shew favour,\nor at most the cases in which he can do it are metaphysical; even\nin doubtful and obscure cases, and in those where the probabilities\nare equal, the laws prescribe rules of equity, which we are strictly\nand rigorously bound to follow. Oh! but some cases are left to the\ndiscretion of the judge! It is true, but they are not for this reason\nto be determined by his absolute will. Prudential maxims, and rules of\nequity, point out the road we should pursue; and it is not lawful for\nus to follow any other course, either for the sake of obliging great\nmen or friends. When it is said, this or that is left to the will\nand pleasure of the Judge, it should not be understood to mean his\nabsolute uncontrolable will, but to imply, that he is to be guided in\nhis decision by the dictates of reason, and the principles of law. This\ndefinition, is conformable to the sense of the Latin verb _arbitror_,\nwhich signifies an act of the understanding, and not of the will.\n\nXVIII. I am well aware, that objections may be made to this frank mode\nof acting: the first is, that we may be called blunt and ill-bred;\nbut, besides that the reflection would be unjust, it would last no\nlonger, than till it was generally known, we had resolved to adopt this\nmethod of acting, and till it was become common and familiar among\nus. While there shall be but one or two judicial ministers who act in\nthis open ingenuous manner, their candid behaviour may pass among the\nignorant for want of breeding and courtesy; but if all the rest were to\ndo the same, even the ignorant would become sensible, that what they\nhad called want of breeding, was integrity; and they would also be\nconvinced, that this is beneficial to them, and a great saving both of\nmoney and trouble, which are both wasted in running after, and seeking\nfor friends and patrons, whose assistance and protection is useless to\nthem.\n\nXIX. The second objection is, that judicial ministers would lose a\ngreat part of the respect and homage which is now paid them, it being\ncertain, that civilities of this sort, are not so much the result of\nthe reverence due to the character of a Judge, as the effect of the\nimagined dependance on his favour. It is established upon the credit\nof good authors, that Epicurus did not, as it is vulgarly thought,\ndeny the existence of the deities, but only their influence or power\nto do good or harm; but this was sufficient, to cause the tenet to be\nheld as atheistical in practice; for he who denies the power of the\nGods, denies them adoration also. Men do not sow obsequies, but with\nthe expectation of reaping a harvest of benefits, and dependance is the\nonly stimulus or first mover to worship; therefore, when men come to\nconsider the tribunal as the mere organ of the law, where every thing\ndepends upon the intention of the legislature, and nothing upon the\ninclination of the Judge, the applications to the ministers of justice,\nwould be very few and very slight.\n\nXX. This objection would have great weight with those Judges, who\ndesire to be regarded and addressed as deities: but do you, my Son,\ncontemplate yourself as placed on the bench, and not on the altar; and\nremember, that you are not an idol destined to receive worship and\nofferings, but an oracle ordained to articulate truths. This is the\nmanner in which you should explain yourself, and undeceive the world;\nassure the great of your respect, and your friends of your esteem; but\nintimate both to one and the other, that neither esteem nor respect can\ngain admittance into the cabinet of justice, because the fear of God,\nwho is the door-keeper of the conscience, requires that they should\nremain in the antichamber.\n\nXXI. But there may still rest with Judges a discretionary power of\nshewing courtesies, if not in points that concern the substantial parts\nof the cause, in the mode of administering justice; I mean, if not in\nthe essence of the sentence, in the brevity of dispatch. This is an\nerror, which I have observed some of our Judges to have fallen into;\nand I call it an error, because with regard to myself, I have no doubt\nof its being one. It is an obligation upon us, to give the quickest\ndispatch possible to causes: and we do not shew favour to him, whose\nbusiness is done with all possible speed; but to him we do not dispatch\nwith the same expedition, we do injustice. The preference given to\npeople in priority of dispatch, is partiality; and the minister who\nis the author of it, ought to make good the damages occasioned by the\ndelay to him who was next in turn; in this matter, attention should be\nhad to the nature of the cause, to the time the suit was commenced, and\nto the injury that would attend procrastination in the decision of it.\n\nXXII. With regard to this last circumstance, when there are not other\nreasons to forbid it, the poor should be dispatched in preference to\nthe rich; and those who come from distant provinces, before those who\nlive in the neighbourhood. St. Jerome, in his comment on a passage\nof the Proverbs, says, that formerly courts of justice were placed\nat the gates of cities; which the Saint imagines to have been done,\nwith a view of preventing the attention of strangers who come upon law\nbusiness, and especially that of the rustics, from being taken up and\nconfounded by the multitude of strange objects which present themselves\nto their sight, and by the bustle and hurry of the city; from hence it\nmay be inferred, that the dispatch was very quick, and that it was not\nnecessary for them to take a lodging in town; but things are greatly\naltered now-a-days, and strangers who come from a great distance to\nprosecute their causes, are detained so long, that they in a manner\nbecome neighbours and inhabitants of the city. Nothing is so pernicious\nas the amazing delays of judicial proceedings; as formerly, they saw\nthe tribunals at the gates of great towns, at present, we see intire\ntowns built round the gates of the tribunals, because the slowness of\ndispatch increases the bulk of the causes in the office, and the number\nof suitors in and about the office-porch.\n\nXXIII. I reflect with horror on the mischiefs which these delays\noccasion; for in consequence of the expence they create, it frequently\nhappens that both the suitors are ruined, the vanquished is stripped\nand laid prostrate, and the conqueror has spent his all. There are\nlitigations, which last as long as the four elements in man, that is\nto say, for the whole course of his life; and the result of them is\nthe same, the ruin of the whole. O terminations of law! you appear\nlike the boundaries of the world in the opinion of Descartes, that is,\nindefinite.\n\nXXIV. Even where there is nothing to wait for, and there is no occasion\nof delay, the cause is sometimes suspended for months together. My Son,\nyou are not ignorant of the rule of law laid down by Sextus Pomponius,\nwhich says, in the discharge of all our obligations, where there is\nno particular day prescribed or assigned for dispatching a business,\nwe should make use of the present day. The practice of all tribunals\nshould be conformable to this rule, and when things are prepared for\ntrial, the decision should not be delayed a day, and the Judges should\ndirect, that the preparations are made with all the expedition possible.\n\nXXV. From what has been premised, it is evident that a Judge can never\nproperly receive from a suitor any compliment or acknowledgment, on\naccount of having dispatched his cause, because he cannot be supposed\ncapable of doing him any favour, and consequently is not entitled to\nany recompence. The ministers of justice ought to resemble the heavenly\nbodies, who bestow great benefits on the earth, although they receive\nnothing from it; for it is their duty, and incumbent on them, to\nconfer those benefits. They receive their reward and support from the\ngreat Sovereign of all, who has assigned them their stations and their\nduties, and the assistance of their light and their influence is a debt\nthey owe to the inferior world; but the inferior world is not charged\nwith obligations to them.\n\nXXVI. Even the visit to return thanks, which after the suitor has got\nhis cause, is made by him to the Judges, I look upon as superfluous.\nFor what does he thank them? For having given him what belonged to\nhim and was his own. They are entitled to no thanks for that; and if\nthey have given him what was the property of another man, they deserve\npunishment.\n\nXXVII. What has been said on the subject of brevity and dispatch, is\nequally pertinent to criminal as well as civil causes. The person\naccused has a right to be cleared if he is innocent, and his punishment\nis a debt due to the public if he is guilty; and it is generally\nexpedient, for one or other of these parties to be pressing for\ndispatch. It is very clear, that proceeding with caution in criminal\ncases is necessary, lest you fall into the serious mischief, of\npunishing as guilty people those who are innocent. But standing still\nand doing nothing, is not proceeding with caution; neither is thinking\nno more of those in the dungeon, than of those in the grave.\n\nXXVIII. Besides the reasons for dispatch, which are common to, and\napply equally to both sorts of causes; there is one of special note,\nand great weight, which points out why it is most necessary in criminal\nones; and that is, delay being frequently the cause of malefactors\nescaping without punishment. This happens by two ways: the first is,\nthat by delaying the process, there is more time given to the culprits\nto contrive and execute their escape from prison, which when these\nfierce savages have effected, they are commonly seized with a rage, of\nrecovering in a few days, the time they have been deprived of by their\nconfinement, to commit outrages; and they fancy they have a right to\nrevenge themselves by new schemes of roguery, for the punishment they\nhave undergone by having been chained and fettered. There is scarce an\ninnocent person whom they do not regard as their enemy, and those only\nwho are their brethren in iniquity, are exempted from their fury and\nindignation.\n\nXXIX. This is the common way of their revenging themselves in general,\nbut their malice and resentment towards particular people is the most\npernicious to the public; those who are most threatened with their\nvengeance, being such as have in any shape been instrumental in their\nconfinement, or in having them brought to justice.\n\nXXX. The second way, by which delays in criminal prosecutions afford\noccasions for delinquents to escape with impunity, is not so palpable,\nnor so obvious as the first, but in general is more successful, and\noftener takes effect. I will explain what I mean. When a notorious\ncrime is newly committed, all minds are sharpened against the offender,\nand filled with horror at the outrage. Even the most mild call out\nfor punishment, and the injured person, invokes heaven and earth for\nit. The public in general seem filled with resentment, and breathe\nnothing but severity. All this indignation, in the course of a short\nspace of time, begins to lessen, and by little and little, this fierce\nfire proceeds to vanish in smoak; and the further we advance from the\n\u00e6ra of the fact, the less impression of the deed is left on the mind;\nand in our conversation on the subject, we begin to mix apophthegms\nof compassion with theorems of justice; and by so much the longer the\ncause is delayed, by so much the more our zeal abates; we pass from hot\nto lukewarm, and from lukewarm to actual cold. The suspension of half\na year, changes the burning heats of July, to the cool air and frosts\nof January. People breathe nothing but pity, and every thing seems\nin favour of the culprit, except his crime. The supplicants in his\nbehalf are numerous, many from compassion, and some from friendship or\ninterest. When the tempers of people are brought to this disposition,\nthe culprit, who but a little before, in the universal opinion,\nwas deemed deserving of a halter, is released from prison, without\nundergoing a punishment that is equal to a pat with the open hand.\n\nXXXI. I have often wondered at the favourable manner in which criminals\nare sometimes treated, when there does not appear any reason, or\nmotive, for being favourable to them; but it should be remembered,\nthere is always a motive for bringing them to justice. God commands it,\nand the public safety requires it; and the community has a right to\ndemand, that delinquents should be chastised; for the impunity of evil\ndeeds multiplies the number of evil doers. In consequence of saving one\nmalefactor from the gallows who is deserving of death, many innocent\npeople may afterwards lose their lives, or their fortunes. O mercy ill\nunderstood! O impious compassion! O tyrannic pity! O cruel pity!\n\nXXXII. I do not deny that criminals should sometimes be pardoned; but\nthen it should only be in those cases, where the public is as much, or\nmore, interested in their forgiveness, than it is in their punishment.\nThe public good is the true north, to which the wand of justice\nshould always point. The services the guilty person has done to the\ncommonwealth, or those which he may be expected to do to it, on account\nof his singular talents for doing them, are special and material\nconsiderations in such a case. The law furnishes precepts conducive to\nthis end, in formal terms. Therefore, the death which Manlius Torquatus\ninflicted on his brave son, when he returned victorious, for having\nfought without orders, was contrary to the rules of equity. What more\ncould have been done to one, who had returned vanquished, and who had\nno antecedent merit to plead which might entitle him to a pardon?\n\nXXXIII. Princes have a larger discretionary power in these matters,\nthan their ministers of justice; not because they can pardon\naccording to their will and pleasure; for they must be guided by their\nobligations to God and the commonwealth; but because the general or\ncommon interests, are more proper objects for their consideration, than\nfor that of particular Judges. With regard to a sovereign, not only\nthe personal services of the guilty individual, but those also of his\nnear relations, such as his father, his wife, his brothers, and his\nsons, may furnish motives for conciliating a pardon, or for mitigating\nthe punishment; and this has always been the practice of the most\nillustrious princes. It is masterly policy, to inform generous minds\nby such instances of clemency, that they cannot only acquire merit\nfor themselves, but for their relations also. Great benefit may be\nderived to the community from this incentive; and many other methods\nof deriving advantages to the public, by a judicious dispensation of\nlenity or pardon, may be hit upon by princes, although it is not easy\nfor me to point out or enumerate them.\n\nXXXIV. In crimes committed through inattention or weakness, there\nis a large scope allowed for the exercise of pity or forgiveness.\nThe laws themselves allot less punishments for such offences, which\npunishments the prince, in some cases, may totally and consistently\ndispense with. I will give an example. It having come to the knowledge\nof Pyrrhus king of the Epirots, that some young fellows in their cups\nhad murmured against, and cast sharp reflections upon him; he caused\nthem to be brought into his presence, where he asked them, if it was\ntrue that they had said such and such things; to which one of them,\nwho was a candid spirited lad, answered, Yes, sir, it is true, that\nafter having drank plentifully, we did say what you have mentioned; and\nif we had drank more, we should have talked more in the same strain.\nPyrrhus pardoned them, and in my opinion he acted wisely. It was a\ngreat mitigation of such a fault, that the offence was committed under\na kind of perverted state of the understanding; and as it was entirely\npersonal against the King, his pardoning it had an air of generosity,\nwhich tended to augment the love and respect of his subjects, a\nconsideration of great importance in all kingdoms. By this mode of\nproceeding, the public gained a great deal more, than it was possible\nit could lose by such a crime going unpunished.\n\nXXXV. But waiving the particular circumstance of their being in\nliquor, which lessened the offence of those young fellows; the\nshewing indulgence and lenity by Princes, to those who cast personal\nreflections on them, will always have a good effect; because by acting\nin this manner, they manifest their clemency, and cause the reflection\nitself to be discredited. The evil-speaking of a few subjects, cannot\ntake from sovereigns any thing like the proportion of respect, which\nthe opinion of their being clement and magnanimous, would gain them\nwith all their other subjects. The delinquent himself would be put\nto shame by the pardon, because, if he considers it as an act of\ngenerosity and lenity, it proves to him that he murmured without\nreason; and if he thinks the gentleness proceeded from contempt, no\nother punishment could mortify him so much, or be better adapted;\nand this is the proper way of chastising insolencies of the tongue,\nbecause, by proceeding in any other manner, you would feed the vanity\nof murmurers, and beget in them a presumption that they were feared;\nyou would also inflame their hatred, and stimulate their rashness.\nIt has been remarked, that princes, who have been very solicitous\nin fishing out and punishing the murmurs of juntos of people, have\nincreased those evils in their own time, and have eternized them to\nposterity. This is a Hydra, the number of whose heads is multiplied\nby vengeance and the knife, and who is suffocated by the fumes of\ncontempt.\n\nXXXVI. The behaviour of our gracious and magnanimous King Philip V. may\nserve as a pattern, for the application of this mixture of severity and\nclemency, which the virtue of justice requires of Princes. Inexorable\nwith regard to those serious crimes that were to the prejudice of a\nthird person, he always shewed a generous indulgence to those which\nonly respected himself. In the civil wars of some years back, when\nthe agitation of the winds was such, as to cause even the rocks and\nmountains to shake; when the constancy of many wavered, and they sought\npretences for loyalty in desertion itself; he winked at many offences\nof deeds, and pardoned all those of words, which did not relate to,\nor were not connected with, the deeds themselves. This augmented the\nlove of all those hearts who were faithful to him, and in the end was\nproductive of fidelity in the hearts of all men.\n\nXXXVII. But to return to the subject of severity in punishing crimes,\nand the duties of a magistrate in that respect; I say that severity\nis not only necessary for the good of the public, but that it is\nalso beneficial to the criminal himself. It is a received opinion,\nthat those who die by the hand of Justice, rarely go to a state of\ncondemnation. All appearances persuade such a belief, and there\nare certain parts of written revelation, which seem to confirm the\nsentiment. What benefit then do you confer on a malefactor, who if he\ndies by the halter, takes his flight to a state of bliss; and who, if\nhe afterwards loses his life in some of those adventures which are\nincident to his profession, is launched into perdition?\n\nXXXVIII. With respect to certain sorts of crimes, in some instances\nwhere I have wished to see Judges very solicitous to inflict\npunishment, I have observed them very indulgent. I speak of those\nfaults in the practice of the law, which are committed by people of the\nprofession, and those who know the true state and secrets of causes,\nand who intervene as instruments in the prosecution of them; such as\nthe advocate, the solicitor, or the attorney, to which we may add the\nwitnesses also. The tribunal is a whole of such delicate contexture,\nthat there is no integral part of it whatever, which is not essential.\nIt is a machine, in which, a failure, false construction, or weakness\nof the most minute wheel, disorders all its movements. Of what avail is\nit, that the Judges are upright, if the proceedings and informations\ncome adulterated to their hands and ears? The greater their integrity,\nthe more certain in the issue would be the pronunciation of a false\nand unjust sentence; because the judgment would be founded, on the\nvitiated proceedings and testimony which had been laid before them.\nAmong the Japanese, they punish with the utmost severity, all false\ninformation which is given to Judges with respect to causes they are\ntrying, even when it is preferred by a party interested. This appears\nto me excellent policy. The way to make the road to justice smooth and\nsecure, is to disincumber it of all impediments to the advancement of\ntruth; and to do this, there is no alternative, but that of punishing\nlyes with the utmost severity.\n\nXXXIX. If it is objected, that this would be excess of rigour, because\nthe punishment might exceed the proportion of the crime; I answer, that\nLawyers should weigh crimes in a different manner from Theologians.\nThe Theologian examines the intrinsic malice or evil of the act: the\nlawyer attends to the consequences that may result to the public;\nand these may be important, although the fault may at first sight\nappear light and trifling. It is true, that the Theologian considers\nthe consequences also, when it appears that the delinquent foresaw\nthem, and in that case regards this circumstance as a proportionable\naggravation of the crime _in foro conscienti\u00e6_. The Lawyer cannot, nor\ndoes it belong to him, to enquire whether the culprit foresaw them;\nfor he is only to apply the remedy the law has prescribed to prevent\nthe mischief; and thus, for the sake of example to the world at large,\nthe offender is punished in the same manner as if he had actually\nforeseen the mischief.\n\nXL. Let us now consider, that the falsehoods and deceits, with which\ntribunals are environed, make the investigation of truth so difficult,\nthat in some causes it is come at late, and in others never. This\nis a most pernicious injury to the public, for the tediousness and\ndifficulty of the verification, gives breathing-time for the ill\nintentioned, to devise and concert all sorts of wickedness. What remedy\nthen can you apply to this evil, but that of punishing rigorously every\nkind of judicial deceit? The most pernicious loss or disadvantage to a\ncommonwealth, does not consist so much in there being a great number of\nmembers in it who do not fear God, as it does in those members who do\nnot fear God, not fearing the magistrate neither.\n\nXLI. I am not surprized that there are so many false witnesses, when I\nobserve the lenity that is shewn to them. Among the eastern nations,\naccording to Strabo, they used to cut off their feet and their hands.\nAnd Heraclides says, that among the Lycians, they used to confiscate\nall their effects, and sell them for slaves. Alexander of Alexandria\nrelates, that the Pysidians threw them headlong from a high precipice.\nIn the Helvetic history, we read, that the magistrates of Bern put to\ndeath two witnesses by boiling them in oil, for having deposed falsely,\nthat one citizen owed another a large sum of money.\n\nXLII. When I contemplate how necessary rigour is in such matters,\nnone of these punishments strike me with horror. The most just and\nreasonable punishment for this mischief, and the best adapted for the\npurpose, is the Lex Talionis, which was dictated by the Divine mouth,\nand which God ordained to be established among the people of Israel,\nand which is also recommended by various texts of the civil law. It\nwas in use in Spain, according to the practice of the antient law,\ncalled the law of Toro. But ultimately, on account of its not being\nadapted to all cases, Philip the IId. leaving it in its full vigour\nwith respect to capital cases, where the false witness was to suffer\nthe same punishment, which, if his evidence had taken effect, was to\nhave been inflicted on the person accused; I say, with this exception,\nhe ordained for all other cases of perjury, that the delinquent should\nbe exposed to public shame and disgrace, and condemned to perpetual\nimprisonment in the gallies. But when will these laws be put in\nexecution? I don\u2019t know whether in the long course of my life, I have\nonce seen the application of them. What most commonly happens is, that\njust as they are on the point of determining on the sentence, Pity\nviolently and abruptly enters, and makes her appearance in the court;\nand upon contemplation of this most serene lady, the Judges, instead of\npublic shame and perpetual confinement in the gallies, decree a fine or\npecuniary punishment.\n\nXLIII. The words of God to Moses, when he spoke to him of false\nwitnesses, as related in the ninth chapter of Deuteronomy, are very\nremarkable; he says, _non misereberis ejus_. No, Moses; have no\ntenderness, no compassion, nor any bowels or pity for such. The decree\nseems rigid, and so it does; but it is absolutely necessary also. With\na false witness, all should be rigour, without the least mixture of\nclemency: _non misereberis ejus_. And so it is fit it should be; for if\nit was otherwise, who would be safe in their property, their honour,\nor their lives? This is not in reality abandoning or losing sight of\ncompassion, but fixing your attention to it on the proper objects; it\nis turning the eyes of pity from a guilty individual, and placing them\non an innocent multitude.\n\nXLIV. The same sort of punishment, which is inflicted on a false\nwitness, having regard to proportioning the quantum of it to the\nnature or degree of the offence, should be applied to all those, who\ndeceive, or in any shape procure deceit to be practised on Judges,\nin the business of trying a cause. It is necessary, in order to\ninsure justice, to smooth the way by which truth is to advance to the\ntribunal, although it should be done with fire and sword. All that\nwould be expended in rigour on this side, would be saved with interest\non the other. By so much the more the proof of offences is facilitated,\nby so much the less will the number of them be; and the less frequent\nthe sad spectacle of executions is, so much the less will the innocent\nsuffer. Dispatch in civil causes, is also a matter of great importance,\nand should be added to the catalogue of these utilities.\n\nXLV. On this account, I am of opinion, that no indulgence, or remission\nwhatever, should be allowed at the instance of an advocate, upon a\nsuggestion of false citations, or mistakes in terms of law (leaving\nhowever such cases to discretion, which may be attributed to the\nequivocal meaning of words, or accidental omissions); but abstracted\nfrom this exception, such attempts, if you consider them, are contrary\nto the virtue and essence of justice, and should not be permitted to\nsucceed.\n\nXLVI. Neither should the advocate escape without severe punishment,\nwho espouses causes which are evidently unjust; and I think the most\nproper penalty which could be inflicted in such cases, would be a long\nsuspension from the exercise of his function; and a Solicitor should\nbe treated in the same manner, who raises impertinent difficulties,\nand makes frivolous objections, with a view of creating delay. But,\nO pernicious lenity! already these serious offences, which are\ncontrary to good faith, and the true spirit of law, are judged to be\nsufficiently punished by a verbal reprehension. This is a weak bridle,\nto curb and restrain the impulses of avarice, ambition, love, fear\nand hatred, five enemies of justice, who alternately, according to\nthe power or influence of the parties to the cause, incite judicial\nministers to violate the chastity of their office.\n\nXLVII. We in all parts hear complaints against the proceedings of\nJustices, their clerks, and other attendants on them. I believe, if all\nthe delinquents of this class were punished according to their deserts,\nwe should see an infinite number of the wands and pens of Spain\nconverted to oars. These people are accused of, and supposed to make\na trade of their profession. If all be true that is said of them, it\nseems as if the Devil, who after his own manner is always endeavouring\nto imitate the works of piety and benevolence, upon seeing the church\nhad founded some convents of religious Mendicants, for the benefit and\nsalvation of souls, had a mind to found in these gentry, a Mendicant\nirreligion, for the perdition of them. Their duty is to apprehend,\nor cause to be apprehended, thieves and robbers; their practice is,\ninstead of taking the thief, to take something of or from him; and\nthere are few delinquents who are not suffered to go at large, and with\nimpunity, provided they have something large to bestow for being winked\nat. It is very difficult to detect collusions of this sort; but in\nproportion to this difficulty, should be the rigour of punishing them.\nIf out of a great number who practise these iniquities, you should be\nonly able to prove the guilt of one, it would be necessary to proceed\nwith such severity against that one, as might terrify all the rest;\nthat if they are not alarmed by the frequency of the punishment, they\nshould be made to dread the weight of it.\n\nXLVIII. Having before touched upon mulcts or pecuniary punishments, I\nwill here frankly make known to you a reflection, which many years\nago occurred to me on this mode of punishing, and which occasioned me\nto look upon it in no very favourable light. I say, I have considered\nthat the burden of the mulct is not only loaded on the shoulders of\nthe guilty, but many times sits equally, if not more heavy, on those\nof the innocent. A father of a family, with a scanty income, commits\na crime, and by way of chastising him, he is fined a hundred ducats.\nThe substraction of this sum, is not felt by him only who was guilty\nof the offence, but by his wife and his children also; and they are\nthose who commonly suffer the most; for as every one loves himself\nbetter than his nearest relations, and the delinquent being master of\nthe house, he keeps as large a share of the good things it contains\nfor his own use as he thinks proper, and seldom curtails himself of\nthe gratifications he enjoyed before, either with respect to food,\nraiment, or diversions. The saving to make good the sum taken from him\nis pinched out of the rest of his household. His own expences are the\nsame, and the inconvenience occasioned by the deduction is chiefly\nborne by his wife and children. Don\u2019t be surprized then, that I look\nwith an unfavourable eye on a punishment, the greatest portion of which\nfalls more on the innocent than the guilty. I confess, however, that\nmany times this is unavoidable, and the levying pecuniary penalties\nestablished by law, for certain offences and neglects, is inevitable;\nbesides which, there is a necessity to distrain for money, to defray\nthe expences of law charges. What can be done then in this case? Why,\nyou can only determine, to reduce this mode of punishment, within as\nnarrow a compass as possible.\n\nXLIX. The honour of the Judges also requires this should be done,\nbecause the vulgar, when they see mulcts laid on with a heavy hand,\nand do not perceive the money arising from them applied to purposes\nof public benefit, such as the building of bridges, the repairing\nof highways, the making of aqueducts, and in the aid of hospitals\nfor the poor, &c. they easily persuade themselves, that the Judges\nare interested in the imposition of fines; and although Judges may\nsometimes be indiscreet and rash, it is necessary to rescue them from\nthose gross imputations, when it can conveniently be done.\n\nL. When delinquents have no families, and the consequences of depriving\nthem of their money are only felt by themselves, no punishments appear\nto me more rational and proper than pecuniary ones, and especially when\nthe nature of the offence does not demand a more severe chastisement.\nIn the first place, it is not a sanguinary punishment, and is more\nconsonant to the feelings of compassion, than one that is tinged with\nblood, both with respect to him who pronounces the sentence, and him\nto whom it is applied. Secondly, despoiling an evil-disposed man of\nhis money, is disarming him of vice, as it deprives him of the weapons\nwith which he was enabled to do mischief. Thirdly, if the money is\nexpended for the good of the public, the community will derive a double\nadvantage from this mode of punishment, as somewhat of temporal benefit\nwill be added by it, to a well-adapted and exemplary application of\njustice.\n\nLI. I now, my Son, have told you my sentiments on all that has occurred\nto me as most essential in judicial administration. If, upon seeing\nme so scrupulously tenacious on the side of justice, it shall appear\nto you that I mean to erase clemency out of the catalogue of virtues,\nyou are mistaken. I know the excellence of this virtue, and even\nlament, that in our ministry there is but small scope for exercising\nit. I venerate this divine quality, which, on account of its elevated\nand sublime nature, I contemplate, as superior to the sphere of our\njurisdiction. I call it divine, by reason of its active power to remit\npenalties decreed by the laws, which is an authority or prerogative\nalmost peculiarly belonging, and proper to God alone. He, as Supreme\nMaster, can pardon all sorts of crimes; Kings as next to him in\nsovereignty, can pardon some; but the hands of their inferior ministers\nare tied in all cases; for he who is subject to the laws, can never be\nvested with a power to arbitrate and dispense forgivenesses.\n\nLII. It is true, that where the law is obscure, we have authority to\ninterpret and construe it in a benign sense; but in this construction,\nwe should not lose sight of the exigence of the public safety, nor\nthe dictates of natural equity: and acting in this manner, is not\nclemency but justice. We may also in virtue of the principle which is\ncalled Epeikeyan, that allows of a wise and moderate interpretation of\nthe law, lessen, or even in many cases omit, the penalties which the\nlaw decrees. This also is not lenity but justice, because upon such\noccasions, we are rather obliged to conform to the intention of the\nlegislature, than the letter of the law; and such cases frequently\noccur in small offences, because, upon an examination of the nature of\nthese things, it often appears to the eye of Prudence, that greater\ninconveniences would attend the punishing, than the tolerating\nthem. Following the letter of the penal law, without admitting any\nexceptions, even in those cases where the legislature could not intend,\nnor prudence suppose it was meant to bind, is what is called justice\nin extreme, or _summum jus_, which with great reason is termed extreme\ninjustice; therefore, acting contrary to the letter of the law in these\ninstances, is likewise not clemency, but justice. Aristotle, who very\nwell understood the nature of things appertaining to Ethics, judges the\nEpiekeyan, to be a principle, or part of justice. From all that has\nbeen said, it may be inferred, that requesting favour or compassion of\na Judge, or supposing him capable of shewing any in the discharge of\nhis duty, is an absurdity, and calling things by improper names; for\nif he acts according to the law, reasonably and rightly understood, he\ndoes justice; if contrary to it, he does injustice. In what are called\n_casos omissos_, and when the law is obscure, there are general rules\nfor interpreting it and supplying the defects, which interpretations\nhave the force of laws; so that there is no middle path between justice\nand injustice, for a Judge to walk in; because there are no means, by\nwhich he can act conformable to law, and contrary to law. God keep you.\n\n\n\n\nON THE IMPUNITY OF LYING.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. Two common errors present themselves to me with respect to the\nsubject-matter of this discourse, the one theoretical, the other\npractical. The theoretical is derived from lying among men being\nreputed as infamous, or as a vice nearly bordering upon infamy. Let us\nadmit, for argument\u2019s sake, the divisions the theologians make of a\nlie, into officious, jocose, and pernicious. Let us admit also, that\na pernicious lie is reputed in the common opinion as it deserves to\nbe reputed, and that it is treated with all possible abhorrence, so\nthat those who are noted for telling lies to the prejudice of their\nneighbours, are generally considered as the pests of society; but\nnotwithstanding all this, my remarks will be principally confined to\nofficious and jocose lies; that is, to such as are not intended to\ninjure a third person, but are only told to entertain, or because they\nmay be of some utility to a man\u2019s self, or to some other person. I must\nalso premise, that I mean to treat this point more as a politician,\nthan as a moral theologian. The theologians estimate officious, and\njocose lies, as venal sins; nor should I or any one else in a moral\nlight, represent them blacker. But if viewed in a political light, my\nsentiment is, that the common opinion is excessively favourable and\nindulgent to this species of vice.\n\nII. And what is the reason of this excessive indulgence? Why the reason\nis, because this sort of lie is not considered as an affront offered to\nany man. The being noted for an officious or jocose liar, does not take\nfrom any man the honour, which in other respects is thought due to him.\nA gentleman, let him tell as many of these sort of lies as he will, is\nstill looked upon as a gentleman; a nobleman also, notwithstanding his\nbeing remarked for this vice, is considered as a nobleman, and a prince\nas a prince. But this appears to me repugnant to all reason. Lying is\ninfamous, bad, and vile; and a liar is unworthy of human society; he is\nan impostor, who traiterously avails himself of the good faith of other\nmen, in order to deceive them. The most precious intercourse among men,\nis that of a frank and reciprocal communication of their souls; with\nwhich, they in conversation lay open and disclose to each other, the\naffections of their wills, the sentiments of their mind, and all that\nis treasured up in their memories. Now what is a liar, but a solemn\ncircumventor of this inestimable commerce? what, but a deceiver, who\nimposes on us delusions for realities? what but a circulator of false\nmoney, who passes the iron of a lie for the gold of truth? and finally,\nwhat can there be found in this man, that should excuse him from being\ndiscarded and rejected by all others, as a nuisance to company, a vile\ncontaminator of conversation, and as a detestable falsifier of all\nintelligence and information?\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nIII. I cannot help remarking a monstrous contradiction, that is\nvery frequent in this matter. If a man of any rank or figure in the\nworld, is told to his face that he lies, he considers himself as very\nseriously injured, and according to the cruel laws of human honour, is\nesteemed as having put up with a very gross affront, if he does not\ndemand of the man who told him so, a very sanguinary satisfaction; but\nI would be glad to know, how telling a man he lies, can be a very\nserious injury, if lying is not esteemed a very serious defect in him\nwho is addicted to it; or how a man can be considered as affronted,\nbecause he is told he lies, if the action of lying is not scandalous\nor unworthy. The degree of reproach annexed to a vice, is generally\nestimated according to the light in which that vice is considered\nby the world at large. If the vice is not held to be such a one, as\ntarnishes a man\u2019s honour, his honour will not be deemed wounded by\nthe commission of it; and it may be said of a man in such a case,\nthat his honour is not injured. This being a notorious fact, the\ninference I would draw from the before-mentioned observation, is, that\nthe frequency of lying, lessens in the generality of mankind, the\nabhorrence, which natural reason left to itself, has of this vice; but\nnotwithstanding this custom, it has not diminished so thoroughly, but\nthat there still remains in the soul of man, a clear conviction, that\nlying is a baseness.\n\nIV. I am confirmed in this opinion, by the observation, that a man\u2019s\ndenying what he has said, is looked upon as an opprobrium to him.\nAnd why is this? why because it amounts to a confession that he had\nbefore told a lie. The opprobrium cannot lie in the truth of what he\nnow confesses; and therefore must consist in the lie which he told\nbefore. Confessing that he has lied, is a mark of sincerity, and no one\nneed blush for having been sincere; therefore all the ignominy must be\nannexed to the lie. This, I say, makes it manifest to me, that their\nnative sentiment of this matter is not so obscured in mankind, but that\nit represents a lie to them as a most unworthy and a vile thing.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nV. The practical error in this matter, is derived from a lie\u2019s going\nunpunished, and from the laws not having prescribed any punishment\nfor liars. Why is there no bridle to curb the propensity men have to\ndeceive one another? and why should a man be allowed to lie to what\namount he pleases at free cost? Although men are not contented with\nenjoying a total indemnity in this case, but frequently glory in what\nthey have done, and go on to insult those they have imposed on, and\nto treat the sincerity of other men as imprudence; is not this an\nabominable offence, and such a one as deserves to be punished?\n\nVI. I may be told, that human laws do not attend to deterring by the\nfear of punishment, people from committing any other crimes, except\nsuch as are prejudicial to the public, or injurious to a third person;\nand that officious or jocose lies, which are those we are discoursing\nof at present, hurt no body, for if they had been found to be\ninjurious, they would before this, have been classed among, and deemed\nas pernicious offences.\n\nVII. Against this remark, solid as it may appear, I have two very\nnotable replies to make. The first is, that although every officious\nor jocose lie considered by itself, is injurious to nobody; still, the\nfrequency and impunity with which they are told, have a pernicious\neffect on the public; for they deprive the generality of mankind of a\nvery valuable benefit. To make my meaning more clearly understood, I\nmust beg every man to contemplate the inconveniencies that would arise\nfrom a doubt or distrust, whether whatever is told us be true or false;\nwhich distrust is unavoidable, and founded on prudence, if we advert\nto the frequency with which people lie. Upon hearing any piece of\nintelligence, in which our wishes, or our conveniencies are interested,\nwe remain in a state of perplexity, whether to believe or disbelieve\nit; and this perplexity is generally attended with a very disagreeable\nagitation of the mind, that sets a man at variance as it were with\nhimself, and causes him to halt between two opinions, and to remain\nin a disagreeable state of suspence, whether to reject as false, or\nassent to the intelligence he hears as true. Those to whom the rumour\nthat is propagated may be serviceable, either with regard to their\ncommunicating it, or on account of the use it may be of to illustrate\nany thing they have been writing, and are about to publish, are set\non the tenters by reason of this uncertainty. They would give any\nthing to ascertain the reality of a curious event, that was applicable\nto, and would tend to embellish the subject they had been writing\nupon, but cannot take a step towards informing themselves, without\nmeeting with a stumbling block in their way. Some affirm the truth of\nthe thing, others deny it; here they tell the story in one way, and\nthere they relate it in another; and all this while, the pen of the\nauthor is obliged to stand still, and to continue for a long time in a\ndisagreeable and violent state of suspence.\n\nVIII. But although the perplexity that may attend our doubting whether\nwe shall give our assent to what we hear, may be productive of these\nevils, the mischief that would result from our giving easy faith and\ncredit to all we are told, would be much greater; for if we reflect,\nwe shall find, that the altercations, disputes, and disturbances\nwhich arise in conversation, are produced for the most part by easy\ncredulity. Different people, hear different accounts of the same thing,\nand because each believed what he heard; they afterwards altercate\nfuriously, each persisting, that the account he had heard of the\nmatter was the true one. Reflect how many people have made themselves\nridiculous, by believing what they should have rejected as fabulous.\nReflect also, that human society, which is the sweetest boon of life,\nor which would be so if mankind were to behave to each other with truth\nand candour, is made ungrateful and disgusting at every turn, by the\ndistrust which is occasioned, in consequence of our experiencing how\nmuch people are addicted to lie.\n\nIX. In order to comprehend how great a good we are deprived of by this\ndistrust, let us figure to ourselves a republic, although I fear there\nnever was such a one in the world, where either from the generous\ninfluence of their soil and climate, men were more noble-minded; or\nfrom the fear of a lie being punished with great severity, all the\nindividuals who compose it, were strict observers of the truth; I say\nadmitting this, my imagination represents to me, that such a community\nwould be a sort of Heaven upon earth. What brotherly love would there\nprevail in it! and how sweet and savoury would the confidence between\nman and man be, and how grateful the satisfaction, with which they\ntalked and listened to each other, free from the suspicion of not\nbeing believed, or the fear of being deceived! There we should survey\nat every step, the most pleasing spectacle the world can afford, that\nof a man\u2019s opening the whole theatre of his soul to another. I do\nnot think that Heaven adorned with all its splendor, or the spring\nembellished with all its flowers, could furnish a more delightful\npicture to the eyes of man, than that which would be presented to human\ncuriosity, by the exposure of a variety of sentiments, affections, and\npassions, of those with whom we converse. In such a society, all men\nwould enjoy a peaceable tranquillity of mind, without the dread, that\nby means of political arts, a traitor should impose himself upon them\nfor a friend; that hypocrisy should usurp an unjust veneration; that\napplause should be tainted with the venom of flattery; that advice\nshould be insincere, and calculated to promote the interest of him who\ngave it; or that correction should be the child of anger, and not the\noffspring of zeal. But unhappy for us, how distant are we from enjoying\nthe blessings of such happy citizens! for we scarce are allowed an\ninstant of relaxation, from the fears, inquietudes, and suspicions,\nthat continually afflict us, and which are produced, by the experience\nwe have, of the little sincerity there is to be met with in the\nworld. Consider now, whether the frequency of lying, does not rob us\nof a great blessing, or to speak more properly, of many inestimable\nblessings.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nX. The second reply I have to make to the before-named observation,\nis, that it very frequently happens, that those lies which are only\nlooked upon as officious and jocose, are attended with pernicious\nconsequences. What does it signify, that he who tells a lie did not\ndo it with an intention to injure any one, if in reality the mischief\nfollows? The emperor Theodosius the second, presented the empress\nEudoxia with an apple of uncommon magnitude; and she afterwards gave\nit to Paulinus a learned and discreet man, whose conversation she was\nvery fond of, and with whom, her correspondence was perfectly innocent.\nPaulinus, ignorant of the hand by which the apple was brought to the\nEmpress, shewed it to the Emperor, and begged him to accept of it;\nthe Emperor, recollecting that it was the same apple he had given the\nEmpress, took an occasion to ask Eudoxia by surprize, what she had\ndone with the apple? The question coming upon her unawares, and she,\napprehensive the Emperor might be displeased with her for parting\nwith the apple, answered she had eaten it. This, in the intention of\nEudoxia, was a lie purely officious; but was attended with a most\npernicious consequence, as it was the occasion of Paulinus being put\nto death; for Theodosius, suspecting the commerce between him and the\nEmpress not to be very chaste, ordered him to be dispatched.\n\nXI. Caligula having recalled from banishment, one who had been\nsentenced to that punishment by his predecessor, asked him how he\nemployed his time while he was banished; and he, to recommend himself\nto the good graces of the Emperor, answered, that he employed the\ngreatest part of it in praying to the gods for the death of Tiberius;\nbecause that would make way for his ascending the throne. What lie\nto all appearance could be more innocent than this? Yet in its\nconsequences, it was very pernicious, for Caligula, taking it into his\nhead, that those he had banished would occupy themselves in the same\nway, ordered them all to be put to death.\n\nXII. I could give more examples of the same sort; but am aware, that it\nmay be said in answer to them, that these are unforeseen accidents;\nbut they notwithstanding, are the evil accidental consequences of\nlies, which although the person who tells them cannot foresee, are not\nunworthy the attention of the legislature; and of their taking measures\nto prevent the mischiefs arising from them, by assigning some species\nof punishment to all kinds of lies whatever. At least, the motive of\npreventing these accidental mischiefs, should operate jointly with the\nreasons we have already given, to induce the legislature, to fall upon\nsome mode of punishment to curb the vice of lying.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXIII. But the principal mischiefs that are produced by lies, which are\ncalled jocose and officious, do not only happen by accident, but such\nlies have in their own nature, a tendency to bring on those mischiefs.\nOf this sort are all flattering lies. Of the many apophthegms we meet\nwith, that have been severe upon liars, there is no one seems to me\nto be better pointed, than that of Bion one of the seven wise men\nof Greece. He being one day asked, what animal he esteemed the most\npernicious? answered, that to the world at large it was a tyrant, and\nin private life, a flatterer. For so it is, that flattery always, or\nnearly always, is pernicious to the person to whom it is addressed.\nThe same man, who if the incense of unmerited applause was not offered\nto him, would be gentle, prudent, and modest, would by the application\nof it, be corrupted to such a degree, as to become proud, fierce,\nintolerable, and ridiculous. It is not one man only, that a flattering\nlie may be the undoing of, but it is also capable of ruining a whole\nkingdom; and this is a fatality that has often happened. Many princes,\nwho have had a portion of the taint of ambition in their compositions,\nif there had not been those about them, who fomented this evil tendency\nof their minds, would have led happy and peaceable lives, but upon\nbeing persuaded by a flatterer, that their greatest glory consisted in\nadding new dominions to their crown, have become bloody scourges, both\nto their own subjects, and those of their neighbours.\n\nXIV. The great Louis the Fourteenth, was without doubt, endued with\nexcellent qualities; and was blessed with a sufficient understanding,\nto distinguish in what the most solid glory of a king consisted, and\nto be convinced, that it consisted in making his subjects happy.\nNotwithstanding which, through the whole of his dominions, the bulk of\nhis people were oppressed, and groaned under the intolerable weight of\nthe taxes, he found it necessary to load on them, in order to support\nthe vast expences of the many wars he engaged in; to which grievance,\nmight be added the lamentation and grief that was produced, by the loss\nof the infinite quantity of French blood that had deluged the fields in\nhis quarrels. From whence did all this mischief proceed? Why from the\nvenomous influence of poisonous flatterers, who persuaded him, that his\ngreatest glory consisted in extending his dominions by his arms, and in\nmaking himself dreaded by all the neighbouring powers. They not only\npersuaded him to this, but even intimated to him, that these were the\nmost effectual means, to render his own kingdom happy and flourishing.\nA flattering poet carried his servile complaisance so far, as to sing\nin his ear, that by pursuing this conduct, he would not only make his\nown people happy, but would make those so likewise, whom he conquered;\nand that they would hug the chains, with which he bound the little\nliberty they ever possessed; and what was beyond all the rest, this\nfulsome poet, went so far as to assert, that his desire of making them\nhappy, was his only motive for bringing them under his yoke.\n\n    _Il regne par amour dans les Villes conquises,_\n    _Et ne fait des sujets que pour les rendre heureux._\n\nIn the idea of this poet, desolating his own country by excessive\ncontributions, carrying fire and sword into the territories of his\nneighbours, and sacrificing men by tens of thousands on the altars of\nMars, is the most effectual way to make people happy; and that it is\nthe great glory of a monarch, to be the pest of his own dominions, and\nthose of all his neighbours. To these extravagant lengths has flattery\nbeen carried, and such are the unhappy effects it has produced.\n\nXV. A flattering lie in private life, is not capable of doing so much\nmischief, if we consider it as standing by itself; but the mischief\nis infinitely extensive, that results from many of those lies put\ntogether; as the use of them is so general, that their numbers are\nnearly infinite. A learned modern French author, says, that the\npractice of the world, is made up of people\u2019s occupying themselves\ncontinually in circulating false complaisance. Mankind depend\nreciprocally upon each other; and the poor man not only flatters the\nrich one, but the rich one flatters the poor one in his turn. The poor\nman courts the rich one, because he has need of his contributions;\nand the rich one endeavours to conciliate himself with the poor man,\nbecause he cannot subsist without the aid of his labour. The money they\nall go to market with, to gain and purchase the hearts of each other,\nis coined from the bullion of flattery; which is the falsest money that\ncan be circulated, because in consequence of trafficking with it in\nthis vile commerce, all sides are cheated.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXVI. But besides flattering lies, there are many others which are\nhurtful in various ways, notwithstanding we find them classed among\nthe jocose and officious ones. A coward brags of his prowess, and\nmartial deeds; a stander-by who hears him, and believes what he says,\nendeavours to make a friend of him, in hopes that he will bear him out\nin any fray or quarrel in which he should happen to be engaged; and in\nconsequence of the confidence he puts in this support, he precipitates\nhimself into some dispute, where his bravo deserts him, and he loses\nhis life. An ignorant fellow, palms himself upon simple people for a\nlearned man, and they, by believing all he says to be right and true,\nget their heads filled with extravagances, which they afterwards by\nventing in other companies, expose their folly, and so by a very easy\nand short method, acquire the reputation of blockheads.\n\nA neglected or disappointed man, brags of the interest he has with a\ngreat person; and some who hear and believe what he says, fancy he\nwill be a good channel through which they may convey an application to\nthat great person, and induce him to assist them in a matter they have\nmuch at heart, and in which they are deeply interested, and in hopes\nof the great benefits they may derive from his friendship and aid, pay\ngreat court to him, and waste the greatest part of their substance in\npresents and bribes to him. A spiritual puffer, brags of the miracles\nhe has seen and experienced of such and such a saint; which one way\nor other, is generally attended with prejudicial consequences to the\ncause of religion. The physician brags of a skill or knowledge he does\nnot possess; a valetudinary person who hears him, believing him to\nbe an Esculapius, surrenders himself without further enquiry to his\nmanagement, and becomes a voluntary victim. A young mariner, brags of\nhis great abilities and skill in navigating and conducting a ship,\nwhich afterwards being trusted to him, is shipwrecked and dashed to\npieces, on some rock or shoal. The same dangers, in a greater or a\nless degree, and in proportion to the matters that are confided to\ntheir management, are we exposed to, by trusting vaunters in all arts\nand professions, who although they are unskilful, presume to boast of\ntheir great knowledge. I should never have done, was I to set about\nenumerating all the species of lies, which go under the name of jocose\nand officious, and which are attended with pernicious consequences.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXVII. But I cannot avoid making particular mention, of a certain\nspecies of lies, which find ample protection with, and pass current\nthrough the world, as if they were perfectly innocent; when in reality,\nthey are extremely injurious to the public. I mean judicial lies;\nsuch, as when in stating a fact which gave rise to, or is the subject\nmatter of a litigation, the parties interested, and those employed in\nthe suit, disguise and disfigure it, to make it appear more favourable\nto their own side. This species of deceit, or as I may say lie, is so\nfrequent, that we scarce see a cause in which it is not practised,\nand in which, both parties agree in the state of the facts, on which\nthe matter in issue rests; and from hence arise the length of the\npleadings, and the principal delay, and great expence of law-suits. Who\ncan entertain a doubt, but that this is very injurious to the public?\nYet there is nobody will attempt finding out a remedy for the evil.\nIt might perhaps be asked, what remedy can be applied to it; but to\nthis I should answer, the remedy that is made use of in Japan. Among\nthose islanders, whose political government there is no doubt excells\nours in many particulars, they punish a judicial lie, or one advanced\nin a legal process, with great severity; and the Algerines do the\nsame. Whoever lies, or when he is brought before the Bey, or any of\nhis judicial magistrates, to answer to a civil process, shall deny,\nif the prosecution is for a debt, that he owes the person suing for\nit the money in question, or if the prosecutor shall be found guilty\nof making a false or unjust demand, in either of these cases, he who\nshall be found to falsify, is adjudged to a rigorous bastinadoing.\nThus these causes are speedily and safely determined, nor is there the\nleast necessity for any writing in them, for the fear of that severe\npunishment, deters any man from demanding what is not due to him, and\nterrifies any one from denying a just debt. If something like this\nmethod was to be adopted among us, law-suits of this sort in Spain,\nwould be as short as they are in those places. What delays law-suits,\nis not so much the difficulty of finding out what the law is with\nrespect to the matter in question; but such delays arise for the most\npart, from fallacious suggestions, and evasive statings of facts. If\nthe suitors, and all the parties concerned or employed in a cause,\nknew, that for every fallacy they advanced, they were to pay a large\nfine, they would be careful not to suggest or advance any thing, that\nwas not simply and exactly true. By this means, the parties would\nsoon be agreed as to the fact, and a determination would quickly be\nmade in favour of the person who had the right of his side, and there\nwould be nothing left to do, but for process to issue agreeable to the\nordinary forms of law, in order to enforce and compleat the judgment.\nThe doing of this, is seldom attended with much expence or delay; and\nby adopting the before-mentioned method of proceeding, there would soon\nbe a stop put to all law-suits, that are founded on false or sinister\nsuggestions; and people would not be near so exposed to have vexatious\nand roguish prosecutions commenced against them, as they are at\npresent. The state or public at large, would be great gainers by such a\nregulation taking place, as the loss occasioned by the attendance, that\nmany artificers, and people employed in useful branches of trade are\nobliged to give on courts of law would be avoided. So that the whole\nloss that would be incurred by adopting this method, would fall on the\nadvocates, solicitors, and other men of the law; but this would be\namply compensated for to the state, by the increase it would occasion\nof professors in useful arts.\n\nXVIII. It is true, that our laws in Spain have not been so deficient in\nthis respect, as not to have assigned certain punishments in various\ncases to judicial lies. One of those which is to be found among\nthe laws which we term the laws _de Partida_ seems to me admirably\ncalculated to suppress this evil. It runs thus: _He of whom any thing\nis demanded judicially by another person, as his property, who shall\ndeny the person making the demand was ever possessed of it, shall,\nif it is afterwards proved that the person who makes the demand was\npossessed of it, be obliged to surrender it to him who demands it,\nalthough the demander should not be able to prove the thing ever was\nhis property._ But I could wish in the first place, that both this law,\nand all others of the same sort, should be extended to more cases than\nthey take in, or to speak more properly, to all cases whatever; so that\nevery judicial lie should be liable to a punishment, proportioned to\nthe mischief it might be attended with. I would wish secondly, that\nsome lawyers in expounding those laws, had given a larger extent to\nthem, and not have limited the operation of them but to few cases;\nfor we have reason to apprehend, that it is in consequence of these\nexpositions, that we very rarely or never, have seen any one punished\nfor this offence, at least I do not remember to have ever known, or to\nhave ever heard of any one that was punished for it. The greatest part\nof the Judges, although there may appear but little reason for their\nacting with lenity, are apt to lean to the compassionate side; but it\nseems to me, that it would be for the good of the public, if upon these\noccasions, they would exercise a proper degree of severity.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXIX. Finally, by contemplating a lie in all its extent, I find it so\ninconvenient to the life of man, that I am disposed to think the whole\nrigour of the laws should be levelled against it, and that it should\nbe treated as a most pestiferous enemy to human society. Zoroaster\nthe famous legislator of the Persians, or Zerduscht, which according\nto the learned Thomas Hyde was his name, in which sentiment Thomas\nStanley differs but little from him, he writing it Zaraduissit; from\nall which we may conclude, that the changing his name to Zoroaster,\nwas an alteration made by the Greeks to make it correspond the better\nwith their own language; but to have done with criticising upon his\nname, he in the statutes he formed for the government of that nation,\nestimated a lie, as one of the most serious crimes a man could commit.\nI must confess; that he erred in this as a Theologian; but that he was\nquite right, and acted wisely as a politician; because no better means\ncan be fallen upon, to make men live happy in society, than that of\nintroducing among them, an utter abhorrence of a lie; and on the other\nhand, if the great propensity in man to lying is not curbed, although\nthe rest of the laws should be ever so pious and just, they will not be\nable to prevent innumerable mischiefs and disorders.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nXX. It is only in one particular instance, that I look upon lying\nto be sufferable; and that is, when there is no fence to resist the\nimpertinent and officious enquiries of people into secrets, that are\ntrusted to a man in confidence. I state the case thus: a friend of\nmine, for the sake of asking my advice, informs me in confidence of\na crime that he has committed. A person in power suspects him to be\nthe man who committed the crime, and by making an improper use of his\nauthority, demands of me, whether I do not know that such a person\ncommitted such a crime. I will suppose for argument\u2019s sake, that he is\na person of such penetration, that I could not deceive him by evasions,\nand giving answers, that amounted to my neither owning nor denying that\nI knew any thing of it; and that my not giving a positive answer, would\nonly tend to confirm him in the opinion that my friend had actually\ncommitted the crime he suspected him of; so that I am drove to the\nnecessity of answering positively, yes, or no. It is certain in such a\ncase, that I am bound by the laws of friendship, fidelity, charity and\njustice, not to reveal the secret confided to me. How then am I to act\nin such a pressing exigency?\n\nXXI. After stating a variety of different opinions of Theologians,\nand other eminent men upon cases of this sort, which I shall omit to\ninsert, as I apprehend they would rather seem tedious, than afford\neither entertainment or instruction to the reader; Father Feyjoo\nproceeds thus: But I do not chuse to take any part in this question, as\nit would require more time to discuss, than I at present have leisure\nto bestow upon it; and therefore shall waive entering into it, and\nreturning to the subject of my discourse, shall say, that admitting\na man, upon being unfairly pressed, cannot avoid disclosing a secret\nwhich has been confided to him, without telling a lie, those lies\nought to be tolerated by human society, and the punishment of them\nshould be left to God alone, for that a republic or state is exposed to\nno inconvenience from them; and that on the contrary, daily mischiefs\nmight result to it, by not preventing the evil effects, of the\nmalicious, and vicious curiosity of men, who are impertinently fond of\nprying into other people\u2019s secrets. And he who makes these enquiries,\nshould blame himself for any imposition or deceit that happens in\nconsequence of them, and not the person who told the lie, for the\ninquisitor is the aggressor in this case, as he may be termed an\ninvader of other people\u2019s secrets, which he had improperly, and without\nany right so to do, taken upon him officiously to pry into.\n\n\n\n\n    ON\n    THE LOVE OF OUR COUNTRY,\n    AND\n    National Prejudice or Prepossession.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. I Seek in men that love of their country, which I find so much\ncelebrated in books, but I do not meet with it; I mean that just, noble\nand virtuous love, which they owe to their country. In some, I see no\nkind of affection for their country at all; in others, I perceive only\na criminal affection, which is vulgarly called national prejudice.\n\nII. I do not deny, that by turning over history, you will find\nthousands of victims sacrificed to this idol. What war is undertaken\nwithout this specious pretence? What field do we see drenched with\nhuman blood, that posterity, over the carcases from whence it flowed,\nhas not fixed the honourable inscription, that those men lost their\nlives for the good of their country? But if we examine things\ncritically, we shall find the world is much mistaken, in thinking\nthere have been so many, or so refined sacrifices made to this\nimaginary deity. Let us figure to ourselves a republic, armed for a\nwar, undertaken on the principle of a just defence; and let us also\nproceed to examine by the light of reason, the impulse which animates\nmen\u2019s hearts to expose their lives in the quarrel. Among the private\nmen, some inlist for the pay and the plunder, others with the hopes of\nbettering their fortunes, and acquiring military honour and preferment;\nbut the greatest part, from motives of obedience, and fear of the\nPrince or the General. He who commands the army, is instigated by his\ninterest and his glory. The Prince, or Chief Magistrate, who is at a\ndistance from the danger, acts more for the sake of maintaining his\ndominion, than for supporting the republic. Now admitting that all\nthese people should find it more for their interest to retire to their\nhouses, than to defend the walls, you would hardly see ten men left on\nthe ramparts.\n\nIII. Even those feats of prowess of the antients, which are so blazoned\nand immortalized by fame, as the ultimate exertions of zeal for the\npublic good, were more probably generated by ambition, and the love of\nglory, than by the love of their country; and I am inclined to think,\nthat if there had not been witnesses present, to have handed down to\nposterity an account of their exploits, that from a principle of love\nto his country, neither Curtius would have precipitated himself into\nthe pit, nor Marcus Attilius Regulus have submitted to die a lingering\ndeath in an iron cage; nor would the twin brothers, for the sake of\nextending the boundaries of Carthage, have consented to be buried\nalive. The incitement of posthumous fame had great influence among\nthe Gentiles; and it might also happen, that some rushed on a violent\ndeath, not so much with a view of acquiring posthumous fame, as from\nthe mad vanity of seeing themselves admired and applauded for a few\ninstants of their lives, of which Lucian gives us a striking example,\nin the death that was submitted to by the philosopher Peregrinus.\n\nIV. Among the Romans, the love of their country, was so much in\nvogue and so prevalent, that it seemed as if this noble inclination\nwas the soul of their whole republic. But what appears to me is,\nthat the Romans themselves, on account of Cato\u2019s constant and steady\nattachment to the public, looked upon him as a very uncommon man,\nand as one descended from Heaven. It may be said of all the rest\nof them, almost without exception, that in serving their country,\nthey sought more their own exaltation than the public utility. They\ngave Cicero the glorious surname of father of his country, for the\nsuccessful and vigorous opposition he made to Catiline\u2019s conspiracy.\nThis in appearance was a great merit, although in reality it was but\nan equivocal one; for not only the success of Cicero\u2019s attaining the\nconsulate, depended upon that fury\u2019s not carrying his point, but his\nlife also; for it is true, that when afterwards C\u00e6sar tyrannized over\nthe republic, Cicero accommodated himself very well with him. The\nsubornations of Jugurtha, King of Numidia, shewed abundantly, what sort\nof spirit influenced the Roman senate; which, contrary to the interest\nof the republic, tolerated in that penetrating and violent Prince, many\ngrave and pernicious evils, because every new insolence he committed,\nwas accompanied with a new present to the senators. He was at last\nbrought to Rome, and detained there; and although he was so far from\ncorrecting or reforming his old practices, that within the city itself,\nhe committed new and enormous offences; by the favour of gold, he was\npermitted to go at large, which in the delinquent himself begot such a\ncontempt of that government, that when he left Rome, after getting at a\nlittle distance from the city, he turned about, and looking at it with\ndisdain, called it _a venal city_, adding, that it would soon perish,\nif any one could find money enough to pay the price of its ruin:\n_Urbem venalem, et mature perituram, si emptorem invenirit_ (Sallust\nin Jugurtha). The same thing, and even more pointedly, was said by\nPetronius:\n\n    _Venalis populus, venalis curia patrem._\n\nThis is a picture of the love of their country so celebrated among the\nRomans, and to which many at this day, judge they owed the enormous\nextension of the Roman empire.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nV. Our opinion of this matter differs greatly from that of the bulk of\nmankind, by whom it is generally believed, the love of their country\nis natural to, and transcendent in all men; and as a proof of it, they\nalledge the repugnance, which all, or nearly all men feel at abandoning\nthe country in which they were born, to go and reside in any other\nwhatever; but I find here a great equivocation, and that what men call\nthe love of their country, is in reality, nothing else but the love\nof their own convenience. There is no man who does not leave his own\ncountry cheerfully, when he has expectations by going to another of\nmending his fortune; and examples of this sort are seen every day. Of\nall the fables that have been fabricated by the poets, there is no one\nappears to be more void of probability, than that of Ulysses\u2019s having\npreferred the dreary and unpleasant rocks and craigs of his own country\nIthaca, to the immortality full of delights, which was offered him by\nthe nymph Calipso, upon condition that he would come and live with her\nin the island of Ogygia.\n\nVI. I may be told, that the Scythians, as Ovid testifies, fled from\nthe delicacies of Rome, to the asperities of their own frozen soil;\nthat the Laplanders, maugre all the conveniences and accommodations\nthat were offered them at Vienna, sighed to return to their own poor\nsteril country; and that but a few years ago, a Canadian savage who\nwas brought to Paris, where he was furnished with every possible\nconvenience, lived there in a seeming state of affliction and\nmelancholy.\n\nVII. I say in answer to all this, that it is true; but it is also true,\nthat these men live with more convenience to themselves in Scythia,\nin Lapland, and in Canada, than in Vienna, at Paris, or in Rome.\nHabituated to the food of their country, however hard and coarse it\nmay appear to us, they find it both grateful and salutary. They are\nborn among snow, and live pleasantly in the midst of it; and as we\ncannot bear the cold of northern regions, they cannot endure the heat\nof southern ones. Their mode of government, is suited to their tempers\nand dispositions, and although the form is but indifferent, they being\nreconciled to it by custom, believe that nature itself never dictated\nany other. Our policy seems as barbarous to them, as theirs does to\nus. Here, we think it impossible to live without a house or permanent\nabode; they look upon this as a voluntary imprisonment, and regard it\nas much more convenient, to be at liberty to change their habitation,\nwhen, and unto wherever it is most agreeable to them, fabricating it in\nthe evening, for the use of the night and the next day, either in the\nvalley, on the side of the mountain, or in the plain. The accommodation\nafforded by changing situations as the seasons of the year vary,\nis enjoyed among us, by none but the great and the opulent; among\nthose barbarians, there is no one who does not enjoy it; and I must\nconfess for myself, that I look upon a man\u2019s having power, whenever\nhe pleases, to remove from a disagreeable neighbourhood, and settle\nhimself in one he likes better, as a very enviable happiness.\n\nVIII. Olaus Rudbec, a noble Swede, who had travelled a great deal\nthrough the northern regions, in a book that he wrote, intitled\n_Lapland Illustrated_, says, that the inhabitants of it, are so\nconvinced of the advantages of their situation, that they would not\nexchange their own, for all the countries in the world. In fact, they\npossess some benefits or conveniencies in it, which are not imaginary,\nbut real. That country, produces some regaling fruits, although they\nare different from ours; and the abundance of game and fish in it, all\nof them remarkably fine flavoured, is immense. The winters, which with\nus are so disagreeably damp and rainy, are there clear and serene;\nfrom whence it follows, that the natives are active, healthy, and\nrobust. Thunder storms are scarce ever known in that region, nor is\nthere a venomous snake to be found in all the country. They live also\nexempt from those two great scourges of Heaven, war and pestilence,\ntheir climate defending them from both these visitations, it being as\nobnoxious to strangers and the plague, as it is healthy to the natives.\nThe snow does not incommode them, for by their natural agility, added\nto art and contrivance they fly over the tops of the snowy heights like\ncrows. The multitude of white bears with which the country abounds,\nserves them for amusement and diversion; for they are so dextrous in\ncombating these fierce animals, that there is scarce a Laplander, who\ndoes not kill many of them in a year, although it is very rare, that a\nLaplander is ever killed by one of them.\n\nIX. We may add, that the long nights in those subpolar regions, of\nwhich they give us so horrible a representation, are not so dismal as\nthey are imagined to be. They hardly experience total darkness there\nabove one whole month; the reason is, because the sun descends below\nhis horizon only twenty-three degrees and a half; and according to the\ncomputation of astronomers, the twilight may be perceived at eighteen\ndegrees of depression. Neither does the apparent absence of the sun\ncontinue for six months, as it is commonly thought, but for five only,\nfor on account of the great refraction of the rays in that atmosphere,\nyou see the sun, half a month before it mounts above the horizon, and\nfor the same space of time after it descends below it. Some Dutchmen\nin a northern voyage they made in 1596, being in the latitude of 76,\nwere vastly astonished at seeing the sun fifteen or sixteen days before\nthey expected to see it. In our discourse on mathematical paradoxes,\nwe explained this ph\u00e6nomenon, and shewed, that by attending to, and\ncomputing all things, those who inhabit near the Poles, enjoy the light\nof the sun for a greater portion of the year, than those who live in\nthe temperate and torrid zones; therefore what is said of the equal\nrepartition of light all over the world, although it is generally\nassented to, is not true.\n\nX. We much admire, and live very happily on the aliments we commonly\nuse; but there is no nation, to which the same thing does not\nhappen. The people of the northern regions, find the flesh of bears,\nwolves, and foxes, very savoury and regaling. The Tartars are fond\nof horse-flesh; the Arabs of the flesh of camels; and the Africans\nand Chinese, of that of dogs; for they both eat and sell them in the\nmarkets as we do pig pork. In some regions of Africa, they eat monkies,\ncrocodiles, and serpents; and Scaliger says, that in various parts of\nthe east, bats are esteemed as regaling a dish, as chickens are with us.\n\nXI. The same that happens in point of food, happens with respect to\neverything else, for whether it proceeds from the force of habit or the\nproportion of temperament or disposition of each nation respectively,\nor that things of the same species, have different qualities in\ndifferent countries, which make them more or less commodious or\nagreeable; every one finds himself better satisfied with the things of\nhis own country, than with those of a foreign one, and he is therefore\nattached to it, because he feels his own convenience better gratified\nthere, and his partiality for it is not influenced by the supposed love\nof his country.\n\nXII. The inhabitants of the Marian islands, which are so called\nfrom Dona Mariana of Austria, who sent missionaries among them for\ntheir conversion, made no use of, nor had any knowledge of fire.\nWho, however, would venture to assert, that this element was not\nindispensably necessary to human life, or that there was any nation\nwhatever, which could subsist without it? But notwithstanding this,\nthose islanders, without fire, lived contented and happy. They were\nnot sensible of the want of it, because they did not know it. Roots,\nfruit, and crude fish, were all their aliment; and still they were more\nhealthy and robust than we, for living to a hundred years of age, was\nvery frequent and common among them.\n\nXIII. The force of custom is amazingly powerful, for it is capable of\nnot only making the greatest asperities sufferable, but by peoples\nbeing familiarized to them, it also causes their being satisfied\nunder them. He who was not well apprized of this truth, would be led\nto think what passed between Esteban King of Poland, and the Peasants\nof Livonia, incredible. This glorious Prince having observed, that\nthese poor people were cruelly and very ill-treated by the nobles of\nthe province, convened them together, and after condoling with them\non their misery, told them, he proposed to make their subjection less\nsevere and easier to be tolerated, by restraining the exercise of power\nin the nobility, within more mild and moderate bounds; but wonderful to\nrelate, instead of seeming sensible of his benevolence, and embracing\nthe offer he made them, they threw themselves at his feet, and begged\nhe would not alter their customs, with which, through long usage, they\nwere quite satisfied. What will not the force of habit conquer, if it\nis capable of making tyranny agreeable! Join to this, the circumstance\nof the Muscovite women, who are not happy or contented, unless their\nhusbands, without their giving them any occasion for it, beat or cudgel\nthem every day, regarding this unprovoked ill-treatment, as a token of\ntheir great love for them.\n\nXIV. We may add to the foregoing remarks, that an uniformity of\nlanguage, religion, and customs, makes the intercourse with our\ncountrymen grateful and pleasing, as a diversity in those matters,\nmakes the society of strangers aukward and unentertaining. Our\nparticular connections and personal friendships also, tend to produce\nthe same effect; and generally speaking, the love of convenience, and\nof that private ease and happiness, which every man finds in his own\ncountry, is what attracts him to, and retains him in it, and not the\nlove of the country itself. He who should experience better personal\naccommodation in another region, would do as St. Peter did, who, as\nsoon as he found himself happily situated on Mount Tabor, resolved to\nfix his lasting abode on that eminence, and to abandon for good and all\nthe valley in which he was born.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXV. It is also true, that not only real, but imaginary conveniences,\nhave their influence, to promote an adherence to our country.\nEntertaining a flattering opinion of the country in which we were\nborn, and preferring it to all others in the world, is one of the most\ncommon of all common errors. There is scarce any man, and among the\nlower class of people not a single one, who does not think his own\ncountry the first production of nature, and abounding in a three-fold\nproportion, with all the goods she distributes, either with respect to\nthe genius or ability of the natives, the fertility of the soil, or\nthe happiness of the climate. To understandings of inferior rank, near\nobjects are represented as by the corporeal eye, which although they\nare really less, appear larger than things at a distance. In his nation\nonly, are to be found learned and wise men, those of other kingdoms are\nhardly civilized; the customs of his country only are rational, and\nthe language of it is the only soft and sufferable one; the hearing a\nstranger speak, as effectually excites them to laughter, as seeing Jack\nPudding on a stage; his nation only abounds in riches, and the Prince\nof it is the only powerful one. At the end of the last century, when\nthe arms of France were so prevalent, a junto of people at Salamanca\nbeing talking on this subject, a low Portugueze who was among them,\nwith an air of great sagacity and importance, made the following\npolitical remark: _There is certainly now no Prince in Europe capable\nof resisting the King of France, except the King of Portugal._ But what\nMichael Montona, in his treatise intitled _Moral Reflections_, relates\nof a rustic Savoyard, is more extravagant still, who said, _I don\u2019t\nbelieve the King of France has the ability he is said to have, for if\nthat was the case, he would have negotiated with our Duke long ago,\nabout making him his Major Domo._ Nearly after this manner, do all the\nlow vulgar discourse of the things of their own country.\n\nXVI. Neither are many of those exempted from so gross an error,\nalthough it is in a less degree, who by their birth or professions, are\nmuch superior to the lower class of people. The number of vulgar who\ndo not associate with the common herd, but are intruded among people\nof understanding, is infinite. How many men of school learning, whose\nheads were stored with texts, have I seen filled with the caprice,\nthat our nation is the only seat of knowledge and learning, and that\nin other countries, they print nothing but puerilities and bagatelles,\nmore especially if they write in their own native idiom; nor does it\nappear to them, that any thing worth reading, can be published in\nFrench or Italian, which is in a manner maintaining, that the most\nimportant truths can\u2019t be expressed or explained in other languages,\nalthough it is certain, the Apostles expounded the most essential and\nsublime ones in all tongues. But strangers are sufficiently revenged\non us for this conceitedness, for in return for our considering\nthem as people of little learning, they look upon us as illiberal\nand barbarous. Thus in all countries, you will find this piece of\nbad road to travel through, which is worn in holes and made rough,\nby the hacknied passage of carriages, loaded with the high notions\nand opinions the natives have of themselves, and the low ones they\nentertain of strangers.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXVII. The worst is, that those who do not think with the vulgar, talk\nlike the vulgar. This proceeds, from what we call national passion\nor prejudice, the legitimate child of vanity, and emulation. Vanity\nteaches us, that we are interested in our nation being esteemed\nsuperior to all others, because every individual looks upon himself\nas a partaker in the pre-eminence; and emulation causes us to view\nstrangers, especially those who are nearest us, with a jealous eye, and\nalso inclines us to wish their abasement for our own security. From\nboth these motives, people attribute to their own country, a thousand\nfeigned excellencies, although at the time they mention them, they know\nthey are fictitious.\n\nXVIII. This abuse, has filled the world with lyes, and has corrupted\nthe faith of almost all histories. When the glory of his own nation\ninfluences him, you will hardly find an historian competently\nsincere. Plutarch was one of the most impartial writers of antiquity;\nnotwithstanding which, the love of his country, in matters that\nrelated to it, made him deviate not a little from his candour; for,\nas the illustrious Cano remarks, he aggrandizes the events and things\nappertaining to Greece, beyond their just proportion. And John Bodin\nobserves, that upon examining his lives, you will find, although his\ncomparisons between Greek heroes and Greek heroes, and between Roman\nand Roman ones, were rightly and fairly made; that when he came to draw\nthe parallel between Greeks and Romans, he warped in favour of his own\ncountrymen.\n\nXIX. I have always admired Titus Livius, not only for his eminent\ndiscretion, method, and judgment, but also for his veracity. He\ndoes not conceal or dissemble the failings of the Romans, when in\nthe course of his history they come in the way of his pen; but on\nthe contrary he lays them open and exposes them; and what is more,\nat the hazard of offending Augustus, he highly extolled Pompey, and\nblazoned his character as preferrable to C\u00e6sar\u2019s, which in those times\namounted to the same thing, as declaring himself a zealous republican.\nNotwithstanding this, I observe a fault in this prince of historians,\nwhich if it did not proceed from want of his adverting to, or being\naware of it, we must confess to be the effect of his passion for the\nmarvellous. In the two first ages of their republic, he gives an\naccount of as many battles gained, and as many cities taken by the\nRomans, as would be sufficient to compleat the conquest of a vast\nempire; but at the end of this time, we see that republic confined\nwithin such narrow bounds, that few less states are at this day to be\nfound in all Italy, which is a proof that the antecedent victories,\nwere not so many nor so great in the original, as they are represented\nto be in the copy.\n\nXX. There is scarce one of the modern historians I have read, in whom I\nhave not observed the same inconsistency. If they relate the events of\na long war, they paint them so favourably to their own side, that the\nreader from those premises, is induced to promise himself, that it will\nend in an advantageous peace, in which his nation will give the law\nto the enemy; but as the premises are false, the conclusion does not\nfollow, and in the end, he finds things turn out quite contrary to what\nhe expected.\n\nXXI. I am not insensible, that during a war, such sort of lies may be\npolitically necessary; therefore in all countries, they print Gazettes\nwith privilege; I don\u2019t say of lying, but of colouring events, so that\nthey should not dishearten, but seem encouraging to the people; and in\ntheir description of things, they imitate the artifice of Apelles, who\npainted Antigonus in profile, to conceal his being blind of one eye; I\nmean, that they display the favourable side of events, and cover the\nadverse one by a deception. I say, that policy requires this should be\ndone in Gazettes, to prevent the subjects being dismayed by the adverse\nstrokes of fortune; but in books that are written many years after the\ntransactions, what danger is there in speaking the truth?\n\nXXII. The case is, that although none could happen to the public by\nit, the writer himself who should make the attempt, would be exposed\nto a great deal. The poor historians, scarce dare to do otherwise than\ndisguise such truths, as are not advantageous to their countrymen.\nThey must either flatter their own nation, or lay down the pen; for\nif they fail to do this, they will be branded with the epithet of\nbeing disaffected to their country. I lament most heartily the lot of\nfather Mariana; this very learned Jesuit, over and above possessing the\nother talents necessary for an historian, was exceedingly sincere and\ningenuous; but this illustrious quality, which aggrandized his glory\nwith found critics, diminished it among the vulgar of Spain; they said\nhe had not a Spanish heart, and that his affections and his pen were\ninimical to his country; and as heretofore, the extreme rigour of\nSeptimus Severus to the Romans, was attributed to his being of African\nextraction by his father\u2019s side, they imputed to father Mariana, a\ncertain kind of pique against the Spaniards, and assigned as the cause\nof it, I don\u2019t know whether with truth or not, his being of French\ndescent on the side of his mother. They would have had him relate\nevents, not as they happened, but in such a way as should seem most\npleasing to them; and by such as are fond of adulation, the man who\nis not a flatterer is regarded as an enemy. But the same thing which\nmade this great man ill looked upon in Spain, gained him the highest\neulogiums from the most eminent personages in Europe: the following,\nbestowed on him by the great Cardinal Baronius, is sufficient to\nestablish his honour and his fame: _Father John Mariana, a scrupulous\nlover of the truth, an excellent pattern and sectary of virtue, a\nworthy professor among the society of Jesus, and a Spaniard by birth,\nbut void of all national passion or prejudice, in a learned and elegant\nstile, wrote a most perfect and faithful history of Spain._ (Baron. ad\nann. Christi 688.)\n\nXXIII. It is not only in Spain, that they would have their historians\npanegyrists, for the same thing happens in other countries. The King\nof England, sent for the famous Gregory Leti, to write the history of\nthat kingdom; but he having protested he would not take pen in hand,\nunless he was allowed to speak the truth; the King, to encourage him\nto engage in the undertaking, assured him, that he should be permitted\nto comply with this indispensable obligation, upon which, he set to\nwork, and compiled his history from the best authorities, and the most\nfaithful monuments and records he could discover; but the natives\nhaving found reason to be dissatisfied with many of the facts laid\nopen in it, the King repented of the permission he had given him, the\ncopies were all called in by the procurement of administration, and the\nhistorian obliged to leave England, but ill recompensed for his trouble.\n\nXXIV. We Spaniards, complain much of the French authors, alledging,\nthat from their hatred to us, they disfigure transactions which are\nglorious to our nation, and aggrandize in proportion, such as are\nfavourable to their own. This complaint is reciprocal, and I believe\nwell founded on both sides. When there have been frequent wars between\ntwo nations, you will always observe, that from the jealousies and\nanimosities these have produced, the wars are constantly kept up in the\nwritings of the authors of both kingdoms; for united as in the arrow,\nthe feather follows the impetus of the steel.\n\nXXV. But as a tribute due to truth and justice, I can\u2019t avoid taking\nnotice in this place, of an unjust accusation, which has been\nfulminated by our countrymen against the authors of that nation. They\nsay, that in relating the events of that kingdom in the reign of\nFrancis the first, they are either silent, or deny the imprisonment\nof that King at the battle of Pavia. This complaint has not the least\nfoundation, for I have read accounts of this advantage of our arms in\nvarious French authors, and even in one of them, I saw celebrated the\npiquant answer of a French lady to King Francis, on the event of his\nimprisonment. The King in a satyrical manner, that insinuated Time had\nrobbed her of her charms, said to her, _Madam, how long is it since\nyou came from the land of Beauty?_ To which the lady readily answered,\n_Ever since you came from the country of Pavia_.\n\nXXVI. Where I find the most reason for the Spaniards to be angry\nwith the French authors, is in their denying the coming of St. James\nto Spain, and in their refusing to acknowledge that his sacred body\nis deposited there; but these pretensions are more the offspring of\ncriticism than national jealousy, and never were material objects of\nemulation between the two nations. It is on the subject of the justice\nof wars, and the advantages gained in the prosecution of them, that\nthe pens engage with the most acrimony.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXXVII. From this spirit of national prejudice, which prevails in\nalmost all histories, it happens, that with respect to an infinite\nnumber of facts, the things which are past seem as uncertain to us, as\nthose which are to come. I acknowledge, that the historical Pyrrhonism\nof Campanela was extravagant, who carried his want of confidence in\nhistory to such a point, as to say, he doubted whether there ever was\nan Emperor in the world named Charles the Great. But with respect to\nthose events, which the historians of one nation affirm, and those of\nanother deny; and as there are many such events, it will be prudent\nfor us to suspend our judgment, till some well-informed third person\nshall decide upon them; for, excited either by vanity or inclination,\nor led by condescension, every one goes on to flatter his own nation;\nthe light of truth at the same time, being concealed from the eyes of\nthe people, by the smoke of the incense of flattery, and the harmony of\nadulation, preventing their listening to the voice of reason.\n\nXXVIII. I shall not dwell upon those authors, who carried the passion\nfor their country, to lengths of extravagance, such as Goropius\nBecanus, a native of Brabant, who very deliberately endeavoured to\nprove, that the Flemish tongue was the first in the world; and Olaus\nRudbec, a Swede, who, in a book he wrote on purpose, tried to evince,\nthat all which the antients had said of the Fortunate Islands, the\ngarden of the Hesperides and Elysian fields, alluded to Sweden,\npronouncing at the same time, his own country to be the source and\nperfection of European learning; and asserting, that letters and\nthe art of writing, did not descend from Ph\u0153nicia to Greece, but\nfrom Ph\u0153nicia to Sweden; in the prosecution of which undertaking, he\nrummaged out, and expended in waste, much hidden learning.\n\nXXIX. It may also be proper to observe here, that another opposite\nvicious extreme, if it is not derived from, arises in consequence of\nthis prejudice. It has been remarked by some, of a modern Spanish\nauthor, that he has been guilty of unjustly denying to Spain, the\nhonour of some glorious antiquities, with a view of being applauded as\na sincere man among strangers. Perhaps this was not his motive, but\nthat his criticism was defective, for want of being tempered with a\ndue mixture of the indulgent and the severe; and that to avoid the\nimputation of flattery, he ran into the opposite offensive extreme; for\n\n    _Dum vitant stulti vitia, in contraria currunt._\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXXX. But the national prejudice of which we have spoken hitherto, is,\nif we may so call it, an innocent vice compared to another, which by\nbeing more common, is more pernicious. I speak of that preposterous\naffection, which is not relative to a republic at large, but applies\nto a particular district or territory which we call our own. I do not\ndeny, that by the term country, is understood not only the republic\nor state of which we are members, and which may be called our common\ncountry, but also the province, diocese, city or district, where every\none drew his first breath, and which on that account may be termed\nhis particular country; but it is certain, the phrase \u201clove of our\ncountry,\u201d cannot be supposed to be confined or apply to our country\naccording to this second definition, but according to the first;\nfor that is the sense, in which it is recommended and enforced, by\nexamples, persuasions, and apophthegms, of historians, orators, and\nphilosophers. The country to which we should sacrifice our lives in\nheroic arms, and which we ought to esteem superior to all our private\ninterests, and as the creditor of all our possible obsequies and\nservices, is that body of state, under which we are united in one\ncivil government, and protected by, and bound to the observance of the\nsame laws. Thus Spain is the proper object of the love of a Spaniard,\nFrance of a Frenchman, and Poland of a Polander. But this should be\nunderstood, not to relate to such people, who by migrating to, and\nsettling in other countries, make themselves members of other states,\nin which case, the duty they owe to the country where they reside, and\nare protected, ought to prevail over the affection they bear to the\ncountry in which they were born; and on this distinction, we shall\nin the sequel make an important remark. The dividing of a kingdom\ninto provinces or districts, which is done for the convenience of\nadministering justice, and conducting other business of government,\nhas a material influence over, and is in a great measure the cause of\ndividing men\u2019s hearts.\n\nXXXI. The particular or limited love of one\u2019s country, instead of\nbeing useful to a state, is in many respects injurious and hurtful,\nbecause it induces a division in the minds of those, who ought to\nbe reciprocally united for the sake of making more firm and stable,\nthe bond of common society; and because also this limited love of\nour country, is an incentive to civil wars, and revolts against the\nsovereign power; for always when a particular province or district\nfancies itself aggrieved, all the individuals of it think the\nredressing the grievances of their injured country, an obligation\nsuperior to all others; and finally, this confined principle, is an\nobstacle to the right administration of justice among all classes of\npeople, and in every judicial and ministerial department.\n\nXXXII. This last inconvenience is so common and apparent, as to be\nhidden from no man; and what is worse, no one endeavours to hide it.\nThis pestilence of partiality to countrymen is, to the perversion and\ncorruption of good regulation, introduced and cherished in the most\nbare-faced manner, into those departments which are vested with the\npower of distributing honourable and useful employments. What sanctuary\nhas been able to protect or preserve us, from the violencies of this\ndeclared enemy of reason and equity? How many hearts, inaccessible to\nthe temptations of gold, insensible to the allurements of ambition,\nintrepid, and proof against the threats of power, have suffered\nthemselves to be miserably deluded and perverted, by national passion?\nNow-a-days, if a man is a candidate for an office or employment, he\nalways reckons upon as many protectors as he has countrymen, who have\nany concern or interest in the disposal of it. His pretensions being\nunreasonable, to a man swayed by national or provincial prejudice,\nare no objection, because the only merit with such a one, is the\ncandidate\u2019s being his countryman. We have seen men, in other respects\nof unimpeachable integrity, who were much infected with this malady;\nfrom hence I have been inclined to conclude, that this is an infernal\nmachine, artfully invented by the Devil, to subdue those souls, who\nby all other ways are invincible; but alas, Achilles, although in one\nlittle part only, you are vulnerable, what does it avail you, if Paris,\nin shooting the arrow, has the skill and address to hit that little\npart?\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXXIII. I do not condemn that affection for our native soil, which does\nnot operate to prejudice a third person. Aristotle\u2019s employing his\nfavour with Alexander, to procure the rebuilding the town of Stagira\nhis native country, ruined by the soldiers of Philip, always appeared\nto me right and proper; and I condemn the indifference of Crates, whose\ncity had suffered the same misfortune, for having, when Alexander asked\nhim if he was desirous it should be rebuilt, answered, _Of what use\nwould the rebuilding it be, if there should come another Alexander to\ndestroy it afresh?_ How exceedingly and ridiculously affected was the\nbehaviour of that philosopher, who lost to his countrymen so signal a\nbenefit, for the sake of a cold apophthegm? The misfortune was, that\nno other opportune sentence of a contrary tendency occurred to the\nphilosopher just at that time; for if there had, he would have accepted\nthe favour offered by Alexander. I have observed, that there are no\npeople more unfit to be consulted upon serious and weighty points of\nbusiness, than those who pride themselves in speaking with grace and\nelegance; for they are always apt to warp their opinion towards that\nside, on which a striking expression occurs to them, and provided they\ndeliver themselves with air and brilliancy, they do not embarrass\nthemselves about a little false reasoning.\n\nXXXIV. I say once more, that I do not condemn any innocent or moderate\naffection for our native land. A love extremely soft and tender, is\nbetter suited to women, and more proper for children just rising up\nin the world, than for men; and therefore I am of opinion, the divine\nHomer humanizes Ulysses to a degree of excess, when he paints him,\namidst all the regales of Pheacia, panting and pining, to see the smoke\narise on the mountains of Ithaca, his own country:\n\n    _Exoptans oculis surgentem cernere fumum_\n    _Natalis terr\u00e6._\n\nThis tenderness in one of the wisest of the Greeks was very puerile;\nbut with all, there is not much inconvenience in viewing with\ntenderness the smoke of one\u2019s country, provided the smoke does not\nblind the eyes of him who looks at it. Let him view the smoke of his\nown country; but alas, do not let him prefer it to the light and\nsplendour of foreign ones; but this is what we see every day. He who\nby being placed at the head of an eminent department, has the disposal\nof various employments at his pleasure, can scarce find any persons\nproperly qualified for those employments, but people of his own\ncountry. In vain it is represented to him, that these men are unfit to\nfill the post, and that there are others better qualified. He finds the\nsmoke of his country so grateful an aromatick, that he would abandon\nfor it the most brilliant lights of other places. O how strangely does\nthis smoke blind men\u2019s eyes! How wonderfully does it disorder and\naffect their heads!\n\nXXXV. In truth, some sin in this particular with their eyes wide open;\nI speak of those, who with the view of forming a party to support their\nauthority, promote as many of their countrymen as they possibly can,\nwithout paying the least attention to merit. This is not manifesting\ntheir love to their country, but to themselves, and is benefiting their\nown soil, as the earth is benefited by the labour of the husbandman,\nwho does not bestow it with a view of improving the land, but of\nadvantaging himself. These are open and declared enemies of a republic,\nbecause it being next to impossible, that one district can furnish\npeople sufficiently qualified for such a variety of employments,\nthe places are filled with unworthy objects; this, if it is not the\ngreatest evil that can befall a state, at least ultimately disposes\ntowards producing such an evil.\n\nXXXVI. Of those, who exercise their passion for their countrymen, from\na belief that they are the most deserving, I am at a loss what to say,\nalthough the motive of their partiality in this matter frequently\nappears to me a voluntary blindness; and if that is the case, they do\nnot stand excused. When the excess of merit in the person set aside,\nis so notoriously superior to that of the man promoted, that it is\nmanifest to all the world, except to him who dispensed the preferment,\nwhat doubt can there be, that he shut his eyes to avoid seeing it?\nor else, that the microscope of his passion magnified to his view,\nthe virtues of the man preferred, and the defects of him neglected?\nThere is scarce any man, who has not a portion of good and bad in his\ncomposition; a man without fault would be a miracle, and one without\na single virtue would be a monster. This made St. Austin say, that\ngigantic vice was as rare to be found among us, as eminent virtue:\n_Sicut magna pietas paucorum est, ita et magna impietas nihilominus\npaucorum est._ (Serm. 10. de verbis Domini.) What happens then is, that\npassion, being to chuse between persons of unequal merit, magnifies\nwhat is good in the bad man, and also what is bad in the good one.\nThere is not a more unfaithful balance to weigh merit in, than that\nof passion and prejudice; but this is what men commonly use for the\npurpose. This caused David to say, men are false in their balances:\n_Mendaces filii hominum in stateris._ Job, to express the greatness and\npower of God, says, that he is able to give weight to the wind: _qui\nfecit ventis pondus_. But I am not clear in what sense to understand\nthis, because I also see, that the powerful of the world in the\nbalance of their passion, frequently give weight, and much weight to\nthe air. What do you see in that person they have just raised? Nothing\nsolid, nothing but air and vanity; but to this air, the great man who\nexalted him gave more weight, than to the gold of the other person who\nwas his competitor for the office. But how was this done? Why, together\nwith the air, he put earth into the scale, I mean the earth of the\ncountry in which he was born, and this earth weighs very heavy in that\nbalance.\n\nXXXVII. It happens in the contentions about occupying places, as it\nhappened in the conflict between Hercules and Ant\u00e6us. Hercules was much\nmore valiant and powerful than the other, and threw him repeatedly to\nthe ground; but the falls, enabled Ant\u00e6us to renew the combat with\nredoubled vigour, because by his contact with the earth, his strength\nwas doubled. The explanation of the matter is this: The antients under\nthe veil of fables, concealed physical and moral maxims, and according\nto the heathen mythology, which was the term they used to signify the\nexposition of those mysterious fictions, Ant\u00e6us was the son of the\nEarth. I believe, to make this fable apply to the present question, we\nneed say no more, than that as things go in the world, every country by\nits recommendation, gives strength to its sons to overcome strangers,\nalthough they are people of superior abilities and vigour. Hercules\nlifted Ant\u00e6us from the ground, and kept him suspended in the air, by\nwhich means he found no difficulty in overcoming him. It were much to\nbe wished, that upon many occasions, in order to determine the worth of\npeople, they should be examined divested of all favour and advantage\nthey can derive from belonging to a particular country, for then it\nwould be much better known to whom the preference is due.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXXVIII. These men of national genius and prejudice, whose spirits are\nall flesh and blood, and whose breasts are always in contact with the\nearth, like that of a snake, do in a community, what the old serpent\ndid in paradise, or as Luzbel did in Heaven, that is, introduce into\nit, seditions, revolts, schisms, and battles. No fire assails a civil\nedifice so violently, as the flame of national passion, for it consumes\nthe very stones of the fabric, levels merit to the ground, and makes\nreason tremble, excites tumults and insults, and makes way for the\ntriumphant entry of ambition. Those hearts which ought to be cordially\nunited by the bond of brotherly love, that bond being broken asunder,\nare miserably divided, and breathe nothing but vengeance and rancour.\nThey form parties, inlist auxiliaries, and range their forces; but\nalas! in the end both the victors and vanquished are unfortunate and\nunhappy; the last lose the day and their patience, and the first by\ntheir conquest lose themselves.\n\nXXXIX. In no words of sacred writ, is a call to a generous and virtuous\nlife painted in more lively colours, than in those of the Psalmist,\nPsalm xliv. _Mark me, my Son, incline your ear, and attend to my words,\nyou must forget your townsmen, and the house of your father._ But how\ngreatly does he deviate from the precept contained in this admonition,\nwho so far from forgetting his townsmen, and the house of his father,\ntreasures up in his heart and memory, not only a house or a town, but a\nwhole province or kingdom.\n\nXL. Alexander, after he had conquered Persia, caused the Macedonian\nsoldiers to marry Persian women, to the end, says Plutarch, that\nforgetting their native land, they should only esteem as their\ncountrymen, those who were good, and regard as strangers those who were\nbad: _Ut mundum pro patria, castra pro arce, bonos pro cognatis, malos\npro peregrinis agnoscerent._\n\nXLI. It is an apophthegm, of many learned and wise men among the\nGentiles, that to a man of a strong and liberal mind, all the world is\nhis country. He who attaches his heart to that corner of the earth in\nwhich he was born, cannot look upon all the world as his country, nor\nhimself as a citizen of it, and therefore the world should despise him,\nas a narrow-minded and mean-spirited person.\n\nXLII. I believe notwithstanding, that there is something figurative\ncontained in the words of the sentences before quoted, for mankind\ncan never be understood to be exempted from the love and service they\nowe to the republic of which they are members, in preference to all\nother states and kingdoms; but I apprehend also, that this obligation\nshould not be confined to a republic, because we were born within\nits limits, but because we are members of its society; therefore, he\nwho has legally transferred his residence from the kingdom in which\nhe was born, to another different one, where he has settled himself,\nand taken up his abode, contracts with respect to that kingdom, the\nsame obligations he owed to that in which he was born and nursed,\nand he ought to regard it as the country to which he belongs. This\nis a distinction, that was not rightly understood by many great men\nof antiquity; and for this reason, we see in various authors of\nnote, some actions celebrated as heroic, which ought to have been\ncondemned as infamous. Demaratus King of Sparta, when he was unjustly\ndethroned and driven out of his kingdom by his own subjects, was\nkindly received and protected by the Persians. He lived among them as\na member of the Persian empire, and owed to that country, besides the\nobligation of gratitude, the duty of a subject; but mark the sequel:\nthe Persians meditate a military expedition against the Lacedemonians;\nand Demaratus, who is let into the secret, communicates the design\nto the Spartans, in order that they might be prepared to defeat the\nenterprize. Herodotus, and many other authors, celebrate this action,\nas a commendable mark of the glorious and heroic love which Demaratus\nentertained for his country; but I say, it was a perfidious, base,\nunworthy, and treacherous act; because in virtue of the antecedent\ncircumstances, the obligation of his loyalty, together with his person,\nhad been transferred from Lacedemonia to Persia.\n\nXLIII. To conclude: I assert that if by reason of being born in it,\nwe contract any obligation to a particular district or place, that\nobligation is inferior to, and ought to give place to every other\nchristian or political one whatever. Surely the difference of being\nborn in this or that country is not so material, that this should\nout-weigh every other consideration; therefore we ought never to prefer\nour countryman only because he is our countryman, except in those\ncases, where there is a perfect equality of all the other circumstances.\n\nXLIV. In superior rulers, I don\u2019t even with this limitation, admit of\nany partiality, with respect to countrymen, for the following reasons:\nfirst, because without being perfectly divested of this passion, it\nis hardly possible in one instance or another, to shun the danger of\npassing from favour to injustice. Secondly, that in whatever manner,\nfavour to our countrymen is limited and restrained, we are apt to fall\ninto an acceptation or preferable choice of persons, which by all those\nwho govern ought to be studiously avoided. Thirdly, superior rulers\nbeing truly the fathers of their people, their impartial affection for\nthem should be regarded as a consideration so incomparably superior\nto all others, that it ought to stifle and suffocate every kind of\nmotive or inclination to preference, except that, which is derived from\nsuperior merit. It would be ridiculous in a father to love one child\nbetter than another, only because this was born in his own town or\ncity, and the mother was delivered of the other in a different place,\nin consequence of her being from home on a journey. Therefore all\nthose who govern, ought ever to retain in their hearts and memories,\nthe maxim of the famous queen of Carthage, who being informed that\nthe Trojans, in consequence of her marrying Eneas, entertained hopes\nof receiving superior indulgences to the Tyrians from her, declared\nher perfect indifference of affection for them all as a queen in the\nfollowing words:\n\n    _Tros, Tyriusque mihi nullo discrimine agetur._\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nXLV. Having spoken in this discourse, of the favour that may be shewed\nto a countryman in preference to a stranger, in case he is a man of\nequal merit, I thought it would not be improper here, to take notice\nof a moral point, which frequently occurs in practice, and in which\nI have often seen men mistake, who in other respects are far from\nabsurd. Those, who have annexed to their charges the distribution of\nhonourable and useful employments, if they have not a perfect knowledge\nof the competitors for a vacant place, commonly avail themselves of\njudicial or extrajudicial informations touching their merits. This is\na case that often occurs in the appointment to such professorships in\nmany universities, as are in the disposal of the king, or his supreme\ncouncil; and in these instances, all the doctors of this university\nof Oveido give their information to the royal council promiscuously.\nIt is to be supposed, that the person, who by his own or delegated\nauthority appoints to the office, when two persons of equal merit are\nproposed to him, may very consistently chuse which he pleases; but with\nrespect to the equality of merit, if he is a stranger to the parties,\nhe must be guided by the informations he receives; and I have seen it\nvery common, when they had no just reason for doing it, for people to\ngive their information in favour of the man they liked best, and I have\nknown them go so far, as not only to recommend him in preference to his\ncompetitor, but to represent him as the only person qualified to fill\nthe vacant office.\n\nXLVI. I call this an error, because that in my opinion, such an\ninformation upon the face of it, is injurious and void of all\nprobability, which I shall endeavour to demonstrate, by exposing\nthe malice and indirect proceeding of him, who between two equal\nsubjects, Peter and John for example, gives his information in favour\nof Peter, in preference to John; for I perceive in such behaviour,\nnot only one, but three serious and distinct offences. And first, he\noffends materially in his information, against the virtue of legal and\nimpartial justice, which requires, that he should represent people\naccording to the true degree of their merits; but he swerves from this\nprinciple, who represents Peter as superior to John, when he is not\nso in reality. Secondly, he behaves unworthily and unjustly to his\nPrince, by usurping and preoccupying the right, which he has to chuse\nbetween the parties. Thirdly, he is guilty of injustice to the said\nJohn, who has a right to be represented according to the true degree of\nmerit he possesses; and the proposing him as inferior to Peter, when\nin truth he is equal to him, is doing him a manifest injury, which\nbesides prejudicing him with regard to other contingencies, renders it\nimpossible in this instance, for him to partake of the king\u2019s grace of\nchusing him in preference to his competitor Peter.\n\nXLVII. From what has been premised, it may be inferred, that no\ncontingent can ever happen, in which an informant or voter can\nconsistently shew favour, or be partial to any man, either in such\nan instance as we have just mentioned, or in any other whatever,\njudicial or extrajudicial; because as we have shewn, competitions\nbetween subjects of equal merit do not admit of it, and if the merits\nof the competitors are unequal, the injustice of such a proceeding\nis self-evident; consequently, to him who acts conscientiously, all\nrecommendations or solicitations are useless and improper; for he will\nnot be biassed by friendship, country, gratitude, school-alliances,\nreligion, college-connections, or any other motives whatever. But\nthe misfortune is, that in the practice of the world, we see but few\nexamples of such disinterested and upright conduct, even in cases where\nthe merits of candidates are unequal; but on the contrary, whenever\nan opposition is set on foot, the favourers of each candidate, are\nmore occupied in canvassing suffrages, than in studying questions,\nand more busied in examining the connections of voters, than books of\nfaculty. The abuse is carried to such a length, that sometimes a man\u2019s\nacting with integrity is imputed to him as a crime. If a voter, who\nis solicited by a man of eminence, answers ingenuously, and excuses\nhimself from complying with what is requested of him; they say he\nis a rough, ill-bred, unpolished man: if he does not yield to the\nsolicitations of a benefactor, they call him ungrateful; and if he\ndoes not give way to the intreaties of a friend, they exclaim that he\nis callous to the feelings of friendship. Finally, it appears to me,\nthat a more intolerable error than this cannot exist, for I have seen\nmen much esteemed by the generality of mankind for their worth, who\nhave always prostituted their votes to these or some other temporal\nmotives; but in the name of reason, can a man have any friend so great\nor so good as God? Is there any benefactor, to whom we owe so much\nas to him? How shall we reconcile this? Can he be called a grateful,\nan honourable, or a good man, who can be wanting in his duty to his\nbest friend and greatest benefactor, by acting unjustly to oblige a\ncreature, to whom he owes this or that limited respect, and to whom\nalso it is impossible he should owe any thing whatever, but what he\nowes principally, and in the first instance to God? In vain I have\nurged these arguments in various private conversations; and I believe\nit is in vain also, that I now use them with the public at large; but\nif they shall not be effectual to amend the abuse, they will at least\nserve to disburthen my mind, and give vent to my chagrin.\n\n\n\n\n    ON\n    TRUE AND FALSE\n    URBANITY.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. The signification of the word Urbanity is equivocal, so that when\nyou read it in different authors who lived in distinct times, you\nwill find, the sense they understood it in varied exceedingly. It\u2019s\nimmediate derivation is from the Latin word _Urbanus_, which springs\nfrom _urbs_ a city; but notwithstanding this, it did not imply city in\ngeneral; for it\u2019s meaning at first, was confined in an especial manner\nto signify the city of Rome.\n\nII. The reason of this was, that the word _urbanus_ began to be first\nmade use of, at the time that the Roman republic was in the zenith of\nit\u2019s prosperity, and this may be evidently inferred, from Quintilian\u2019s\nsaying the word was new in the days of Cicero; _Cicero favorem, et\nurbanum nova credit._ It was then that the generical word _urbs_ began\nto be used by way of eminence, to signify the city of Rome, on account\nof it\u2019s portentous grandeur; and with the same pace that Rome proceeded\nto domineer over the world, that sort of culture which the Romans\nlooked upon as an excellence peculiar to themselves, proceeded to gain\nground, and prevail in the city, and it was then that the Romans began\nto make use of the word _Urbanus_, to express that compound sort of\ncultivation that people received there, which seemed not to be confined\nto letters and sciences only, but also to comprehend manner and\npunctillo also; _homo urbanus_, _sermo urbanus_; and they used the word\n_urbanitas_, to express those accomplishments in an abstracted sense.\n\nIII. But all authors did not give the same extension to the cultivation\nimplied by the word _urbanitas_. Cicero, as we know from his book _de\nclaris oratoribus_, restrained it to a graceful manner of speaking,\nwhich was peculiar to the Romans.\n\nIV. Quintilian thinks, the graceful manner of speaking, which was\npeculiar to the Romans, and which consisted in their proper choice of\nwords, their just application of them, and the decent tone of their\nvoices, did not comprehend the whole, but was only a part of the\naccomplishment that was meant to be expressed by the term Urbanity; and\nhe assigns as another part appertaining to it, a tincture of erudition\nacquired by frequent conversation with learned men; _nam, et urbanitas\ndicitur, qua quidem significari sermonem pr\u00e6 se ferentem in verbis, et\nsono, et usu proprium quemdam gustum urbis, et sumptam ex conversatione\ndoctorum tacitam eruditionem, denique cui contraria sit rusticitas_.\n\nV. Domitius Marsus, an author who lived about mid-way between the days\nof Cicero and Quintilian, and who wrote a treatise upon Urbanity,\nwhich we are indebted to Quintilian for the knowledge of, strikes\ninto a new track, and maintains Urbanity to consist in the keenness\nand force of a short pithy expression, which delights and inclines\nthe hearer to be affected in the manner the speaker could wish; and\nwhich is well adapted to excite either resistance or assent, according\nto the circumstances of persons and things: _Urbanitas est virtus\nqu\u00e6dam in breve dictum coacta, et apta ad delectandos, movendosque in\nomnem affectum animos, maxime idonea ad resistendum, vel lacessendum,\nprout qu\u00e6que res ac persona desiderant. (Quintilian ubi supra.)_ This\ndefinition is truly confused, and either explains nothing, or else,\nonly explains a particular idea of the author, distinct from every\nthing that has hitherto been understood, respecting the meaning of the\nword Urbanity.\n\nVI. The moral philosophers, who have studied and laboured to explain\nthe admirable ethics of Aristotle, have considered this word as\nequivalent to the Greek one _Eutrapelia_, which Aristotle made use of\nto express that virtue, which influences people to observe moderation\nin the tone of their voice, and their manner of expressing themselves;\nas vicious extremes in these particulars, were apt to degenerate into\nrusticity, or else, to be attended with scurrility and buffoonry; and\nthese are the sentiments of our cardinal Aguirre and count Manuel\nThesaurus.\n\nVII. But neither the word urbanity, nor that of rusticity, which is\nits opposite, are made use of to express at present, what they were\nunderstood to imply formerly. They call him now-a-days, an agreeable\nor well-bred man, and not a man of urbanity, who speaks in a moderate\nand pleasing tone of voice, and who expresses himself in decent and\nopportune phrases; and he who delivers himself in an opposite manner,\nthey do not call a rustic, but a coarse or an unpleasant man, or else\ndescribe him by phrases that are equivalent to those.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nVIII. But to come to the acceptation that is given to the word Urbanity\nin these present times, and to the sense in which it seems now to be\ngenerally understood in Spain, it signifies the same as _Cortesania_;\nbut it is also true, that some give a more limited, and some a more\nextensive signification to this phrase. There are those who understand\ncortesane, or courteous, to mean the same as well-bred, and to express\na man who in his commerce with other men, conducts himself with that\ndecorum and ceremony which is prescribed by good education. But amongst\nthose who define things with propriety, I believe a courteous man\nis understood to mean one, who, by his natural disposition, has a\npropensity in all his words and actions, to conduct himself with that\ntemper and manner, that makes his conversation and company agreeable\nand pleasing to the rest of mankind. Taken in this sense, the Spanish\nword _Cortesania_, is equivalent to the French one _Politesse_, to the\nItalian one _Civilit\u00e1_, and to the Latin one _Comitas_.\n\nIX. The derivation of the word _Cortesania_, is analogous to that of\n_Urbanitas_; for as this last was taken from the word _Urbs_, which\naccording to the custom then in use, was looked upon to be applicable\nto the city of Rome, which was then the capital of a very great part\nof the world, the term Urbanity was understood to imply, that sort of\ncultivation which was then in vogue at Rome. Just so _Cortesania_,\nwhich in Spain is derived from _Corte_, or court, where it is generally\nsupposed people behave with the greatest politeness is understood to\nimply that sort of good breeding which is generally practised there,\nand which we express by the term _Cortesania_.\n\nX. Understanding then the word Urbanity in this sense, I shall define\nit in the following manner; _that it is a virtue, or virtuous habit,\nwhich directs and leads a man both in his words and actions in such\na way, as makes his company and behaviour savoury, grateful, and\nengaging, to the rest of mankind_. I shall not embarrass myself, about\nwhether some people think this definition too redundant, and that it\nseems to express more than the term Urbanity implies. I adjust the\ndefinition to the interpretation I myself put upon the term, and to the\nsense it is understood in, by those who have treated of the subject in\nthe most approved manner. Those who give less extension to the word,\nmay, if they please, define the thing in another manner. Disputes\nabout definitions are mere nominal questions, and may not improperly\nbe called playing upon words. Every one defines a thing, according to\nthe acceptation he gives to the word that expresses it. If all men\nwere to agree in the acceptation of a word, they would scarce ever\ndiffer in the definition of the object that is expressed by it; but\nthe misfortune is, that the same word, excites in different people\ndifferent ideas with respect to the meaning of it, and hence it is,\nthat we see such a variety of definitions.\n\nXI. There is no doubt, but that all the particulars which compose a\ncourteous carriage, should lead to the attainment of a certain end, and\nshould be calculated to induce a certain manner in all a man\u2019s exterior\nbehaviour, that should be free from any mixture of the indecent, the\noffensive, or the tiresome; but that on the contrary it should rather\nbe combined, with the grateful, the decent, and the opportune.\n\nXII. Urbanity, like all other moral virtues, is placed between two\nvicious extremes; one of which it is apt to run into by exceeding, and\nthe other by deficiency, or not doing enough. The first is occasioned\nby that excessive complaisance which borders upon meanness; and the\nsecond, by a rigid unsavoury reserve, which has the appearance of\nrusticity.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXIII. As there is no virtue, whose use is so general and common as than\nof Urbanity, so there is no one which is so much counterfeited and\nfalsified by hypocrisy. There are men who by seldom finding themselves\nin a situation to exercise some particular virtues, are not very\nanxious about contriving means to imitate them by hypocrisy; but as\nUrbanity is a virtue that all men have opportunities of exercising,\nit is in the power of all men to counterfeit it by deceit. In truth,\nthe hypocrites in the line of Urbanity are innumerable. All the world\nsuper-abound with expressions of submission and profound respect,\nwith obsequious offers, and with exaggerated professions of esteem,\nwith smiling countenances, whose essence consists in the command they\nhave of their features, and in expressions of their lips, in which\ntheir hearts have not the least share; but on the contrary, are rather\nimpressed with sentiments, that are quite opposite to those false\nappearances, and mock demonstrations.\n\nXIV. What, then, should Urbanity be implanted in the heart? Without\ndoubt it should, or it is at least from thence that it ought to derive\nits origin. If it was otherwise, how could it be a virtue? Reason tells\nus, that there is an honest complaisance due from one man to another;\nand whatever reason dictates should be esteemed a virtue. But how can a\nlying, deceitful, and affected complaisance be a virtue? It is evident\nit cannot. Urbanity then should arise from the bottom of the soul. What\ndoes not do that, is not Urbanity, but hypocrisy that counterfeits\nit. An honest soul, stands in no need of fiction to assist it in the\nobservance of all those attentions which compose good-breeding, because\nit is naturally inclined to the observance of them, left alone to\nitself. By an innate propensity, accompanied by the light of reason,\nsuch a one will never, upon any occasion, be found wanting in the\nrespect that is due to his superiors, nor in the condescension he\nshould shew to his equals, nor in the affability he should practice\nwith his inferiors, nor in the good-will and gracious manner, with\nwhich he should manifest to all men, both in words and deeds, these\nlaudable dispositions of his mind, and his love of human society.\n\nXV. I am not ignorant, that Urbanity is commonly understood to consist\nin our external testification of respect and benevolence to those\nwith whom we converse. But if this testification, is not accompanied\nwith the affections of the mind that are expressed by it, it becomes\ndeceitful, and cannot possibly constitute that sort of urbanity, which\nconsists in a virtuous habit; for in order to constitute such a one,\nit would be necessary that the testification should be sincere, which\namounts to the same as saying, that there is essentially included in\nurbanity, the existence of those sentiments, which are expressed by\ncourteous words and actions.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXVI. It is certain, that courts are the great public schools of true\nUrbanity; but they have mixed so much false in those schools in the\npractice of it, that some have been led to think, it has nearly\nobscured the true, of which, there seems to be scarce any thing left\nbut the mere appearance. I believe, that without disparagement to\nany other courts we ever heard of, those of antient Rome, and modern\nParis, may be esteemed the most cultivated and polite that have been\nknown in the world. After mentioning this, let us hear what two authors\nsay who were well versed in the practice of them both. The first is\nJuvenal, who clearly gives us to understand, that he who could not lie\nand flatter should withdraw from court, as there were no hopes of his\ngetting any thing by his attendance there--\n\n    _Quid Rom\u00e6 faciam? Mentiri nescio; librum_\n    _Si malus est, nequeo laudare, &c._\n\nXVII. The second is the abbot Boileau, a famous preacher at Paris in\nthe reign of Louis the Fourteenth. This eminent man, in a treatise\nhe published, entitled _Choice Thoughts or Reflexions_, drew such a\npicture of the court of Versailles, as shews the Urbanity exercised\nthere, had degenerated not only into dissimulation, but even into\ntreachery, although he admits, this was not the practice of every one\nwho attended it. These are his words:\n\nXVIII. \u201cWhat are the manners and behaviour of a courtier? Why they\nconsist in flattering his enemies while he is afraid of their power;\nand in endeavouring to destroy them whenever he finds an opportunity\nfor doing it; in being civil to, and making use of his friends when he\nstands in need of their assistance, and in turning his back upon them\nwhen they can be of no further service to him; in seeking out powerful\nprotectors, whom he fawns on, and idolizes exteriorly, and frequently\ndespises in secret.\n\nXIX. \u201cCourtly Urbanity, consists in converting dissimulation and\ndeceit, into the law or rule of a man\u2019s actions; and representing all\nsorts of people in such colours, as your interest dictates to you that\nyou should paint them; in bearing slights and disappointments with a\nforced reserve, and in awaiting with a strained appearance of modesty\nand composure, the favours of Fortune.\n\nXX. \u201cIn a court, for the most part there is no sincerity, but almost\nevery thing you see there, is compounded of hypocrisy, deceit, and\nmalevolence; for example, in peoples doing underhand ill offices\nto each other; in contriving and laying snares that nobody can be\naware of; in bearing painful and mortifying disgusts with a smiling\ncountenance; and in hiding under an apparent shew of modesty, the\npride of Lucifer. It is very common in a court, for a man not to be\npermitted to love whom he likes, to do what he should, nor to speak\nwhat he thinks. It is necessary to keep silence, in order to conceal\nyour sentiments, and it is also necessary, to acquire a facility at\nchanging them. You must applaud, abuse, love, abhor, speak, and live,\nnot according to your own liking or inclination, but in conformity to\nthe arbitrary will and caprice of other people.\n\nXXI. \u201cIn what do the other manners and mode of a man\u2019s conducting\nhimself consist in a courtier? Why in dissembling injuries, and in\nrevenging them; in flattering his enemies, and in destroying them; in\npromising every thing for the sake of obtaining a dignity or promotion,\nand in performing none of these promises after he has got it; in\nrepaying favours with words, services with plausible assurances, and\ndebts with threatenings. At court, they in the same breath implore and\nexecrate Fortune, applaud and despise merit; and they also disguise the\ntruth, under an ostentatious appearance of frankness.\u201d\n\nXXII. I believe there is a great deal of this sort of dissimulation\nall over the world; but it is natural to suppose, there is more of\nit practised in courts than in other places, for the incitements to\nthe exercise of the before-mentioned vices, are generally stronger\nthere, than they are found to be out of those circles. There is not a\npassion nor an appetite, which there a man does not seem within reach\nof indulging, and the objects which stimulate his desires, shine\nforth there also in their greatest splendor. The ambitious man fancies\nhimself on the point of grasping honours, and the covetous one riches.\nThe pretenders are vying with each other, the emulous contending with\nthe emulous, and the envious with the envied. There the success of the\nunworthy man, is staring the neglected deserving one in the face, and\nthere the hands of the unskilful artist fully employed, is exhibiting\na disgusting spectacle, to the able one who has nothing to do. And\nalthough a modest man who only views this at a great distance, or who\nonly hears it from report, may reason upon it, and contain himself like\na philosopher, still, when the mortifying prospect is so near him, he\ncan scarce speak of the thing with temper, nor look upon it without\nfalling into a passion. Thus it is almost morally impossible, that\nthe hearts of the neglected men should not be in a continual state of\nfermentation, and their feelings in a tumultuous agitation, which is\nattended, not so much with the corruption of the men themselves, as\nwith that of their manners.\n\nXXIII. But notwithstanding all that has been alledged, we ought to\nconclude, that the two before-named authors exaggerated the evils they\nmeant to reprehend. There is a great deal of bad in courts, but there\nis also some good to be found in them. The complaints that merit is\nneglected, are frequently nothing more than sighs, which express the\ngrief and disappointments of the heart from whence they proceed. The\nsame man who laments political mismanagement, while he is not permitted\nto go beyond the porch of the favourite\u2019s house, when he has once\ngained admittance into it, begins to applaud his conduct, as he ascends\nthe steps leading to his levee-room; which is a proof that what he\nmeant by mismanagement and a bad conducted government, was such a one\nas he got nothing under, and that what he understands by a good one,\nis such a one as is advantageous to him. I have at all times heard the\nadministration ill spoken of, but if we come to enquire by whom, we\nshall find it is chiefly done, by importunate candidates for places\nand employments, who are unable to attain what they never deserved,\nand by litigious suitors, who were justly disappointed of success in\ntheir vexatious attempts, and who have been condemned to pay costs, for\ncommencing unjust prosecutions; by delinquents who have been legally\nmulcted for their misdeeds; by ignorant people who have passed for men\nof understanding, and who without having studied in any other school,\nthan that of a coffee-house or a club-room, have presumed to give\npositive opinions, upon the most important and difficult political and\nmilitary questions; and finally, by weak people, who fancy that a good\ngovernment can effect impossibilities, and that they are able to make\nall the subjects of a state, happy and contented.\n\nXXIV. Neither my genius, nor my destiny have allowed me to have much\nintercourse with ministers in high stations; but I have heard sincere\njudicious men, who have known many of them well, speak of them, in\nterms very different from those they have been spoken of by the vulgar;\nand who have expressed a different opinion, both of their abilities and\ntheir intentions, from that which has been commonly propagated. Nor\nindeed is it credible, that princes, who generally know men\u2019s political\ncharacters better than private people, should make choice of men for\ntheir ministers, who are either incapable, or wickedly disposed.\nIf in case that they should have been mistaken in the opinion they\nentertained of them, and they find upon trying them, that they are not\nequal to conduct the business they have confided to their management,\nthey may easily remove them. Thus it is utterly improbable to me, that\na man destitute of all merit, should for any length of time, occupy a\npost of great importance, or have the ear of his sovereign.\n\nXXV. With respect to inferior ministers, such for example, as the\nprincipal people and magistrates in the provinces, I have had a great\ndeal of experience, and protest, that for the most part, I have found\nthem to be the best sort of men to be met with in the country. I say\nfor the most part, for it cannot be denied, that among this class,\nthere are men to be found that are not very upright, and more than a\nlittle addicted to avarice. And by what I find the principal directors,\nlawyers, and magistrates in the country to be, I judge of those about\nthe court; and it seems natural to me, that the higher the sphere of\nlife is in which people move, they are the more stimulated by motives\nof honour, and less likely to descend to, or be guilty of mean actions.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXXVI. Neither do I believe above half that is said, of the neglect that\nis shewn to merit, and the abandoned situation it finds itself in at\ncourt; for the number of candidates for preferment that may be found\nthere, who have no merit at all, would upon enquiry appear to be very\nconsiderable, and that among them, you will meet with mischief-makers,\ntogether with crafty, deceitful, and treacherous people, whose bad\npractices and characters, it is almost beyond the power of language to\ndescribe; who are a sort of imps of Satan, that for the most part serve\nthe Devil without pay; and are a kind of galley slaves upon earth, who\njoin to that slavery, being the galley boatswains mates, or drivers\nof each other, whose oar, and whose scourge, are never out of their\nhands, for fear of their not being the first to arrive at the desired\nport, and to accomplish what they had in view. They are a species of\nidolaters of Fortune, who sacrifice as victims to that deity, their\ncompanions, their relations, their friends, and their benefactors; and\nin the end themselves also, or their own souls. What have we not to\nexpect, or what have we not to fear from men of this character?\n\nXXVII. I have been three times at court, but either from my natural\nincuriosity, or because my stay there each time was but short, I came\naway as ignorant of the practices of a court, as I went; and only\ntook particular notice of one circumstance, which is relative to\nthe subject I am now treating of. I saw there, as in other places,\nUrbanity degenerate into that fulsome kind of ceremony, which may be\ntermed cringing complaisance. Accident furnished me with numberless\nopportunities of seeing such things; and I have frequently observed\ntwo people who have usually met together in their walks, and who, as\nI have been informed, had a tolerable indifference for each other,\nand even looked upon one another with reciprocal contempt; I say I\nhave seen these people upon their meeting, strive which should excel\nin expressions of the love, veneration and respect they bore to each\nother. There was scarce a word came out of their mouths, which was not\naccompanied with some affected gestures. Their eyes cast glances of\ntender devotion on each other, and milk and honey flowed from their\nlips; but at the same time their affectation was so palpable, that any\nman of the least discernment, might have perceived the disagreement\nthere was, between their hearts and their appearances. I laughed\ninwardly at them both, and I believe they also in their hearts, laughed\nmutually at each other.\n\nXXVIII. I saw once two lawyers accost each other, with such extreme\nexpressions of tenderness, that a Portuguese might have learned from\nthem, phrases and gestures for feats of gallantry. Both these people\nhad places at court, on which account they could not avoid seeing each\nother pretty frequently; and there was no friendship between them;\nnotwithstanding which, their expressions were like those of the most\ncordial friends, who had met together after a long absence.\n\nXXXIX. Having expressed to some people who were used to the court, how\ndisgusting this appeared to me, they answered that this was behaving\nin the court stile; but would not any one who hears this, conclude the\ncourt was nothing but a comic theatre, where all the world act the part\nof enamoratos; although to speak the truth, it was only in spirits of\ninferior order, that I noted this amorous kind of farrago. In those of\nmore elevated hearts and minds, if they don\u2019t owe the thing to their\nown genius and disposition, the education of a court produces a better\neffect, and exhibits people of a more noble behaviour, and such as is\nproper to, and expressive of true urbanity. I say I have observed in\nsuch, affability, sweetness, expressions of benevolence, and offers\nof kind services; all which were tendered with propriety, and in a\ndecent generous manner, free from affected exaggerations, but animated\nat the same time, and expressed with so natural an air, that the\narticulations of the tongue, were indications of the emotions of the\nmind, and the feelings of the heart.\n\nXXX. Cato, as Tully tells us, said, he wondered how two augurs whenever\nthey met, could refrain from laughing at each other; as they both well\nknew, that their whole art was a mere imposture. I think the saying may\nbe applied to two fulsomely complaisant courtiers; for I do not see how\nthose who have once saluted each other in this cringing and affected\nway, can upon meeting again, forbear laughing in each others faces, as\nthey both know, that all the hyperbolical professions of their esteem,\naffection, and readiness to oblige, mean nothing, and that this is all\na mere common-place farrago or rhapsody, quite destitute of truth or\nreality.\n\nXXXI. I have said, that in the lesser towns I have visited, I have\nnot observed so much by a great deal, of this ridiculous parade. It\nis true, that you will find in them, some few people who walk about\nthe streets with incense in their hands, to offer up to, and idolize\nall those, whom they fancy can be of any service to them; but they\nare looked upon like what they are, not as men of worth, but as men\nof craft, whose incense smells savoury in the nostrils of none but\nfools. This sort of behaviour about the court, frequently passes for\ngood-breeding; but in these other places it is condemned as meanness.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXXXII. I am persuaded that solid and brilliant urbanity, has much more\nof the natural than the acquired in its composition. A good, sound,\nand unembarrassed mind, accompanied with discretion, which is gentle\nwithout meanness, and is disposed by genius and inclination to conform\nto every thing that is not contrary to reason, to which dispositions\nthere is annexed a clear understanding, or native prudence, which\ndictates to a man how he should speak and act, according to the\ndifferent circumstances and situations in which he finds himself,\nwill, without studying in any school, acquit himself well, and appear\nagreeable in his commerce with mankind. It is true, that he will be\ndeficient in his knowledge of those forms, modes, and ceremonies, which\npeople study in courts, and which are changed by caprice at every\nturn; but in the first place, natural advantages, which always are\nintrinsically valuable, and which will ever operate, will supply upon\nordinary occasions, the want of studied forms; and secondly, a modest\nand candid confession, to those you happen to be in company with, of\nyour ignorance of political forms and ceremonies, on account of your\nhaving been born and bred in the provinces where they are not generally\npractised, will be a sufficient excuse for your transgression of\nthose forms, and even your doing this, will appear better in the eyes\nof reasonable people, than your observing a strained and scrupulous\nattention to them.\n\nXXXIII. I have availed myself many times of this resource at court;\nwhere I have made no scruple to declare, that I was born and bred in\na small country town; and that I early entered myself a member of a\nreligious order, whose principal care it was, to seclude its sons,\nand especially in their youth, from all commerce with the world. That\nmy genius naturally disposed me to abhor bustle, and avoid great\nconcourses of people; and excepting three years that I was a student\nat Salamanca, which may not improperly be termed three years of\nsolitude, on account of the heads of our college not permitting their\nyoung members to have the least intercourse with secular people; I say\nexcepting these three years, I have lived all the rest of my life, in\nGalicia and Asturias, which are provinces at a great distance from\ncourt; and besides all this, I have a natural dislike to studying\nceremonies; but I am aware however, that not only the substance, but\nthe forms of them also, are necessary to political society; although I\ndo not consider that as an important form, which consists of rules that\nare established to-day, and changed to-morrow, just as whim and caprice\ndictate; some of which forms, or modes, prevail in one country, and\nare different in another; but I mean to speak of those forms or modes\nonly, which reason dictates should be observed in all times, and in all\nplaces. From the before-named declaration, it may be easily conceived\nhow little I understand of courtly ceremonies; notwithstanding which,\nwith the assistance of the above frank confession, I never found\nmyself the least embarrassed, and I perceived, nothing I said or did\nappeared disagreeable to those I conversed with, but that rather on the\ncontrary, my natural behaviour seemed pleasing to them.\n\nXXXIV. Men of sublime spirits and elevated understanding, possess a\nnatural privilege to dispense with formalities whenever they think\nproper; just as musicians of great genius are allowed upon many\noccasions, to depart from the common rules of their art; their doing\nwhich, hardly ever renders the music ungrateful to the ear; so men\nwho are endowed with great talents, and display a manifest superiority\nin conversation, may dispense with the ordinary and common methods of\nspeaking, without ever offending the ears of their auditors. Natural\nadvantages shine forth with a greater lustre, and are more solid, and\nmore pleasing than borrowed acquisitions. Thus the world are well\nsatisfied, to accept the first in the room of the last, and look upon\nthemselves as over-paid for the loss of the one, by the introduction of\nthe other in its stead.\n\nXXXV. I was even about to say, that the establishment of ceremonies\nof urbanity, was only calculated for people of middling or inferior\ngeniuses, and was meant as a succedaneum for a discretion so superior\nto that which the others we have mentioned possess, as to be capable\nof dictating of itself, the rule of deportment one man should observe\nto another. I believe it happens in this, with very little difference,\nthe same that it happens in all material movements. There are men, who\nnaturally and without any teaching, have a grace and air in all their\nactions, in the motions of their hands, and their feet, in the bending\ntheir bodies, and inclining their heads, in the casting downwards and\nlifting up their eyes, and in whom in every motion and gesture, all is\ndone with such a native grace, that it enamours those who behold them;\nand is that sort of excellence, which is described by Tibullus to have\nbeen possessed by Sulpicia:\n\n    _Illam quid quid agit, quoquo vestigia flectit,_\n        _Componit furtim, subsequiturque decor._\n\nI should consider it as very useless and unnecessary, to prescribe\nrules for the carriage and actions of such sort of people. Let precepts\nbe kept for the use of those who are naturally aukward, and let them be\ntried to see whether by art, they can mend this defect of nature.\n\nXXXVI. It is only with respect to two sorts of people, that no body is\nallowed to be exempt from observing ceremony, and they are princes and\nwomen. The first, from time immemorial, have instituted ceremonies as\nessential appendages to majesty. The second, from education and habit,\nhave been taught, and accustomed to regard as the substance, what in\nreality is an accidental or visionary entity, and even to prefer this\nvisionary or accidental entity, to the substance itself. Thus they are\napt to disesteem the most discreet and agreeable man in the world, and\nto give the preference to one of much inferior talents, because he is\nwell instructed in fashionable formalities, and is a strict observer of\nthem. I except from this number, the women of superior abilities, who\nknow as well as any body, how to distinguish, and do justice to true\nmerit.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXXVII. Whether this native grace is an integrant part of, or an\nornament to that urbanity, which seasons and adorns men\u2019s words and\nactions, it is certain, that study and art can never supply the defect\nof it.\n\nXXXVIII. This is that sort of perfection, which Plutarch extols in\nAgesilaus, and by the help of which, he observes, that although he was\nbut a little man, and his figure rather contemptible, he in his old\nage, appeared more amiable and engaging, than any of the handsome young\nfellows. _Dicitur autem pusillus fuisse, et specie aspernanda; c\u00e6terum\nhilaritas ejus omnibus horis, et urbanitas aliena ab omni, vel vocis,\nvel vultus morositate, et acerbitate, amabiliorem eum ad senectutem\nusque pr\u00e6buit omnibus formosis._\n\nXXXIX. This is that species of seasoning of which Quintilian speaks,\nwhen he says, that it makes the same sentence seem to come better from\nthe mouth of one man than another: _Inest proprius quibusdam decor\nin habitu, atque vultu, ut eadem illa minus, dicente alio, videantur\nurbana esse._\n\nXL. This is that kind of ornament, which Cicero called the colour,\nor blazon of urbanity, and instances Brutus, as one who was tinged\nwith it in great perfection, but when he came to explain or describe\nthis blazon, he defined it to have consisted of a mysterious _je ne\nscai quoi_. These are his words, taken from his dialogue _De claris\nOratoribus: et Brutus, quis est, inquit, tandem urbanitatis color?\nNescio, inquam, tantum esse quendam scio._ Which last expression, I am\nobliged to decipher by the sentence _Je ne scai quoi_, as I can find\nno other that is equivalent to it. This native grace, or if you please\nto call it by the figurative name Cicero has expressed it by, this\ncolouring of urbanity, is composed of many particulars. For example,\nthe neatness of the articulation, the good tone, and the harmonious\nflexibility of the voice, the graceful attitude of the body, the well\nregulated movements of the action, the amiable modesty of the carriage\nor manner, and the striking or lively expression of the eyes, are the\nparts, which constitute the whole of this grace.\n\nXLI. It is easy to perceive, that all the before-mentioned are gifts\nof nature; which can never be acquired by study, or supplied by\ninstruction. Many people have hoped to succeed, by attempting to\nimitate those, in whom these natural gifts are resplendent, or to\nspeak more properly, are a part of their nature; but the very means\nthey employ to give themselves a pleasing and agreeable air, cause\nthem to appear ridiculous. That which is a grace in the original, has\noften an apish look in the copy. The imitation of natural endowments,\nseldom amounts to more, than a contemptible mock semblance of them.\nThe affectation in these attempts is glaring and palpable, and all\naffectation is surfeiting.\n\nXLII. I shall only state two limitations, or exceptions, to the\npossibility of acquiring those parts of gracefulness, which consist\nin the position of the body, and the motion of its members; and shall\nadmit in the first place, that these may in some measure be acquired by\nimitation; but when? why when people do not think of acquiring them,\nand are not sensible that they do acquire them; that is in their infant\nstate. It is then that nature is so pliant and flexible, that like soft\nwax, it may be easily molded to any shape, and made to receive any\nimpression; and hence it is, that we frequently see children in their\nordinary actions and motions, greatly resemble their parents.\n\nXLIII. In Galicia where I was born, there are many people who\nunderstand Spanish perfectly well, who speak it in a drawling sort of\na way, and by leaving out now and then a letter, are apt to lose the\nexact and proper pronunciation. Many have attributed this defect, to\nthe imperfect organization of the tongues of the people of Galicia,\nproduced by the influence of the climate; but it is no such thing, for\nthis vicious pronunciation, is derived from the bad habit of speaking\nthey contract in their infancy; and it is evident that it proceeds\nfrom thence, because many Galician children who have been carried\nfrom home when they were very young, and have been afterwards brought\nup and educated at Castile, some of whom I have seen, pronounce the\nCastilian language with as much clearness and readiness, as the natives\nof that province themselves. It is not many years ago, that there was\na celebrated actress, who was born in a small village in Galicia, and\nwho was carried to court by her uncle at four years old, and was there\ntrained up to the stage, and who was greatly admired for her neat and\nready pronunciation.\n\nXLIV. The second limitation and exception I admit to the position\nI have advanced, is, that both a vicious pronunciation, and an\naukwardness of motion and manner, may be greatly corrected and amended,\neven after people are grown to a state of maturity, and especially\nwhen these defects proceed from bad habits contracted in their youth.\nBut in order to accomplish this, there is need of great perseverance\nand application. Even an inveterate bad habit, may be torn up by the\nroots by applying vast force and exertion to eradicate it; but when the\nfibres of the root, are inserted into the profundities of nature, all\nendeavours are vain.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXLV. Although Urbanity, with respect to the most brilliant and\nbeautiful parts of it, which we describe by the term gracefulness, as\nwe have before observed, depends very little upon study or instruction,\nstill in all its substantial and essential parts, it admits of precepts\nand rules; so that any man who has been taught, or has made himself\nacquainted with them, may perfectly understand in what this appearance\nof Urbanity consists.\n\nXLVI. People very frequently, and in many ways offend against the laws\nof Urbanity; and I have seen those, who have had a reasonable good\neducation, who have notwithstanding that, been frequently guilty of\noffending against the rules of good-breeding. All those imperfections,\nare the very reverse of Urbanity, which tend to make people\ndisagreeable in their conversation, and when in company with other men\ntroublesome or disgusting in their behaviour; and this explanation,\nsuits well with the definition we at first gave of Urbanity. But which\nare these imperfections? To this I shall answer, that they are many,\nand that I will proceed to point some of the most striking ones out,\nwhich I apprehend will be the most instructive part of this essay, as\nenumerating the most glaring imperfections that tend to make people\ndisagreeable and troublesome in conversation, will have the same\neffect, as prescribing rules that should be observed, to render their\ncompany pleasing and desirable to society. As I proceed, the reader\nmay accompany me, and examine his political conscience as we go on, in\norder to discover whether any of the faults or failings I point out,\nare applicable to himself.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\n_Loquacity._\n\nXLVII. I consider talkative people as a sort of tyrants of\nconversation; for according to my opinion, who admit of a limited\nspecies of reason in brutes, talking is a faculty more peculiar to man\nthan reasoning; and engrossing all the conversation to a man\u2019s self is\na most arbitrary proceeding. He who is always desirous of being heard,\nand is impatient of attending to any one else, usurps a privilege\nto himself, which should be enjoyed in general by all mankind, as a\nprerogative proper to their being. But what fruit can be gathered\nfrom his torrent of words? None, except the tiring and disgusting his\nhearers may be called a fruit, who after they are rid of him, make\namends for the silence he had imposed on them, by speaking of him with\nderision and contempt. No time is worse employed, than that which is\nconsumed in hearing talkative people; who are generally men without\ndiscretion or reflection, for if they had any, they would be more\nreserved and keep within reasonable bounds, in order to avoid making\nthemselves contemptible; and if they want reflection, they must want\njudgement also, and how can he who wants judgement talk with propriety?\nOr what benefit can result to those who listen to an extravagant\nprating man, except that of his affording them an opportunity for the\nmeritorious exercise of their patience? Thus what Theocritus said of\nthe verbose fluency of Anaximenes, may be applied to all talkative\npeople; that he considered them as a luxuriant river of words, in\nthe whole stock of whose waters, you could not find one drop of\nunderstanding: _Verborum flumen, mentis gutta._\n\nXLVIII. What flows from such tongues, may be compared to vomitings\nof the soul; or to the sickly discharges from an unsound mind, which\nthrows up before it has digested them, all the mental species or\naliment it has received. They would have that pass for a faculty or\npower of explaining themselves, which in reality is nothing more than\nthe want of a retentive faculty, or the power of keeping down what is\nin them. I would describe this malady, by calling it a relaxation of\nthe rational faculty; whereas others might be apt to say, that is not\nthe case, for the species are thrown up, for want of space to contain\nthem in the part destined for their reception.\n\nXLIX. Let no man plume himself too much, upon his being well attended\nto or applauded when he first begins to speak in public; for this may\nbe a favourable tempting breeze, that may encourage him to loose the\nsails of loquacity; but although it may be a favourable and a tempting\none, it may be a breeze of but short duration. Conversation is the food\nof the soul, but the cravings of the soul, are as various, as delicate,\nand as capricious as those of the body. The most noble diet persisted\nin for too long a time, becomes satiating, and loathsome. Thus the\noratory of him, who for a certain space shall be listened to with\npleasure by his hearers, may become tiresome to them after a while,\nand they would not attend to what he said, if he persisted in talking\ntoo long. The planets a man should consult the aspect of, to know\nwhen he should enter deep, or go but a little way into the gulph of\nconversation, are the eyes of his auditors; their pleasing serenity, or\nlowering appearances, should be the signs, that should either encourage\nhim to spread all the sails of rhetoric and make great way; or else\nshould warn him of the hazard and risque of proceeding any further, and\nthat for the present it would be most prudent for him to lay-by, and\nwait a more safe and favourable opportunity to pursue his course.\n\nL. But even these appearances may be fallacious and deceiving, and more\nespecially to persons of high rank and authority; for the dependants\nof such, not only flatter them with their tongues, but with their\neyes also. Why should I confine their adulation to the expressions of\ntheir tongues and their eyes, when they convert their whole bodies,\nand every limb and member of them, to instruments of delusion and\nflattery? for with certain fawning movements, and certain mysterious\ngestures of complaisance and admiration, they attend to and applaud all\nthat is said or done by a man in power, on whom they are in any shape\ndepending. He at the same time, big with his own cleverness, and his\nchops watering with approbation of himself, with the drivel running out\nat both corners of his mouth, vents his oratory, and talks whatever\ncomes uppermost, be it good or bad, in a full persuasion, that the\nwords of Apollo of Delphos were never listened to with more attention,\nor more respect. But, unhappy man, how do you deceive yourself! for you\ntire every body, and you disgust every body; and, the worst is, that\nthose who had been just listening to you with such seeming applause, as\nsoon as your back is turned, to relieve themselves from the pain the\nforced tribute of their adulation to you gave them, vent themselves in\nrepeated bursts of laughter and derision at your folly. Great people\nmay believe what I say, and be convinced that this is the way of the\nworld; and they may also believe me when I tell them, that power in the\nhands of a weak man, only tends to make him appear more ridiculous;\nand that in the hands of a discreet one, if he is not extremely so, it\ntends in a great measure to cast a blemish on his understanding.\n\n\nSECT. X.\n\n_Lying._\n\nLI. What can be more obnoxious to urbanity than lying? What man of\nunderstanding is there whom it does not offend? Or to whom is it not\ndisgusting? and how can deceit cease to be injurious? All the utility,\nall the delight that can be obtained by conversation, is destroyed by a\nlie. If he, with whom I converse, tells me lies, of what service will\nthe information I receive from him be to me? for if I do not believe\nhim, all he says will only tend to irritate me; and if I do, to fill me\nwith errors. If I am not assured he tells me truth, what satisfaction\ncan I have in attending to him? For his conversation, so far from\naffording me entertainment or instruction, will set my mind on the\nrack, and cause me to waver, and continue in a painful state of doubt,\nand also perplex me, to find out reasons for believing or disbelieving\nwhat he has told me.\n\nLII. Conversation is a species of traffic, in which mankind exchange\ninformations and ideas with each other; and what better name can we\ngive to him, than that of a cheat and a deceiver, who in this commerce,\npasses false informations and ideas for true ones; and ought we not\nalso to treat him as a prevaricator, who is unworthy of being admitted\ninto human society?\n\nLIII. I have always been amazed at, and have always condemned, the\nindulgence and toleration that lying people find in the world. I have\nalready exclaimed against this practice in my Essay on the Impurity\nof Lying, and must beg leave to refer the reader thither for a more\nfull discussion of the point; but it has occurred to me since I wrote\nthat Essay, that it is probable, this toleration may have arisen\nfrom the great extension of the vice of lying; and that the number\nof those who find themselves interested in this indulgence, is much\ngreater, than that of those who find themselves injured by it; and that\nperhaps they tolerate lying in one another, because the toleration is\nnecessary and useful to both parties. If the sincere part of the world\nconsists of but few people, they cannot, without being guilty of great\nrashness, attempt to wage war against the many; but they at least may\nremonstrate, and with temper complain of the disgust they receive,\nfrom the indulgence that is shewn to lying. I ingenuously confess for\nmyself, that I look upon him as a man of but little sincerity, who\nhears a lie with much seeming composure, and without expressing any\nsigns of his dislike of it; although I must confess at the time I say\nthis, that a frank manifestation of our dislike of the practice, cannot\nso easily be shewn, unless it is to our equals or our inferiors.\n\nLIV. There is a species of lie, that passes in the world for humour\nand pleasantry, which I would punish as a crime. Whenever there\nhappens to be a person in company who is noted for being an exceeding\ncredulous man, it frequently happens, that some one or other tells a\nvery incredible story, for the sake of exposing the easy faith of such\na person, and of shewing, how apt he is to swallow absurdities and\nimprobabilities for truth. This is received as a piece of wit, and all\nthe by-standers laugh and applaud the ingenuity and invention of him\nwho told the lie, and they all regale themselves at the expence of the\ninnocent credulous person. But I consider this as an abuse; for does\nthe simple and easy credulity of any person give others a right to\ninsult him? admitting that his excessive credulity proceeds from the\nscantiness of his understanding; are we peradventure only obliged to\nbe civil to, and treat with urbanity, the discreet and the acute? If\nGod has blessed you with more talents than another man, would it not be\nan insolent abuse of them, if you made that person an object of your\nscorn, and played upon him, and treated him with the same derision and\ncontempt that you would treat a monkey? Would this be using him like\nyour neighbour? Or would it be applying your talents to the end and\npurpose, for which God was pleased to endow you with them?\n\nLV. But the truth is, that excessive credulity proceeds more from\ngoodness of heart, than from want of discretion. I have seen men who\nwere very simple, and at the same time very penetrating. The same\nrectitude of heart, which excites a man of simplicity of manners to\nconduct himself without deceit, inclines him to think, that other\npeople conduct themselves upon the same principle. It often happens,\nthat a lie is believed by one person because he is an ingenuous man;\nand discredited by another, because he is a simpleton. The case is,\nthat the first, excited by the goodness of his disposition, sets\nhimself about finding out grounds of probability for what he has\nheard, and by his penetration discovers such. The other, who is only\ninfluenced by the dictates of his malice, never seeks after any such\nthing; and although he should seek after it, his stupidity would not\npermit him to discover it.\n\nLVI. I don\u2019t know whether the story that is commonly told of St. Thomas\nAquinas, which is, that he was made to believe there was an ox that\ncould fly, be true or not, as likewise what was said about his going\nout very anxious to see the spectacle; but this I know, that the rebuke\nwhich was couched in the answer he gave to those who attempted to put\nthat affront on his credulity, is well worthy of a St. Thomas; I say\nworthy of that great repository of excellent virtues, both moral and\nintellectual, and worthy also the generosity of heart, and exalted\nprudence, of that sublime genius. The answer was as follows: _I could\nmore easily be made to believe that there was an ox which could fly,\nthan I could be made to believe, that mankind were capable of giving a\nlying relation of such a thing._ What reproof could be more discreet\nthan this! and what energy and delicacy is there contained in it! I\nesteem this sentence more, than I do any of those which the ancient\nGrecians have recorded of their wise men. The sublimity of it persuades\nme, that it was the legitimate child of St. Thomas\u2019s brain, and of\ncourse I can have no doubt, but the story we have related was true.\nThus we see, the greatest discretion is not incompatible with, but\nmay be easily reconciled to, and brought to unite with the greatest\nsimplicity.\n\n\nSECT. XI.\n\n_Speakers of bold Truths._\n\nLVII. As there are many people who behave with ill-breeding, from being\naddicted to relate falsehoods, so there are many others, who offend\nagainst the laws of urbanity by speaking ill-timed and uncivil truths.\nI mean to hint at those, who under pretence of undeceiving people, and\nof being their friends, out of time, and contrary to all the rules of\ndecency, take the liberty of pointing out all their faults, and of\nspeaking their opinion, both of them and their conduct. This is an act\nof barbarism, disguised under the veil of honest sincerity.\n\nLVIII. We shall describe these people, by giving the character and\nbehaviour of Philotimus. Philotimus is a man, who at all times is\ndinning in people\u2019s ears the professions of his ingenuousness, and\ndeclaiming till he is out of breath against adulation. He is ever\ndwelling upon his immutable love of truth, which he uses as a sort of\ncoupling, to all the insinuations he throws out against this or that\nperson. He rudely tells a man his faults to his face, and then shelters\nhimself under the pretence, that when an occasion presents itself for\nhis doing it, he cannot refrain from speaking the truth, for all the\ngratifications and indulgences the world can afford. If he hears any\nperson praised, be he absent or present, in whose conduct he conceives\nthere is something reprehensible, he immediately gives vent to his\nspleen, and tells all he knows or has ever heard to that person\u2019s\nprejudice, and reproaches those who have spoke well of him, with having\nflattered or been partial to him; and then immediately pleads his great\nlove of truth, as a justification for what he has done.\n\nLIX. What shall we say of such a man? We may venture to pronounce,\nthat there is much more stuff about him, than is necessary to form\neither a fool or a rustic; and that he is an extravagant babbler, who\nin his conversation observes no order or bounds; that he is a rude,\nyea a very rude unpolished man, who does not understand the difference\nbetween servile adulation, and bare-faced effrontery. He being such a\nsort of man, why should those who hear him regard any thing he says?\nOr who can believe that he is capable of forming a just opinion of\nmatters or things, who is so far infatuated as to overlook, or not\nattend to the maxims, which natural reason has so clearly dictated\nand pointed out? But if we were to admit that he does not err in the\nconception he forms of things, we must at least grant, that he errs in\nhis mode of advancing his opinions, if he prefers them out of time,\ninopportunely, and without method. Has he peradventure a royal licence\nor patent, for being the superintendent or corrector of other men\u2019s\nmanners and conduct? But admitting for argument\u2019s sake, that he is a\nman of as great veracity as he pretends to be, which by the way is what\nI very much doubt of; for my experience has convinced me, that if it\ndoes not apply to every individual, that fine sentence is most true\nand applicable to the bulk of mankind, which I have read somewhere,\nalthough I can\u2019t remember in what author, and is as follows: _Veritatem\nnulli frequentius l\u00e6dunt, quam qui frequentius jactant. There are no\npeople lie more frequently, than those who are always boasting of their\nveracity._ I say, admitting that they are as sincere as they pretend\nto be, does their being men of veracity give them a right to go about\ncudgeling, and breaking the heads of all the world? Truth, according\nto the doctrine of St. Paul, is the beloved companion of charity:\n_Charitas congaudet veritati_; and should it then be used in a gross\nmanner, and so as to become offensive and disgusting? The truth of the\nChristians, according to the description given of it by St. Austin,\nis more beautiful than the Helen of the Greeks: _Incomparabiliter\npulchrior est veritas Christianorum, quam Helena Gr\u00e6corum_; and should\nit appear, or be characterised with so brasen a face, that it abashes\nand stares every body out of countenance?\n\nLX. I confess that there are occasions, on which every man is obliged\nto speak the truth, although his doing it should offend, or be attended\nwith the resentment of those who hear him; but this licence should only\nbe taken in one of the three following instances, the vindication of\ndivine honour, the defence of accused innocence, and the reforming or\nreclaiming your neighbour; and I suppose this last is the only motive,\nfrom which the speakers of bold truths we have just been describing\npretend to act; but are they ignorant, that, although it will always\nbe sure to give offence, their manner of attempting this, can never\naccomplish the reformation they affect to bring about? Nor can it be\notherwise, for how can their sour, overbearing, and arrogant behaviour,\nproduce so good an effect? Or how can they expect, according to the\nscripture phrase, that by sowing thorns, they should hereafter gather a\nharvest of grapes?\n\n\nSECT. XII.\n\n_Tenaciousness or Obstinacy._\n\nLXI. Not less tiresome than those we have just been speaking of, nor\nless interrupting to the pleasure of conversation, are tenacious or\nobstinate people. The spirit of contradiction is an infernal spirit,\nand at the same time so perverse a one, that I very much doubt, whether\nthere has hitherto been a remedy found out for the cure of those who\nare possessed with it.\n\nLXII. This brings to my mind the example of Aristius. He is a great\nfrequenter of, and a busy man in clubs and coffee-houses, to which\nhe is always running, in quest of disputations and argumentations.\nHis opinion is his idol, and nobody must dissent from it, on pain of\nexperiencing the effects of his indignation; neither must any body\nprefer an opposite one, lest he should be treated by him as an enemy;\nand nothing can satisfy him, but a total acquiescence in, or silent\napprobation of all he says. His influence in conversation may be\ncompared to that of the southern constellation, called _Orion\u2019s Belt_,\nwhich excites nothing but tempests. Nimbrosus Orion, as Virgil calls\nit. No sooner does he enter a company, than the serenity of a pleasing\ntranquil conversation, begins to degenerate into a turbulent tumultuous\nnoise. He begins with contradicting, the person contradicted defends\nhimself, others take part in the dispute, the fire of altercation\nlights up, and catches from one to the other like the contagion of a\npestilence, _Insequitur clamorque vir\u00f9m, stridorque rudentum_, till\nat last, the conversation sounds like the talking of gibberish, and\nbecomes a confused jargon and noise, so that the company can neither\nhear or understand each other. All this mischief in political society,\nmay be, and frequently is introduced by a tenacious and obstinate man.\nNor is this malady ever to be cured; for you can more easily turn the\nstream of a rapid river, and make it run back contrary to its course,\nthan force him to give up an opinion he has once advanced.\n\n\nSECT. XIII.\n\n_Excessive Gravity._\n\nXLIII. Opportune cheerfulness, is the most savoury seasoner of\nconversation, and has so great a share in true urbanity, that some,\nas we observed before, have considered it as the most essential part\nof it; for, when introduced with propriety, it produces the most\ndesirable effects, as it enlivens both the speakers and the auditors,\nconciliates their good-will to each other, and affords a relaxation\nto the mind, after it has been fatigued with study, or any serious\noccupation. It was on this account, that the moral gentiles, and even\nthe christians also, placed cheerfulness among the number of moral\nvirtues. Hear what Saint Thomas says on this head, in l. 2. qu\u00e6st. 168.\nart. 2. after declaring cheerfulness to be a virtue, he describes the\ndelight that results from it, not only to be useful, but necessary also\nfor the purpose of giving ease and relaxation to the soul: _Hujusmodi\nautem dicta, vel facta, in quibus non qu\u00e6ritur nisi delectatio\nanimalis, vocantur ludicra vel jocosa. Et ideo necesse est talibus\ninterdum uti, quasi ad quandam anim\u00e6 quietem._\n\nLXIV. Men who are always grave, may be termed a sort of entities\nbetween men and statues. Risibility being a property or quality\ninseparable from reason, he who denies himself the pleasure of\nlaughing, degrades himself below the degree of a rational animal.\nFools, are apt to esteem such people as men of sense, judgment, and\nmature understanding. But is a man\u2019s deporting himself with the dryness\nand rigidity of a stock or a stone, a proof of his understanding? No\nbrute is capable of laughing; and ought a property that is common\nto every brute, to be considered as a descriptive mark of, and the\ncharacteristic of a man of understanding? I look upon such a carriage,\nto bespeak an obstinate genius, and a man of a sullen temper. The\nantients were used to say, that all those who had ever entered the\nenchanted cavern of Trophonius, never laughed afterwards. If there is\nany truth in this story, which many people doubt, it is probable, that\nthe infernal deity who was consulted in that cavern, instilled into\nthose who consulted him this black diabolical melancholy.\n\n\nSECT. XIV.\n\n_Disgusting or unseasonable Jocoseness._\n\nLXV. But excessive gravity, is perhaps not more repugnant to true\nUrbanity, than unseasonable jocoseness. Pleasantry in conversation, can\nbe disagreeable but in three ways; by exceeding in the quantity of it,\nby indecency in the quality of it, and by its being deficient in point\nof nature.\n\nLXVI. He who is always laughing and upon the gog, may be more properly\ntermed a buffoon, than a man of good-breeding. No person makes himself\nmore ridiculous, than one who is always laughing, and he who is always\naffecting to be gay, is ever disgusting; and a man likewise who acts\nthe jack-pudding all his life, is a mere jack-pudding and nothing more.\n\nLXVII. Cheerfulness may be also reprehensible, by degenerating into\nribaldry, or by being over satyrical. The first, is properly the\nlanguage of stables and tippling houses, and as I don\u2019t write for\nlacqueys, grooms, and coachmen, we shall pass this over, and proceed\non to the second point. Those who have a high opinion of their own\ntalents, are very frequently guilty of this fault. I mean to speak of\nthose who set themselves up for dictators, but who ought more properly\nto be termed babblers and praters, but I do not mean to enumerate in\nthis catalogue, such, as may be truly termed men of understanding,\nbut such only as Horace spoke of, when he said, that if opportunities\noccurred for indulging their satyrical vein, they made no scruple of\nlashing their most intimate friends.\n\n                                _Dummodo risum_\n    _Excutiat sibi, non hic cuiquam parcet amico._\n\nOf those, who according to the description given of them by Ennius,\ncould more easily retain in their mouths a hot iron, than a keen\nsaying; these are a sort of people, who seem to claim a right of making\nerror pass for sterling gold, of converting comedy into tragedy,\ninjurious treatment into good behaviour, and of converting honey also\ninto poison. Their tongues may be compared to those of the lions, which\nare so rough and sharp, that wherever they lick they take the skin off.\nThey are also called hummers; and so they are, for like wasps, hornets,\nflies, and all other vile insects of the humming kind, they the instant\nthey have hummed, implant their sting.\n\nLXVIII. But let them make what parade they will of their abilities,\nthey can never escape being noted for malignant or troublesome people;\nand whether they are one or the other, all honest men should either\ndiscard them from their company, or restrain them by threatenings. The\nCount de Amayuelas, whom I became acquainted with in my youth, said\nto a gentleman of this kind, who had taken frequent occasions to say\nrude and ill-natured things to him, under the pretence of being jocose,\nFriend Don N. I have bore with several indelicacies from you, and\nyou may vent as many more upon me as you think proper, but let it be\nunderstood between us from henceforward, that for every indelicacy you\nmust expect a stab. By which intimation, he took the sting out of the\ntail of the hummer.\n\nLXIX. There is a serious fault in hummers, and one that they very\nfrequently commit, which is their exercising their banter upon\ncommon-place things, and general topics, and pointing their sneers,\nfor example, against the rank, or nation of the person they attack.\nI am obliged for this observation, to that great master of Urbanity\nQuintilian; these are his words: _Male etiam dicitur quod in plures\nconvenit: si, aut nationes tot\u00e6 incessantur, aut ordines, aut conditio,\naut studia multorum._ People of steril geniuses, are the most apt to\nfall into this absurdity, who being at a loss what to say concerning\nmen\u2019s actions or personal qualities, fall upon some common-place\nobservations, respecting their condition, country, &c.\n\nLXX. The reason why this should be avoided is, because among the\nmultitude of those who are comprehended in common-place and general\nobservations, there may be more than a few of them, who may construe\nthe hum into an affront; and although they may not have been present at\nthe conversation in which this happened, upon hearing afterwards what\npassed in it, may be excited to shew their resentment against what they\nhave been told was said, which is a thing I have often experienced. And\nI have also seen this attended with not a little injury to common-place\nhummers, who have drawn on themselves resentments they were not aware\nof. But although there should be no danger attending this practice,\nit should be avoided from motives of equity; for notwithstanding\npleasantry is in its own simple nature innocent, it is not right to\nexercise it towards him, who may fancy himself injured by it. Those who\nare so tender and delicate, that they would feel as a hard blow, what\nto others would only seem a playful pat with the hand, should never be\nso much as lightly touched with the finger, for if the lightest touch\ngoes to their hearts, whoever touches them can\u2019t fail to wound them. It\nnot being possible then, for those who deal in general or common-place\nhumour and banter, to avoid giving offence to many people, every one\nwho would be thought a man of urbanity or good-breeding, should abstain\nfrom that practice entirely.\n\nLXXI. Finally, all pleasantry that is not natural is disgusting. Those\nwho without genius attempt to be witty, soon grow tiresome, and make\nthemselves appear ridiculous. There is nothing more insipid, than a\nman who is desirous of making himself seem entertaining, by venting\nstudied conceits, and by aukward and forced endeavours to imitate\npeople of natural humour. It is true, that they succeed in part of\nwhat they aim to accomplish, which is the making other men laugh, but\nthen they themselves, and not their wit, stand as the object of their\nlaughter. If there happens to be a man in a town, who is remarkable and\ncelebrated for his humour, and saying of good things, twenty or thirty\nothers, will attempt to imitate and set themselves in competition with\nhim; but all their endeavours, will never enable them to exhibit more\nthan a ridiculous mock copy of that person. Mankind don\u2019t care to be\nconvinced, that in this and all other such endowments, nature not only\nfurnishes the means, but does the whole executive part of the business\nherself. It is for the want of making this reflection, that those who\nare the least qualified for it by nature, attempt to imitate others, on\nwhom she has with a bountiful hand bestowed the choicest qualities. The\nexceeding likeness there is between a man and a monkey, seems to me to\nbe greater still, if in making the comparison between them, we begin\nwith the man first. It has been insisted, that both in Asia and Africa,\nthere have been apes or monkeys found, who have the exact appearance of\nmen; and I insist, that in Africa, Asia, and Europe, and in all other\nplaces, there are men who have the exact appearance of monkeys, and in\neffect, that they put on, or wear this appearance, by their attempting\nto imitate each other. There never starts up an excellent original\nin our species, of which you will not see innumerable affected\ncopies; but then these are a sort of copies, that never exceed a mock\nscare-crow imitation.\n\n\nSECT. XV.\n\n_Ostentation of Knowledge._\n\nLXXII. Science is a treasure that should be expended with \u0153conomy, and\nnot squandered away profusely. It is of great value to the possessor\nwho lays it out sparingly, but if squandered and made ostentation of,\nit becomes trifling and ridiculous; and indeed upon a strict enquiry,\nit will be found that they very seldom possess it, who boast or make\nparade of being masters of it. They who know but little, are the only\npeople, who in all places, are fond of exposing their whole stock of\nknowledge to view. They never enter into a conversation, that without\nwaiting a fit opportunity for doing it, they don\u2019t exhibit their whole\nscanty budget of informations. Between those who are truly learned, and\nmen of but slender literary acquisitions, there is the same difference,\nthat there is between merchants who keep great stocks of goods, and\npedlars who go about with a pack. The first in their warehouses, lay\nup large assortments of things, where all people may resort, and be\nfurnished with what they have occasion for; the others carry their\nmiserable scanty shop of wares at their backs, and there is neither\nstreet, alley, or corner, where they don\u2019t cry them about, and expose\nand offer them to sale.\n\nLXXIII. Some are so simple, as among all classes of people, to\nintroduce, or as we may say lug-in by the head and shoulders, a\nconversation, on the subject of the profession they were bred to. The\nabb\u00e9 Bellegarde, tells a story of a military man, who in a visit he\nmade to some ladies, without being asked to do it by any body, set\nhimself about relating very circumstantially, all the particulars of\na siege he had been employed in, which he did in all the technical\nterms of military art, taking care also, to mention the regiments\nand officers that assisted at it, and to describe minutely, all the\nmanoeuvres both of the besiegers and the besieged, from the time\nof investing the place to the day of its surrender; which tedious\nrelation, must without doubt have been very entertaining to the\nladies. But Moliere\u2019s comic description of these sort of people, which\nhe gives us in the character of a young practitioner in surgery, is\nmore laughable still; who in one of his first visits to a lady he\npaid his addresses to, after having exhausted all his compliments, in\nanatomical phrases and chyrurgical terms of art, invited her to see\nthe dissection of a dead body, and expressed how greatly he should\nbe obliged to her for her company; for that he himself was to be the\noperator. This undoubtedly could not fail of affording a pleasing\nentertainment to a delicate and tender-hearted lady.\n\nLXXIV. One of the most essential instructions that can be acquired by\ntrue Urbanity, is that of learning upon all occurrences, to accommodate\nyourself and your conversation, to the genius and capacities of your\ncompany; and of leaving to the choice of others, the subject-matter of\ndiscourse, and in following them in the pursuit of it, as far as they\nshall find it pleasing and agreeable to carry it. He is not more absurd\nand extravagant who talks to another on a subject or faculty he does\nnot understand, than he, who talks to him in a language he is an utter\nstranger to.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\n_Affectation of Superiority._\n\nLXXV. The different behaviour of some people at their first entrance\ninto a room, and after their coming to engage in conversation with\nthe company they find there, is very remarkable. At their first\ncoming in, if the people they meet happen not to be such as they are\npretty intimate with, they seem over and above complaisant, make most\nrespectful cong\u00e9es, are very hyperbolical in their professions of\nattachment and esteem to every one they accost, and are very profuse\nof their offers to oblige and serve them; but after a little while,\nthey begin to draw themselves up, to assume an air of gravity and\nconsequence, and in all their words and actions, to behave as if they\nwere vested with a senatorial, or legislative authority. Such a man\nbegins to array himself with a habit of importance, and to appear on\nthe theatre with an air of pomp and arrogance. He lays by the easy\nsock, and assumes the buskin. His _sol fa_ which commenced in a low\ntone in _e faut_, is raised in a very little time, to the highest note\nin _g solre_. His political stature grows to a gigantic size, and he\nbegins to look down on all around him, and to treat all they say with\nthat scorn and disdain, which is generated by, and lineally descended\nfrom rustic pride.\n\nLXXVI. Treating on this subject, brings to my mind a story which Moreri\ntells of Brunon, bishop of Langres, who in the beginning of one of\nhis pastoral letters stiles himself _humilis pr\u00e6sul_, and afterwards\nin the body of it, assumes a majestic tone, and says, _nostram odiens\nmajestatem_. Those who behave in this manner, must certainly lie under\nthe delusion, that urbanity and modesty, were only calculated for\nexordiums, prologues, and salutations at peoples first meeting.\n\n\nSECT. XVII.\n\n_Speaking in a magisterial tone._\n\nLXXVII. Among the professors of literature, there are not a few, who\nmake themselves unpleasant companions, by assuming an overbearing and\ndictatorial manner. With them every place is a school, every chair a\nprofessional one, and all their auditors their pupils. Conceited, and\nfull of themselves and their science, and big also with the dignity\nof their office and degrees, they look upon those who have not gone\nthrough the schools, as people of an inferior species, whom they scarce\never deign to speak to, but with a frowning brow, and a contemptuous\nlook. They always talk in a dictatorial tone of voice, and express\nthemselves with the majestic authority of an oracle, and in their\nconversation with other men, seem to exercise the power of a chapel\nmaster, who regulates the tone the whole band are to sing and play in.\n\nLXXVIII. I have known many, indeed very many, who were prepossessed\nwith the error, that study augments the understanding. And is this an\nerror? without doubt it is, for whether we suppose, that inequality\nof understanding or reason in mankind, proceeds from an entitive\ninequality of souls, as some have imagined; or whether we suppose it\nproceeds from a different temperament or formation of men\u2019s organs,\nwhich is the most generally received opinion; it will necessarily\nfollow from these premises, that with the assistance of study, or\nwithout it\u2019s aid, the intellectual faculty, must ever remain equally\nand identically the same; it being certain, that study can never alter\nthe organization or native temperament of man; and much less can it\nchange the substantial entity of the soul. Thus after many years study,\nthe reasoning faculty can never be increased in natural strength, so\nmuch as half a degree. The before-named argument demonstrates it; but\nbesides this, my own experience has shewn me the thing palpably and\nclearly. I have seen people of great application to letters, who after\nconsuming a large portion of their lives in that pursuit, reasoned\nmiserably on whatever subject they attempted to talk upon; and I have\nobserved others, whom I have had frequent opportunities of seeing for\na great number of years, and who were scarce ever without a book in\ntheir hands, who laboured under the same inability of reasoning, and\nwhose ideas were equally confused, and their comprehension just as\nobscure at the end of that period, as at the beginning. Study assists\npeople with certain informations, and furnishes them with a variety\nof species or matter, by the help of which, they are enabled to make\nmany deductions, which they could not have made without that aid; but\nthe power or activity of the understanding, cannot be increased or\nenlarged by any such means. A workman, who should be furnished with\nmany instruments of his art, which he was not possessed of before,\nwould with this assistance, be enabled to do many things, which without\ntheir help he could not have executed; but this would not prove that\nthe strength of his arm was increased.\n\nLXXIX. Even with respect to the particular faculty or science men\nstudy, they never can get over, or pass beyond the fence rail which\nnature has placed before them; they read much, converse much, and\ntreasure up a great many species in their memories, but never collect\nthem with any order, or separate and apply them with any judgment or\ndiscretion, and never clearly penetrate or comprehend their uses. Thus\none of these comes out from his studies, like a learned man that is\nonly skilled in perspective, and capable of fascinating the ignorant\nvulgar with false lights and shadowings; or such a one as the common\npeople call wells of science, but they are only wells of muddy water,\nthat is of no use or benefit to mankind.\n\nLXXX. This being the case, which it most undoubtedly is, it is very\nclear and evident, that the faculties they have studied, give them no\nright or pretensions to the magisterial air they assume on account of\nthe degrees they have taken, and that the insignia or outside marks of\nthose honours and dignities, give them no just reason for affecting,\nor claiming any authority or superiority, over the rest of mankind.\nThe most provoking part of this matter, and that which heightens the\nridiculousness of it to an extreme degree, is, that those who for\nthe most part are under the dominion of this vain presumption, are\nprofessors of inferior note; for those who are really ingenious, and\nmen of clear understandings, let themselves be influenced by reason.\nI repeat again, that the professors of little note, are those who are\nostentatiously fond of enlarging the size of their little letters,\nand of making them all appear like capitals. They are those, who from\nstudy extract a great deal of smoke, but little clear or luminous\nfire. Thus when they mix with the rest of the world, they assume an air\nof superiority over other men, and say a thousand silly things, with\nas solemn and grave a face, as if all they articulated were profound\napophthegms.\n\nLXXXI. It may be thought that I exaggerate, but I do not; for the\nreader may believe me when I assure him, that I have known many, nay\nvery many, who without any more merit, than that of having kept their\nterms at a university for a certain number of years, and of having\ntaken a degree, and being authorized to wear the insignia of academic\ndignity, treat with contempt every thing that is advanced by a lay man,\nand behave to him, as if he was a rational animal of an inferior order\nto himself. In whatever company such a man finds himself, whether the\nconversation turns upon war, politics, or civil government, he with\na ridiculous self-sufficiency, takes upon him to give his opinion,\nalthough it is in opposition to that of a man, who may be reasonably\nsupposed to understand these things much better than him. And what does\nhe get by all this? He causes himself to be despised and derided, and\nto be pointed and laughed at for a blockhead.\n\nLXXXII. I can\u2019t omit mentioning another gross fault, which these men\nof slender talents are apt to fall into; although it may with truth be\nsaid, that it is frequently incurred by people of all classes; which\nis, being much addicted to criticise and censure the productions or\nabilities of others, who are better informed than themselves. It is\nto be sure very laughable, to think of a silly fellow, who runs about\ncalling the rest of the world fools; and to reflect, that he who does\nnot know a word of science, should busy himself with measuring by\ninches, the scientific talents of other men, which he hardly ever will\nvouchsafe to estimate by feet or yards, because there are very few\ninstances, in which he will admit their talents to arrive at those\ndimensions. Thus a bad preacher, will never acknowledge that he has\nheard a good sermon; a bad taylor, that he has seen a suit of cloaths\nwhich were well made; or a bad smith, that he has seen a piece of work\nthat was well executed, &c.\n\n\nSECT. XVIII.\n\n_Troublesome or ill-timed visits._\n\nLXXXIII. There are some men, who by being over attentive and civil to\ntheir friends, become intolerable. I speak of those, who make visiting\nan employment or occupation, and who are always exercising themselves\nin that way, as if it was their profession. These are a sort of people,\nwho not knowing what to do with themselves, or how to employ their own\ntime, run about tiring and breaking-in upon the avocations of other\npeople, who are engaged in most honourable and important occupations;\nthey are a sort of robbers of men\u2019s time, who steal from them that,\nwhich it is necessary for them to employ in their business; they are\na sort of knights errant, whose tongues instead of spears, are ever\nprepared for attack, and who busy themselves in doing wrongs, instead\nof redressing them; a kind of dealers in common-place phrases, who go\nabout like beggars from house to house; and who may be termed cheats\nin good-breeding, and such, as would impose on the world vexation for\nobsequiousness.\n\nLXXXIV. Those who think to recommend themselves to the good graces of\nmen in power, by a repetition of visits, deceive themselves greatly;\nfor what merit can there be in keeping such a person confined an\nhour to his room every third day, where he may possibly remain as\nuneasily, as if he was sitting in the stocks, and be deprived of an\nopportunity of taking some amusement or recreation he is fond of, or\nelse, of employing that time in some business he wanted to attend to?\nWhat most commonly happens in these cases is, that the visitor has no\nsooner taken leave and turned his back, than the person visited vents a\nthousand curses on his impertinence; and if there should chance to be\nany one by to whom he can unbosom himself in confidence, he declares to\nhim, that he never met with a greater savage in all his life.\n\nLXXXV. I feel much for ministers who are exposed to this sort of\npersecution; for to the heavy load of their office that lays on them,\nmay be added the surcharge of these tiresome visits, the weight of\nwhich may possibly sit more burthensome on them, than that of the whole\nduty they have to do besides.\n\n\nSECT. XIX.\n\n_Visits to sick people._\n\nLXXXVI. On the head of visits to sick people, there is much to be\nsaid, as in making them, we should attend not only to the rules of\ngood-breeding, but to those of charity also; and it is impossible,\nif we are wanting in the last of these obligations, for us to comply\nwith those of the first. Sick people, both with respect to their souls\nand bodies, should be treated and dealt by with as much delicacy and\ncaution, as you would handle an exquisitely thin vessel of glass. A\nsick body is affected by, and sensible of the slightest touch; and\nan afflicted soul, may be inquieted by such a sensation as cannot be\ndefined.\n\nLXXXVII. Visiting sick people, is not only an act of urbanity, but\nan act of tenderness and humanity also; but in order to constitute\nit such an act, it is essentially and absolutely necessary, that the\nvisit should be so managed, and attended with such circumstances, as\nwill afford relief and comfort to the sick person. But how many of\nthese kind of visits are experienced by the poor sick? one may venture\nto assert, scarce one in fifty. The prudent part of mankind are but\nfew in number, but the visitors consists of many. What effect must\nhis visits have on a sick man, who tires and disgusts one in health\nwith them? Nor is it sufficient, that he who visits a sick person is\ndiscreet, if his discretion does not lead to instruct him, when, how\nmuch, and in what manner a sick person should be talked to. To know\nwhen he should be talked to, the physician, and those who attend him\nshould be consulted; how much, in what manner, and on what subject,\nmust be determined and regulated, by the prudence of the person who\nvisits him.\n\nLXXXVIII. The how much, is the point which visitors most commonly\nmistake. Sick people should be but little talked to, even although\nthe subject of the conversation is such as they are fond of; for\ntheir attention to what is talked of, is apt to fatigue them, and to\nwade those spirits, which would be better employed in resisting the\ndisease. Thus it in general is better to leave them in that sort of\nhalf slumber, and languid quiet of mind, which by not being disturbed\nor interrupted, permits all the ideas that occur to them to pass easily\nthrough the brain.\n\nLXXXIX. With regard to the manner they should be talked to in, it\nought to be such, as by no means should inquiet or disturb them; and\nto prevent their being surprized or alarmed, it will be necessary to\ntalk to them in a low voice. If loud talking is capable of cracking a\nhead of brass, what effect must it have on a glass one? They should not\nbe asked many questions, nor should they as little as possible, be put\nunder a necessity of replying to what is said of them, for from thence\nthere would result two fatigues, that of reasoning, and that of talking.\n\nXC. The subject of the conversation with a sick Person, should in\ngeneral turn upon such things, as he was observed to be most fond of\nwhen in health; for with respect both to the aliments of the soul,\nas well as those of the body, I am of opinion, that physicians and\nthose who attend on, or visit sick people, should have regard to their\nappetites and desires, and I am inclined to think, that with respect\nto these particulars, there are frequent mistakes made, and especially\nwith relation to the aliments of the soul, for by making them grateful\nto people, there will seldom any inconvenience result, but having\nregard to doing this, may be attended with much use and benefit.\nWhenever an epidemical distemper prevails in a town or country, it may\nnot be improper now and then, to talk to sick people on the subject\nof that disorder; but in doing this, care should always be taken\nto mention to them only those who have been visited with, and have\nrecovered from the disease; and regard should likewise be had, never to\nsay a word of such as have died of it; but I have known visitors who\nwere such blunderers, as scarce to tell a sick person any other news,\nthan that such a one, or such a one is dead. This tends to make a sick\nman very unhappy, for according to the logic of his melancholy, he is\napt to conclude, that his death must be an infallible consequence of\nthat of the other persons.\n\nXCI. To these general rules, I shall add a remark on two mistakes that\nare very commonly fallen into by those who visit sick people. The first\nof these is, their beginning upon their entrance into the chamber of\na sick person, if there are three or four of them, to ask him one by\none, how he goes on, and how he finds himself. A man had need have the\npatience of Job, to answer such a number of identical questions. Even\nin slight illnesses, the pain and uneasiness it gives a man to answer\nthe same string of questions over and over again, is very evident and\npalpable. Therefore the method people should pursue in their visits\nto a man who is seriously ill, should be, to ask in a low voice, how\nhe is of those who attend him. Or the expedient may be had recourse\nto, that was practised by a friend of mine, who was of the same\nreligious order as myself; who when he was once very ill, to avoid this\ninconvenience, ordered that every morning, there should be written on a\npiece of paper, all the questions that are generally asked by visitors,\ntogether with the answers to them; such as what sort of a night he\nhad had, whether the pain in his head was abated, whether his thirst\ncontinued, or whether he had taken any nourishment, &c. This paper he\nordered to be stuck with wafers on the side of his chamber door, that\nthose who came to visit him might read it, in order to prevent their\nfatiguing him with a number of those questions.\n\nXCII. The second mistake, is that of all the visitors taking upon them\nto be physicians, and to prescribe for the sick person. This is an\naffectation practised by many; but when we consider, how abstruse and\nhow arduous a study physic is, and how long practice and experience it\nrequires to obtain a competent knowledge of it, and that the greatest\ningenuity is found to be unequal to the acquisition; I say when we\nconsider all this, must it not appear very absurd and presumptuous,\nfor every one to pretend to take upon him the office. Thus, whatever a\nvisitor fancies would be serviceable to the diseased person, either as\nfood, or medicine, he is continually teasing the sick man, and vexing\nthe physician with his recommendation of. How often have I seen very\nprudent and able physicians, much perplexed to determine what they\nshould prescribe; and at the same time, have observed a thousand vain\npretenders flourish away, and very self-sufficiently, and much to their\nown satisfaction, determine off hand, the medicine the patient should\ntake! How many times also have I seen these conceited wrong-headed\npeople, with their importunities, drive an able learned physician out\nof his course, who had determined, after well considering all the\ncircumstances of his patient, to stand still for a little while, and\nleave the disease to nature, in order to see which way she would point;\nbut persecuted and overcome by the pressing instances of the people\nwe have been mentioning, he is brought to break this resolution, and\nto set pen to paper, and prescribe something that he had better have\ndesisted from ordering! These ignorant folks, are ever exclaiming that\nnature should always be assisted. This is a grand aphorism; and one\nthat all the world pretend to understand; but what such men as we have\njust mentioned fancy to be assisting nature, is in reality, and most\ncommonly, cutting off her legs and arms.\n\n\nSECT. XX.\n\n_Visits of Condolence._\n\nXCIII. All those who labour under any great misfortune, may properly be\nclassed among the sick or infirm. Those things which we commonly call\ndiseases, begin with the body, and from thence proceed to affect the\nsoul; but the disease of grief, or sadness, begins with the soul, and\nfrom that is communicated to, and infects the body. To the afflicted\nwith grief, all the visitors should act the physician, nor indeed are\nthere any other physicians, who can afford them so much relief. The\ncure of the passions of the soul, do not appertain to medicine, but to\nethics. Thus the discretion of a man who visits an afflicted person may\nafford him relief, when all the precepts of old Hippocrates can furnish\nhim with none.\n\nXCIV. But what most frequently happens in these cases? why, that the\nvisits of condolence, add a new affliction to him who is already borne\ndown by grief. It is necessary to leave a disconsolate widow, or a man\nwho was exceedingly fond of his deceased wife, for a few days after\ntheir loss to themselves, both out of respect to the formalities of\nthe world, and to afford them an opportunity to vent their sorrow.\nThe natural alleviators of great grief, are abundant tears, impetuous\nsighs, repeated exclamations, and extravagant gestures. None of these\ncan be indulged by any one, while he or she is receiving a visit; for\npeople at such times, are obliged to behave with as much composure,\nas a person who is acting a serious part in a play; and must confine\nthemselves to expressions of their grief, that are purely theatrical.\nTheir words and their sighs, must issue from them, in form, in order,\nand according to rule. Their bosoms are oppressed with an ocean of\nbitterness, and they are only permitted to vent it drop by drop. The\ndoing of which if you consider it, does not afford them the slightest\nrelief; but on the contrary, the violence they put upon themselves\nto conform to these regular demonstrations of sorrow, is rather an\naddition to their torment.\n\nXCV. The cruel consequences that result to afflicted people, by denying\nthem the natural breathings of their sorrow, and restraining them\nfrom venting their grief by all ways and means, is well explained by\nPicineli in his simile of a River, which swells the more, the more its\ncourse is obstructed, _ab obice crescit_; for so it is, that grief\nincreases by being suppressed, and that the less vent is given to it,\nthe more apt it is to suffocate. _Strangulat inclusus dolor_, said\nOvid, who was well versed in these matters.\n\nXCVI. For these reasons, I am of opinion, those who have met with such\nmisfortunes, should for a certain time, be only seen by their relations\nand most intimate friends, their familiar intercourse with whom, would\nrather facilitate, than interrupt those burstings of their souls, which\nrelieve the oppressions of their breasts. The visits of such people,\nshould always be accompanied with expressions of friendship, and hearty\ntenders of kind and generous offers, and especially, when the grief\nis increased by apprehensions, that the consequences of the loss they\nhave sustained, will be a partial, or total privation of their temporal\nconveniences. And besides those intimate friends and relations, the\nvisits of some spiritual man, whose character for virtue and discretion\nis generally acknowledged and confessed, might afford great comfort\nin affliction, or to speak more properly, the interposition of Divine\nProvidence through him, might administer greater relief in such cases,\nthan could be furnished by the nearest relations, and the most sincere\nfriends. And the best office that could be done to those who are borne\ndown with grief by their friends and relations, might possibly be to\nprocure them frequent visits from men of this character.\n\nXCVII. I would have it understood, that I mean all I have just said,\nas applicable only to great and real griefs; for truly appearances in\nthese cases are very uncertain and equivocal. If a father, a mother, a\nhusband, or a wife dies, the nearest relation to the deceased party,\nmanifests great tokens of being deeply affected. But who will believe\nthat a husband can be greatly concerned for the death of his wife,\nwho was known to be much fonder of other women than of her? or who\ncan believe that a wife can be really grieved for the death of her\nhusband, who always played the tyrant with her, and treated her like a\ngalley-slave of matrimony? or who that a son can be feelingly affected\nby the death of a father, whose estate he has long panted to be in\npossession of? In such instances as these, multitudes of visits of\ncondolence may not be improper; for condolences of compliment, are well\nsuited to mournings of ceremony.\n\n\nSECT. XXI.\n\n_Letter-writing._\n\nXCVIII. The writing letters with address and propriety, is a very\nessential part of urbanity, and a matter upon which a great deal\nmay be said by way of instruction; but as the want of this may be\nsupplied, by reading approved books of letters on various subjects,\nI would recommend to the reader the perusal of those of many eminent\nmen, which have been lately collected and published, by that diligent\nand pains-taking person Don Gregorio Mayans y Siscar, librarian to\nhis majesty, and professor of civil law in the kingdom of Valentia;\nand would advise him to read them over and over again with much\nattention, as the best patterns of letters in our language. With\nrespect to the writing of Latin letters, those who desire to be well\ninstructed in that, should read attentively, those of Don Manuel Marti\nDean of Alicant, which have been lately published by the before-named\nDon Gregorio Mayans in two volumes in octavo; and those of Mayans\u2019s\nown, which he published in one volume in quarto in 1732. I consider\nthe publication of these books, to have been of the greatest use and\nimportance, on account of the miserable state, to which the writing the\nLatin language was reduced in Spain, and especially with respect to\nthe familiar or epistolary stile. How often have I experienced, that\nwhenever it became necessary for a religious society or community, to\nwrite a Latin letter to Rome, or some other foreign kingdom, that there\nwere very few men to be found among them, who were capable of doing it,\nunless it was in Latin stuffed full of Hispanisims? And whenever it\nbecame necessary for them to converse in Latin with any stranger, they\nseemed as much at a loss, and as much embarrassed, as if they had been\nobliged to talk to him in Arabic.\n\nXCIX. People are apt to run into the same error in writing multitudes\nof letters, that they are in paying too many visits; as letters may\nbe termed a sort of visits in writing. Numbers of people are addicted\nto this fault, and their reason for committing it is, that they are\nin hopes by this means, to recommend themselves to the good graces of\nthose they write to; but nothing can be more absurd or ridiculous,\nthan thinking, that by being troublesome to people, you will gain\ntheir esteem and affection; whereas the commission of this fault,\nis most commonly attended with a quite opposite effect; and I have\nseen many, who by the frequency of their letters, have lost the\ngood-will of those who had a regard for them, and whose friendship\nthey would have continued to possess, but for their teasing them with\na superfluous repetition of letters. There are not a few, who write\nthese sort of letters, for the sake afterwards of feeding their own\nvanity by shewing the answers to them, in order to manifest that they\nare esteemed by, and honoured with the correspondence of persons of\ndistinction. These are not only troublesome to those they write to,\nbut to those also to whom they shew the answers to their letters; and\nwhat most commonly happens is, that instead of making themselves appear\nrespectable by doing this, they cause themselves to be despised, and\nto look ridiculous; for there is scarce any one who does not regard\nwith contempt, a man that runs about from company to company reading\nand shewing his letters, like a bad poet, who is always troubling his\nfriends with a repetition of his verses.\n\nC. But what remedy is there for these impertinences? why no other, but\ndisregarding, and not giving answers to such letters. Oh! but this\nwould shew want of urbanity; no it would not, for I assert, that so far\nfrom it, it would manifest much discretion; and I consider any man who\nmaintains a contrary opinion, to be under a great mistake. There is no\none who thinks it shews want of urbanity, to deny your being at home to\na man who persecutes you with troublesome visits. Why then should it\nbe thought that a man is wanting in this respect, who returns no answer\nto these sort of letters? It is very likely, that the writer of them\nwill be much concerned and affected at not having answers to them; but\nif I can cure an indisposition I labour under, by making the person\nwho brought it upon me, swallow the bitter draught that it may be\nnecessary should be taken to accomplish that end, instead of my taking\nit myself, why should not I avail myself of such a remedy? In short,\nin cases of this sort, it is impossible to adopt any other method than\nthat of giving no answer to these kind of letters; for attempting to\ndo otherwise, would be attempting more than a man who receives great\nnumbers of such letters could find leisure to execute; for I can safely\ndeclare with respect to myself, that if I had not taken a resolution\nnot to answer all the letters I received, my whole time would not have\nbeen sufficient to write those answers, nor my whole fortune, to pay\nthe postage of those that would have been addressed to me.\n\n\n\n\n    A\n    DEFENCE\n    OR\n    VINDICATION OF THE WOMEN.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. I Enter upon a serious and difficult undertaking; in the prosecution\nof which, it is not one ignorant vulgar person only I shall have to\ncontend with, for setting about to defend all the women, amounts to\npretty near the same thing as resolving to offend all the men, there\nbeing scarce one among them, who, in order to give precedence to his\nown sex, does not endeavour to bring the other into disesteem; and to\nsuch an extravagant length, has this custom of abusing and vilifying\nthe women by common consent been carried, that in a moral sense they\nload them with defects, and in a physical one with imperfections,\nand will scarce allow them to possess a single good quality: but\nthey lay the greatest stress on the scantiness or limitation of their\nunderstandings; for which reason, after briefly vindicating them in\nother respects, I shall discourse more at large on their aptitude, for\nattaining all sorts of science and sublime knowledge.\n\nII. The false prophet Mahomed, denied the women entrance into that\nill-laid-out and absurdly-disposed paradise, which he had devised and\nappropriated to be possessed by his followers, limiting the felicity of\nthe females to beholding from without, the glory and happiness enjoyed\nby the men within; and it certainly must give the women great pleasure,\nto survey their husbands in that scene of delights, composed all of\nturpitudes, clasped in the arms of other consorts, which were feigned\nto be newly created for this particular purpose by that great artist in\nfabricating chimeras. Such a delirium being admitted and received by a\ngreat part of the world, sufficiently shews, to what a degree mankind\nare capable of running into error.\n\nIII. But it seems as if these, who deny the women almost every kind\nof merit in this life, do not differ much from those who deny them\nhappiness in the next. The most vile among the vulgar, very frequently\nrepresent that sex as having a most horrible propensity to vice; and\nwould insinuate, that the men are the sole repositories of virtue.\nIt is certainly true, that you will find these species of sentiments\nloudly trumpeted forth in an infinite number of books; in some of\nwhich, the invective is carried to such a point, as scarcely to admit\nthere is one good woman, and asserting, that their blush, which has\nbeen generally considered as an addition to their beauty, and a token\nof modesty, is the effect of the lewdness of their souls.\n\n    _Aspera si visa est, rigidasque imitata Sabinas_\n      _Velle, sed ex alto dissimulare puta._\n\nInstead of replying to such insolent malevolence, the best method is,\nto treat it with contempt and detestation. Not a few of those, who are\nmost addicted to paint the sex in the blackest colouring, have been\nobserved to be the most solicitous about obtaining their favour and\ngood graces. Euripides, who was exceedingly satirical upon them in his\ntragedies, as Athen\u00e6us and Stob\u00e6us inform us, was excessively fond of\nthem in private. He execrated them on the theatre, and idolized them\nin the chamber. Boccace, who was excessively addicted to women, wrote\na satyr against them, entitled, The Labyrinth of Love. What was the\nmystery of this? Why it most probably was, that, under the disguise of\nhaving an aversion to them, he endeavoured to conceal his passion for\nthem; or it might be, that the brutal satiety of the turpid appetite\nhad brought on a loathing, which caused every thing appertaining to the\nother sex to appear hateful and disgusting. This sort of abuse, may\nalso sometimes proceed from a refusal to lend a kind ear to entreaties\nand solicitations; for there are men so malevolent, as to be capable\nof saying a woman is not good, because she has refused to be bad.\nThis unjust motive for complaint and resentment, has sometimes vented\nitself in the most cruel acts of revenge; an example of which, may\nbe instanced in the unhappy fate of that most beautiful Irish lady\nmadam Douglass, against whom, William Leout was blindly irritated, for\nhaving refused to comply with his lewd solicitations. To be revenged,\nhe accused her of high treason; and procured the calumniating and\nfalse charge to be proved by suborned witnesses. She suffered capital\npunishment; and la Mothe de la Vayer, who (in his Opusc. Scept.) gives\nthe relation, says, that Leout himself afterwards confessed the falsity\nof the accusation, and the wicked means used to prove her guilty.\n\nTo this instance, may be added that of a most virtuous and beautiful\nFrench lady, the marchioness of Gange. Her two brothers-in-law made\ndishonourable propositions to her, and successively tried many arts, to\nprevail on her to gratify their base inclinations; but, notwithstanding\none of them, who was an extreme cunning man, and governed the marquis\nher consort entirely, threatened to instil into the mind of her husband\nsuspicions of her fidelity, she vigorously rejected their entreaties.\nFinding themselves in spite of the menace, repeatedly repulsed\nwith scorn and indignation, they resolved to carry the threat into\nexecution; and, having prevailed on the credulous husband to entertain\ndoubts of his wife\u2019s honour and constancy, he consented that the two\nbrothers should take away the life of the innocent marchioness; which\nthey did in a barbarous and cruel manner, by first forcing her to\nswallow a poisonous draught, but afterwards, doubting of the efficacy\nof the potion, they gave her several desperate wounds. Although she\nsurvived both the wounds and the operation of the poison for the space\nof nineteen days, and, by means of her relation of the matter, which\nwas corroborated by other circumstances, the officers of justice and\nthe public were informed of the whole transaction, and measures were\ntaken for apprehending the delinquents; yet they, finding themselves\ndiscovered, fled the kingdom, and escaped the punishment due to their\ncrime. This tragical event happened in the year 1667, and is related by\nGayot Piteval, in his fifth volume of Remarkable Cases.\n\nIV. I don\u2019t deny that many of them are vicious; but, alas! if we were\nto trace their slips and irregularities to their source, I fear we\nshould find them originate in the obstinate and persevering impulse\nor solicitations of our sex. He, who would wish or endeavour to make\nall the women good, should begin with converting all the men. Nature\nimplanted modesty in the sex, as a fence-wall to resist the attacks of\nappetite; and it very rarely happens, that a breach is made in this\nwall by force applied on the inside.\n\nV. The declamations against the women, which we read in some parts\nof holy writ, should be understood, as pointed and levelled at the\nperverse ones, as there is no doubt but there are such; and, although\nthey should be supposed to have an eye to the sex in general, nothing\ncould be inferred from thence; because the physicians of the soul\ndeclaim against women, as the physicians of the body declaim against\nfruit, which, although it is good, beautiful, and useful in itself, the\nabuse or excess of it is pernicious: besides this, allowance should be\nmade for the latitude permitted to oratory of magnifying the risque,\nwhen it is used to divert or turn people from dangerous courses.\n\nVI. Let them, who suppose the female sex to be more vicious than ours,\ntell me, how they can reconcile this, with the church having in an\nespecial manner, bestowed on them the epithet of devout? How with the\nwords of many of the most grave and eminent doctors, who have declared\nit as their opinion, that there are more women saved than men, even\nhaving regard to the proportion, in which it is generally thought the\nnumber of females exceeds that of the males? Which opinion, they do\nnot, nor cannot found on any other thing, than their having observed in\nthem a greater inclination to piety.\n\nVII. Methinks I already hear, in opposition to our undertaking, that\nproposition of much noise, and little or no truth, that the women are\nthe cause of all evil; and, by way of proving it, the vulgar, down to\nthe meanest and most contemptible of them, endeavour to inculcate at\nevery turn, that La Caba occasioned the ruin of all Spain, and Eve that\nof all mankind.\n\nVIII. But the first instance is absolutely a false one. The count Don\nJulian was the person who brought the Moors into Spain, but was not\npersuaded to it by his daughter, who did no more than make known\nto her father the affront and injury she had received. How unhappy\nis the lot of women, if, in the case of being trampled on by an\ninsolent ravisher, they are to be deprived of the relief of unbosoming\nthemselves to their fathers, or their husbands! The aggressors, in\nthese cases, would gladly deprive them of this relief and benefit;\nthough if at any time an unjust vengeance should be the consequence\nof the complaint, the fault would not lie at the door of the innocent\noffended person, but would rest with him who did the execution with the\nsword, and the man who committed the insult; and thus the whole blame\nand crime would be imputable to the men only.\n\nIX. If the second example proves, that the women in general are worse\nthan the men; by the same mode of reasoning it may be proved, that\nthe angels in general are worse than the women; because, as Adam was\ninduced to sin by a woman, the woman was seduced by an angel. It is not\nyet decided whose sin was the greatest, that of Adam, or that of Eve,\nbecause the fathers are divided in their opinions; and, in truth, the\nexcuse which Cayetane makes in favour of Eve, that she was deceived by\na creature of much superior intelligence and capacity to herself, is\na circumstance that cannot be urged on behalf of Adam, and greatly\nabates her crime in comparison with his.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nX. But passing from the moral to the physical, which is more applicable\nto our present purpose, we shall find the preference of the robust\nover the delicate sex is a point settled, and any claim or pretensions\nto equality on the part of the women is set aside, and treated with\ncontempt; and to such a length has depreciating the women been carried\nby some, that they have not scrupled to call them imperfect, and even\nmonstrous animals, asserting, that Nature, in the work of generation,\nnever intended to produce any thing but males, and that it was only by\nmistake, or in consequence of some defect in the matter or faculty,\nthat females were produced.\n\nXI. O admirable adepts in physics! It would follow from hence, that\nNature conspired to work its own destruction, because, without the\nconcurrence of both sexes, the species cannot be preserved. It would\nfollow also, that Nature in this her principal work, is more frequently\nmistaken than right; because it is allowed, that she produces more\nwomen than men. Nor when we see females the offspring of parents who\nare healthy, robust, and in the flower of their age, can we attribute\nthe formation of them to debility, want of vigour, or a defect in the\nmatter; nor is it probable, that if man had preserved his original\ninnocence, in which case there would have been none of these defects,\nwe should have had no women born, and that the human lineage would have\nbeen kept up or continued without propagation.\n\nXII. I know very well there was an author, who, for the sake of\nindulging his malice, and supporting his envious insinuations against\nthe other sex, swallowed so palpable an absurdity. This was Almaricus,\na Parisian doctor of the twelfth century, who, among other errors,\nasserts, that, if the state of innocence had continued, all the\nindividuals of our species would have been males, and that God would\nhave created them immediately himself as he did Adam.\n\nXIII. Almaricus was a blind follower of Aristotle, insomuch that all,\nor very near all his errors, were produced by conclusions, which\nhe had drawn from the doctrines of that philosopher; and, seeing\nthat Aristotle, in more than one part of his works, gives it to be\nunderstood, that a female is a defective animal, its generation\naccidental, and out of the design of nature, he concluded, that there\nwere no women in the state of innocence; and thus it comes to pass,\nthat an heretical theology is very frequently occasioned by a mistake\nin physics.\n\nXIV. But the great and avowed adherence of Almaricus to Aristotle, was\nrather unfortunate to them both; because the errors of Almaricus were\ncondemned by a council held at Paris in 1209; and, in the same council,\nthe reading the books of Aristotle were prohibited, which prohibition\nwas afterwards confirmed by Pope Gregory IX. Almaricus had been dead a\nyear when his dogmas were proscribed; but his bones were afterwards dug\nup, and thrown into a jake.\n\nXV. This shews, that we should not lay any great stress upon the\nopinion of a few doctors, who, though they were in other respects\ndiscreet men, have asserted, that the female sex is defective, for no\nother reason, than because Aristotle whose followers they were had\ndeclared so; but they did not however proceed so far, as to precipitate\nthemselves into the error of Almaricus. It is certain, that Aristotle\u2019s\ntreatment of the women proceeded from spite; for he not only proclaimed\nwith vehemence their physical defects, but was more vehement still in\nblazoning their moral ones; some instances of which, I shall point\nout in another place. Who would not suppose from all this, that his\ndisposition inclined him to shun the sex? But nothing was so opposite\nto him, for he not only tenderly loved two wives which he married,\nbut his affection for the first, named Pythais, who, as some say,\nwas daughter, others niece of Hermias, tyrant of Atarneus, carried\nhim so far beside himself, that he franticly offered incense to her\nas a deity. They also give us a relation of his loose amours with a\nlittle servant girl, though Plutarch does not incline to credit the\ntale; but in this business, the testimony of Theocritus Chio, who was\ncontemporary with Aristotle, ought to have more weight than the opinion\nof Plutarch, who was much posterior to him; and Theocritus, in a lively\nepigram, lashed Aristotle for his obscenity. From this instance we may\nperceive, that men\u2019s seeming malignity to, and inveterate abuse of\nwomen, is, as we have observed before, frequently accompanied with an\ninordinate inclination for them.\n\nXVI. From the same physical error which condemned woman for an\nimperfect animal, there sprung another theological one, which is\ncombated by St. Austin, in Lib. 22, de Civit. Dei cap. 17. The\nauthors of this system say, that, at the universal resurrection, this\nimperfection is to be remedied, by converting all the women into men;\nand that then, grace is to compleat and finish the work which nature\nhad only begun.\n\nXVII. This error is very like that of the infatuated Alchymists, who,\nrelying on the maxim, that nature in the formation of metals, never\nintended to produce any thing but gold, and that it was only from\nsome obstruction, or from some defect of vigour and virtue, that she\nfabricated other imperfect metals; also pretend, that art is afterwards\ncapable of carrying the work to perfection, and making gold of that\nwhich was originally produced iron. But, after all, this error is\nthe most sufferable of the two, because it does not interfere with\nmatters of faith; and because also, let the intention of nature in\nthe formation of metals, and the imaginary capacity of art, be what\nthey will, it is a fact, that gold is the most noble of metals, and\nthat the others are of a much inferior quality compared to it. But, in\nour present question, the assertion, that Nature always intended the\nproduction of males, and that her producing females was the effect of a\nbastard operation, is all false and erroneous; and much more so is the\naffirming, that this is to be amended at the resurrection.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nXVIII. I would not, however, be understood to approve of what is\nthrown out by Zacuto Lusitano, in the introduction to his Treatise De\nMorbis Mulierum, where, with frivolous reasons, he attempts to give\nthe preference to the women, and to persuade us, that their physical\nperfections greatly exceed those of the men. Such an opinion, might be\nsupported by much more plausible arguments than are used by him; but my\nview is not to persuade a superiority, but only an equality.\n\nXIX. And to begin, setting aside the question of their understandings,\nwhich I mean to discuss separately and more at large in this discourse,\nlet us consider the three endowments, in which the men seem manifestly\nto have the advantage of the women, to wit, robustness, constancy,\nand prudence; but, although this should be granted by the women, they\nmight pretend to a competition, by pointing out other three qualities,\nin which they excel the male sex, to wit, beauty, gentleness, and\nsimplicity.\n\nXX. Robustness, which is a bodily perfection, may be considered\nas counterpoised by beauty, which is so likewise. Many people are\ndisposed to give the last the preference; and they would be right, if\nthat was to be esteemed the most valuable, which is the most flattering\nor pleasing to the sight: but the consideration of which is most useful\nto the public, should, in the eye of sound judgment, weigh most in\ndeciding the question; and, viewing the thing in this light, robustness\nmust be preferred to beauty. The robustness of men, furnishes the\nworld with three most essential benefits, which may not improperly\nbe termed the three columns which support every state, to wit, arms,\nagriculture, and mechanics. From the beauty of women, I do not know\nwhat important advantage can accrue, unless it comes by accident. Some\nwill argue, that beauty, so far from producing benefits, occasions\nserious mischiefs, by causing unruly amours, which inflame and excite\ncompetitions and strife, and which involve those who are charged with\nthe custody of women, in cares, uneasiness, and anxiety.\n\nXXI. But this accusation, as it originates from a want of reflection,\nis ill-founded; for supposing, for argument\u2019s sake, that all the women\nwere ugly, in those who were blemished with the fewest deformities, we\nshould experience the same attraction, which we do at present in the\nhandsome ones, and they would consequently occasion the same mischief.\nThe least ugly placed in Greece would have caused the burning of Troy,\nas Helen did; and placed in the palace of King Roderigo, would have\nbeen the ruin of Spain, as La Caba was. In those countries where the\nwomen are the least tempting, there are not fewer disorders than there\nare in those where they are more genteelly, and more admirably formed:\neven in Muscovy, which in number of handsome women exceeds all the\nother kingdoms of Europe, incontinence is not so unbridled as in other\ncountries, and conjugal faith is observed there, with more exactness\nthan it is in other places.\n\nXXII. Beauty therefore of itself, is not the cause of the mischiefs\nwhich are attributed to it; notwithstanding which, in the present\nquestion, I must give my vote in favour of robustness, as I esteem\nit a much more important quality than beauty, and therefore, in this\nparticular, must give the preference to the men. There is, however,\nsaved and remaining to the women, if they chuse to avail themselves of\nit, an objection to this decision, which may be founded on the judgment\nof many learned men, and which was assented to and admitted by a whole\nillustrious school: this judgment, recognizes the will for a more noble\nfaculty than the understanding, which is rather favourable to their\ncause; for if robustness, as being of the most consequence, is, in the\ngeneral opinion, most prized and valued, beauty, as the more amiable\nquality, has most control over the will.\n\nXXIII. The virtue of constancy, which ennobles the men, may be\ncontrasted with docility, which is resplendent in the women. But it\nwill be proper here to remark, that we do not treat of these or other\nqualities, as formally considering them in the state of virtues,\nbecause in this sense, they are not of the lineage of nature, but only\nas they are grafted into, and display themselves in the temperament or\nhabit; and, as the embryo of information is indifferent to receive good\nor bad impressions, it would be better to call them flexibility, or\ninflexibility of disposition, than constancy or docility.\n\nXXIV. I may be told, that the docility of women degenerates many times\ninto levity; to which I answer that the constancy of men as frequently\nterminates in tenaciousness. I confess, that firmness in a good cause\nis productive of great benefits; but it can\u2019t be denied, that obstinacy\nin a bad one is also productive of great evils. If it is argued, that\nan invincible adherence to good or evil is a quality appertaining to\nangels only: I answer, that this is not so certain, for many great\ntheologians deny it; and many properties, which in superior beings\nspring from their excellence, in inferior ones proceed from their\nimperfection. The angels, according to the doctrine of St. Thomas,\nare the more perfect, the fewer things they understand; in men, their\nknowledge being confined to a few particulars, is considered as a\ndefect. In angels, study would be regarded as a diminution of, or\na reflection upon their understandings; although it is known to be\nabsolutely necessary, to illustrate and adorn those of men.\n\nXXV. The prudence of the men, may be balanced by the simplicity\nor gentleness of the women; and I was even about to say more than\nbalanced, for, in reality, simplicity or gentleness, is more beneficial\nto the human race, than the prudence of all its individuals; for nobody\nhas ever described the golden age as composed of prudent, but of candid\nmen.\n\nXXVI. If it is objected, that much of that which is called simplicity\nin women, is thoughtlessness or inattention: I reply, that much of that\nwhich is called prudence in men, is fallacy, duplicity and treachery,\nwhich are much worse qualities. Even that very indiscreet frankness,\nwith which they sometimes incautiously unbosom themselves, is a good\ntoken, considered as a symptom. No person is ignorant of his own vices;\nand whoever finds himself loaded with them to a large amount, is very\ncareful to shut the crevices of his heart, to prevent the pryings of\ncuriosity: whoever commits criminal disorders within his house, does\nnot leave his doors open at all hours, and by that means expose himself\nto be detected. Reserve is the inseparable companion of a bad heart;\nand you may conclude, that those who familiarly, and with ease, unbosom\nthemselves, have little about them they are anxious of concealing.\nConsidered then in this light, the simplicity or candour of the women,\nis always a valuable quality; but, when conducted with good sense,\nit approaches to a perfection; and, when it is not, it may always be\nlooked upon as a favourable symptom.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nXXVII. Over and above the good qualities we have specified, the women\nhave another, which is the most beautiful and transcendent of all, to\nwit, their modesty; a grace so characteristic of the sex, that is does\nnot forsake even their dead bodies; for Pliny remarks, that when the\ncarcasses of drowned persons float on the water, those of the men swim\nwith the face upwards, and those of the women with the face downward.\n\n    _Veluti pudori defunctarum parcente natura._\n\n    Lib. 7. Cap. 17.\n\nXXVIII. A certain philosopher, being asked what tint gave the most\ngraceful hue to a woman\u2019s countenance, answered with much truth and\nperspicuity, modesty; and I am really of opinion, that it is the\ngreatest advantage the women can claim over the men. Modesty is a\nscreen or fence, which nature seems to have placed between virtue and\nvice, and is, as a discreet French author observes, the shield of fine\nsouls, and the visible character of virtue: and St. Bernard extends\nthe simile still farther, illustrating it with the epithets of the\nprecious gem of manners, the torch of the chaste soul, and the sister\nof continence; the guardian of fame, honour and life, the foundation\nof virtue, the pride of nature, and the symbol of all honesty (Serm.\n86, in Cant.) and Diogenes ingeniously and properly calls it the symbol\nof virtue. In fact, this is the great and formidable bulwark, which\nnature has raised, and placed in front, to oppose vice, and to serve\nas a shelter and covering to the whole fortress of the soul; and, as\nNazianzenus said, when this is once subdued, no farther resistance can\nbe made to every kind of vicious outrage. _Protinus extincto subeunt\nmala cuncta pudore._\n\nXXIX. It may be said, that modesty is a signal preservative against\nexterior assaults, but not against interior acquiescence; and thus a\ndoor always is left open, at which vice may make a triumphal entry,\nwhich may be effected by the means of invisible attacks, in parts,\nthat are not sheltered or protected by the wall of modesty. But even\nadmitting that such a thing might happen, shame would ever remain a\nmost valuable preservative, and be the cause of preventing an infinite\ndeal of scandal, and the fatal consequences attending it. Upon serious\nreflection it will be found, that, if it does not defend totally, it is\nin a great measure a protection even against those silent and secret\nassaults, which scarce ever peep out or shew themselves beyond the\noccult recesses of the soul: for internal consentings are very rare,\nwhen they are not excited by some sort of attempts, for these are the\nthings which radicate criminal affections in the soul, and also those\nwhich augment and strengthen propensities to vice. It is true, that\nwithout these stimulants, we now and then see turpitude introduce\nitself into the spirit; but he does not seem to lodge there as if he\nwas at home, or like the master of the house, but only as a stranger or\na sojourner.\n\nXXX. The passions, without the aliment that nourishes them, lay very\nlanguid, and act very timidly, especially in persons who are much\naddicted to blush; and those, in whom there is such a frank and easy\ncommerce between the bosom and the countenance, are always under\napprehensions, left the most secret operations of their breasts, should\nbe exposed to public view on the parade of their faces. In fact, if\nupon every occasion, their most private or concealed affections are\nblazoned on their cheeks, the glow of the blush, seems the only tint,\nwith which the images of invisible objects can be painted or described;\nand thus, the fear of being liable to have what is impressed in their\nminds read in their faces, becomes a rein, which confines and checks\nthe dangerous sallies of desire.\n\nXXXI. To this may be added, that the colour is so apt to rise in the\ncountenances of some of them, that they will often blush at themselves.\nThis heroic excellence, or type of modesty, which the ingenious\nfather Viera celebrates in one of his sermons, is not, as some coarse\nspirits have termed it, purely ideal, but in persons of the most noble\nsentiments and dispositions, real, and natural. This was well known to\nDemetrius Phalereus, who, when he was instructing the youth of Athens,\nenjoined them, that at home they should behave with modesty to their\nparents, that abroad they should observe the same deportment to every\none they saw, and that in private they should preserve a decency and a\nmodest carriage even to themselves.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXXXII. I think I have pointed out as many advantages on the side of the\nwomen, as will balance, if not out-weigh, the qualities in which the\nmen excel. Who now is to give sentence in this plea? If I had authority\nto do it, I might perhaps pronounce a short one, declaring, that the\nqualities in which the women excel, conduce to make them better in\nthemselves; and that those in which the men excel, make them better\nfor, or, to speak more properly, of greater use to the public; though\nas I am not exercising the office of a judge, but only that of an\nadvocate, the cause must for the present remain undecided.\n\nXXXIII. And even supposing I had the necessary authority to determine,\nI should be obliged to suspend giving judgment, as it might be urged on\nbehalf of the men, that the good qualities which are attributed to the\nwomen are common to both sexes: I confess they are, but the same thing\nmay be said with equal justice with respect to those of the men. In\norder not to confound the question, it will be necessary to point out\nthe good qualities which are more frequently found in the individuals\nof one sex, and seldomer in those of the other. I grant then, that you\nmeet with men who are docile, candid, and capable of blushing; and I\nwill add, that blushing, which is a good symptom in women, is a better\nstill in men, because it denotes a generous nature and much ingenuity;\nwhich John Barclay has more than once declared in his Satyricon; and it\ncan\u2019t be denied, that the opinion of a man of his subtile genius, is a\nvote of great consequence in such a question; and although this may not\nbe an infallible sign, I myself have made so much observation in these\nmatters as to be convinced, that no great expectations can be formed of\na boy, who is audacious and forward.\n\nXXXIV. I say then, that various individuals of our sex, may be observed\nto possess the fine qualities which enoble the other, though not with\nthe same frequency; but this by no means inclines the balance in our\nfavour, because, on the other hand, the perfections the men boast of,\nbeing communicated to many women, have equal weight in the opposite\nscale.\n\n\nSECT. VI.\n\nXXXV. There have been a thousand examples of princesses, who were\nexpert and able politicians. No age will ever forget the first woman,\nwhose true character history developed and rescued from the obscurity\nof fable: I mean Semiramis, queen of the Assyrians, who in her infancy\nwas nursed by doves, but afterwards soared superior to the eagles:\nshe not only knew how to make herself blindly obeyed by the subjects\nher husband had left her, but she also made subjects of all the\nneighbouring nations, and by extending her conquests, she likewise made\nneighbours of the most distant ones. Her empire extended on one side to\nEthiopia, and on the other to India. Nor can Artemisia, queen of Caria,\nbe forgotten, who not only maintained, during her long widowhood,\nthe respect and adoration of that kingdom; but, being invaded by the\nRhodians, she, in her own territories, by two singular stratagems, with\ntwo attacks only destroyed the troops of her enemies; and, passing\nsuddenly from the defensive to the offensive, she invaded them in her\nturn, and conquered and triumphed over the island of Rhodes. The two\nAspasias also will be ever remembered, to whose admirable management,\nPericles the husband of one of them, and Cyrus the son of Darius\nNotho, gallant of the other, happily and successfully, confided the\ngovernment of their states; as will likewise the most prudent Phile,\ndaughter of Antipater, whom, while she was a child, her father advised\nwith concerning the government of the kingdom of Macedonia, and who\nafterwards, by her wise stratagems and great address, extricated her\nhusband, the precipitate and flighty Demetrius, from a thousand\ndifficulties. Livia, of fertile invention, whose subtile cunning\nseems to have been too deep for the penetration of Augustus, is\nanother instance of female ability, for she could never have had such\ndominion over his mind, if he had known her. The sagacious Agrippina\nis likewise another, although her arts, as she unhappily employed\nthem in promoting her son Nero to the throne, were fatal to herself\nand the world. Amalethunsa also, is well deserving of being reckoned\namong the women of great talents, in whom, her understanding all the\nlanguages of every nation subject to the Roman empire, was esteemed an\ninferior accomplishment, compared to the great skill and address, which\nshe displayed in governing the state during the minority of her son\nAthalaricus.\n\nXXXVI. Nor, passing over many others, and approaching nearer to our\nown times, should we ever forget Elizabeth of England, in whose\ncomposition, the influx of the three Graces concurred equally with\nthat of the three Furies. Her conduct as a sovereign, would ever\nremain the admiration of Europe, if her vices were not so interwoven\nwith her maxims of government, as to make it impossible to separate\nthem; and her political image, will ever present itself to posterity,\ncoloured, or, to speak more properly, stained and blemished with the\nblood of the innocent Mary Stewart, queen of Scots. Neither should\nwe forget Catharine of Medicis, queen of France, whose sagacity in\nnegotiating and maintaining a balance between the opposite parties of\nCalvinists and Catholics, in order to save the crown from a precipice,\nresembled the dexterity of a rope-dancer, who, mounted on a cord, by\nhis ready art and address at poising himself with the weights at the\nends of his poles, secures himself from falling, and delights and\namuses the spectators, by displaying the risque, at the same time that\nhe dextrously avoids the danger. Our own queen Isabella, would not\nhave been inferior to any of them in the business of administration\nand government, if, instead of a queen consort, she had been a\nqueen-regent. Under all this disadvantage, when proper occasions\npresented themselves, she manifested by her actions, that she was a\nwoman of consummate prudence and ability; and Lawrance Beyerlink in\nhis eulogium of her, says, that no great thing was done in her time,\nin which she did not assist, or was wholly the author of. _Quid magni\nin regno, sine illa, imo nisi per illam fer\u00e8 gestum est?_ At least the\ndiscovery of the new world, which was an event the most glorious for\nSpain that had fallen out in the course of many ages, would certainly\nnever have been effected or accomplished, but for the magnanimity\nof Isabella, who dispelled the fears, and vanquished the sloth of\nFerdinand.\n\nXXXVII. In fine, and what seems to have more weight than all the rest,\nit appears to me, although I am not very certain of the computation,\nthat among the queens who have reigned for any length of time as\nabsolute sovereigns, the greatest part of them, have been celebrated\nin history for excellent governors. But the poor women, are still so\nunhappy, as always to have trumped up against this train of illustrious\nexamples, a Brunequilda, a Fredegunda, the two Joans of Naples, and a\nfew others; but, by the way, the two first, although they abounded in\nmischief, did not want understanding.\n\nXXXVIII. Nor is the world so universally persuaded as some may think,\nthat a crown does not sit well on the head of a woman, because in an\nisland or peninsula, which is formed by the Nile in Ethiopia, called\nMeroe, women, according to the testimony of Pliny, reigned for many\nsuccessive ages. Father Cornelius Alapide, speaking of Saba, who\nwas one of their queens, supposes, that her empire extended much\nbeyond the limits of Meroe, and that it might possibly comprehend the\ngreatest part of Ethiopia, grounding his opinion, upon an expression\nof our Saviour, who called her Queen of the South, which words seemed\nto imply, that she possessed vast dominions in that quarter. Thomas\nCornelius also tells us, that authors were not wanting, who asserted,\nthat Meroe was bigger than the island of Great Britain, and, if so, the\nterritories of those queens were not very confined, though they did not\nextend beyond the limits of Meroe. Aristotle (Lib. 2. Polit. Cap. 7.)\nsays, that among the Lacedemonians, the women had a great share in the\npolitical government; and that their being allowed it, is agreeable to\nthe laws given them by Licurgus.\n\nXXXIX. In Borneo also, according to the relation of Mandeslo, which\nmay be seen in the second volume of Olearius, the women reign, and\ntheir husbands enjoy no other privilege, than that of being their most\ndignified subjects. In the island of Formosa, situated in the southern\npart of the Chinese sea, those idolaters who inhabit it, have such\nconfidence in the prudent conduct of the women, that the Sacerdotal\nfunction, together with every thing which relates to religious matters,\nis confided wholly to them; and that, with regard to politics, they\nenjoy a power superior to that of the senators, they being considered\nas the interpreters of the will of their deities.\n\nXL. Notwithstanding all this, the ordinary practice of nations is most\nconformable to reason, as it corresponds best with the divine decree\nnotified to our first mother in Paradise, and to all her daughters in\nher name, which enjoins a subjection to the men; and we should only\ncorrect the impatience, which many people shew at submitting to female\ngovernment, when according to the laws of the land they should obey;\nand we should also bridle that extravagant estimation for our own sex,\nwhich carries us such lengths, as to prefer the government of a weak\nchild, to that of an able and experienced woman. The antient Persians\nwere drawn by this prepossession to such a ridiculous extreme, that the\nwidow of one of their princes happening to be left with child at the\ndeath of her husband, and being advised by their magi, that she had\nconceived a male, they crowned the belly of the queen, and before it\nwas born, proclaimed the f\u0153tus king by the name of Sapor.\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXLI. We have hitherto treated of political prudence only, in the\ndiscussion of which point, we have contented ourselves with a few\nexamples, and have omitted the many. It is needless to insist on the\nability of women in point of \u0153conomical prudence, as every day\u2019s\nexperience exhibits to us, houses and families extremely well governed\nby women, and very badly governed by men.\n\nXLII. We shall next proceed to consider resolution as a property, which\nthe men look upon as peculiarly annexed to, or inseparable from, their\nown sex. I admit that heaven has endowed them in comparison to the\nwomen, with a quadruple portion of this ingredient; but not that it was\ngiven them as an exempt property, peculiarly annexed to, and belonging\nto their sex only, and that the other was to be excluded from the least\nparticipation of it.\n\nXLIII. Not an age has passed, which has not been ennobled and graced by\nwomen of eminence and worth; and without dwelling on the heroines of\nScripture, and the martyrs to the law of grace, because actions, which\nare aided by the especial intervention of a supernatural hand, should\nbe attributed to the divine power, and not to any natural virtue, or\nfaculty of a sex: I say, without having recourse to these sort of\nexamples, women of heroic valour, present themselves to the memory in\ncrouds; and after the Semiramis\u2019s, the Artamissas, the Thomyris, the\nZenobias, there appears an Aretaphila, the wife of Nicrotatus, the\nsovereign of Cyrene in Libya, in whose incomparably generous nature,\nthe greatest fortitude of mind, the most tender love of her country,\nand the most subtile and discerning understanding, contended for\nthe pre-eminence; because, to deliver her country from the violent\ntyranny of her husband, and to revenge the murder, which, for the\nsake of possessing her he had perpetrated on her first consort, she\nmade herself the leader of a conspiracy, and deprived Nicrotatus of\nthe kingdom and his life. Leander, who inherited all his brother\u2019s\ncruelty, having succeeded to the crown, she had the valour and address\nto rid the world of this second tyrant also; crowning in the end, all\nher heroic actions, by declining to accept the diadem, which from a\ngrateful sense of the many benefits she had conferred on them, was\noffered to her by the Cyreneans. Denepetina, the daughter of the great\nMithridates, and the inseparable companion and partner of her father,\nin all his dangerous undertakings and projects, in the execution of\nwhich she manifested upon every occasion, that strength of mind and\nbody, which the singular circumstance of her coming into the world with\ndouble rows of teeth, seems to have foretold at her birth; after her\nfather was defeated by the great Pompey, she was shut up and besieged\nin a castle by Manlius Priscus, where, finding it impossible to defend\nherself, she deprived herself of life, to avoid suffering the ignominy\nof being made a slave. An Arria, the wife of Cecinus Peto, whose\nhusband having been concerned in the conspiracy of Camilus against\nthe emperor Claudius, was for this crime condemned to death; and she,\ndetermined not to outlive her consort, having several times tried in\nvain to beat her head to pieces against a wall, procured at last to\nbe introduced to her husband in prison, where she extorted from him a\npromise, to anticipate with his own hands the work of the executioner,\nand, by way of encouraging him to do it, immediately transfixed her\nown breast with a dagger. An Epponina, upon her husband Julius Sabinus\nhaving in Gaul arrogated to himself the title of C\u00e6sar, endured, with\nrare constancy and fortitude, unspeakable toils; and being at last\ncondemned to death by Vespasian, she frankly and openly told him, she\nshould die contented, as death would deprive her of the disgust of\nseeing so bad an emperor as him on the throne.\n\nXLIV. And, that it should not be thought the latter ages are inferior\nto the antient ones in resolute and courageous women, see the maid\nof Orleans present herself, and stand forth compleatly armed, as the\npillar, which, in its greatest distress, supported the tottering\nmonarchy of France; which she did so amazingly, that the English and\nFrench, who were as opposite in sentiments as in arms, imputed her\nextraordinary feats, the one to a diabolical compact, and the other\nto divine assistance. The English perhaps feigned the first, for the\npurpose of throwing an odium on their enemies; and those who had the\nmanagement of affairs in France, suggested the other politically;\nfor it was of vast importance, when the people and soldiers were so\ngreatly dismayed, to raise their dejected spirits, by persuading them,\nthat heaven had declared itself their ally, and introduced on the\ntheatre of the world, a damsel of perspicuity and magnanimity, as an\ninspired instrument, which was equal to, and capable of effecting the\nmiraculous succour. A Margaret of Denmark, in the fourteenth century,\nin her own person, headed an army, and conquered the kingdom of Sweden,\ntaking king Albertus prisoner. The authors of those times, call her the\nsecond Semiramis. One Marulla, a native of Lemnos, an island in the\nArchipelago, when the fortress of Cochin was besieged, upon seeing her\nfather slain, snatched up his sword and shield; and having prevailed on\nthe whole garrison to follow her, she put herself at their head, and,\nencouraging them by her example, charged the enemy with such ardour,\nthat she drove them from their trenches, and obliged the Basha Soliman\nto raise the siege: which action, the Venetian general Loredano, who\nwas proprietor of the place, rewarded, by permitting her to chuse for\na husband, whichever of the most illustrious captains of his army\nshe liked best, promising at the same time, to settle on her and her\nconsort, a fortune suitable to their rank, which he did in the name\nof the republic. One Blanca de Rossi, the wife of Baptista Porta, a\nPaduan captain, who, after defending valorously a post on the walls\nof Bassano, a fortress in the march of Tresvina, finding the place\nsuddenly taken by treachery, and her husband made prisoner and put to\ndeath by the tyrant Ezelinus, and perceiving she had no means left to\nescape falling a victim to the brutal passion of that ravisher, who\nwas furiously enamoured with her beauty; she threw herself out of the\nwindow of an upper room; but being afterwards, against her inclination,\ncured of the bruises she received, and enduring with anguish and regret\nunder that oppressive barbarian, the shame of having been forced, she,\nto relieve the bitterness of her grief, and to extricate herself from\ncontinuing in a state of violation to her conjugal faith, deprived\nherself of life in the sepulchre of her husband, which for the purpose\nof doing it there she had caused to be opened. We could instance many\nother women of heroic courage, and particularize the occasions on which\nthey exerted it; but, to avoid the recital appearing prolix or tedious,\nwe shall omit the relation of them.\n\nXLV. The reason of my not having yet mentioned the Amazons, which is\na case so applicable to this matter, is, because I think it will be\nbetter to treat of them separately. Some authors, in opposition to many\nothers who affirm it, deny their existence; but without engaging in\nthis dispute, we must allow, that much fable has been mixed with the\nhistory of the Amazons; such as that they destroyed all their male\nchildren; that they lived in a total state of separation from the other\nsex, and only consorted with them once a year for the sake of becoming\npregnant. Of a piece with these, are the tales of their encounters\nwith Hercules and Theseus, and the succour given to afflicted Troy by\nthe fierce Penthesilea, and perhaps that also, of the visit of queen\nTalestris to Alexander. But with all this, against the testimony and\ncredit of so many antient authors, it would be rash to deny, that there\nwas a formidable body of warlike women in Asia, who went by the name of\nAmazons.\n\nXLVI. But in case this should be denied, in lieu of the Asiatic\nAmazonians they deprive us of, we should be supplied with another set,\ndrawn from the other three parts of the globe, ready to stand forth and\ntake their places. The Spaniards discovered American ones, navigating\narmed, on the river Maranon, which is the largest in the world, and\nto which, for this reason, they gave the name of the river of the\nAmazons. There are some of them in Africa, in a province of the empire\nof Monomotapa: and, it is said, they are the best soldiers in all that\nterritory; there are not wanting geographers, who made Monomotapa a\ndistinct state from the country these warlike women inhabit.\n\nXLVII. In Europe, although in no part of it the women are military\npeople by profession, we may venture to give the name of Amazons to\nthose who upon different occasions, have fought in such battalions or\nsquadrons, as have defeated and triumphed over the enemies of their\ncountry. Such were the French women of Beauvais, who, when that city,\nin the year 1742, was besieged by the Burgundians, on the day of the\nassault, united themselves together under the conduct or command of\nJoan Hacheta, and vigorously repulsed the enemy; their captain Hacheta,\nhaving with her own hands, tumbled the person headlong from the walls,\nwho attempted to erect the enemies\u2019 standard there. To commemorate\nthis transaction, they keep an annual festival in that city, and the\nwomen on the feast-day, have the singular privilege of walking in\nprocession before the men. Such also, were the inhabitants of the\nislands Echinadas, called at present Bur-Solares, celebrated for the\nvictory of Lepanto, which was gained in the sea of these islands. The\nyear antecedent to this famous battle, the Turks having attacked the\nprincipal island, the Venetian governor Antonio Balbo, and all the men,\nwere so terrified, that they betook themselves to flight in the night,\nleaving the women behind them, who, at the instance of a priest named\nAntonio Rosoneo, resolved to defend the place; and, much to the honour\nof their own sex, and the disgrace of ours, they really did defend it.\n\nN. B. With respect to the women who laid violent hands on themselves,\nwe do not mean to propose their resolution as examples of virtue, but\nonly to exhibit it, as a vicious excess of fierce courage, which is\nsufficient to answer the purpose intended.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXLVIII. After all this recital of magnanimous women, there still\nremains something to be said on a particular, which the men point\nout as their weak side, and with respect to which, they charge them\nwith the greatest want of constancy; that is, their not being firm in\nkeeping a secret. Cato the Censor in this instance, would not admit of\nany exception whatever with regard to them, and condemned the trusting\na secret to any woman, be she who she would, as one of the greatest\nerrors a man could run into; but Cato\u2019s own great niece Porcia,\ndaughter of Cato the younger, and wife of Marcus Brutus, gave the lie\nto this assertion, she having obliged her husband, to confide to her\nthe grand secret of the conspiracy against C\u00e6sar, by the extraordinary\nproof she exhibited to him of her valour and constancy, in the great\nwound she voluntarily gave herself with a knife in the thigh.\n\nXLIX. Pliny, quoting the Magi as his authors, tells us, that the heart\nof a certain bird, applied to the breast of a woman when she is asleep,\nwill make her reveal all her secrets. And in another place, he says,\nthe tongue of a certain snake will have the same effect. The magicians\nbeing obliged to search among the hidden secrets of Nature, for keys\nto unlock the doors of their hearts, is no proof, of the women\u2019s being\nso easily brought to reveal what has been confided to them. But let\nus laugh with Pliny at these inventions; and let us grant, if you\nplease, that there are very few women strict observers of a secret;\nbut, in return to this, it is confessed on the other hand by the most\nexperienced politicians, that there are very few men also, to whom\nyou can confide secrets of importance; and truly, if such men were\nnot very scarce commodities, princes would not hold them in such high\nestimation, as to think scarce any of their richest moveables equal to\nthem in value.\n\nL. Nor are there examples wanting, of women of invincible constancy in\nthe article of keeping a secret. Pythagoras, when he found himself\nnear dying, delivered all his writings, in which were contained\nthe most hidden mysteries of his philosophy, into the custody of\nhis prudent and dutiful daughter Damo; directing her at the same\ntime, never to permit them to be published, which injunction she so\npunctually obeyed, that, even when she found herself reduced to extreme\npoverty, and could have sold those books for a large sum of money,\nshe chose rather to endure the anguish and pinchings of want, than be\ndeficient in point of the confidence reposed in her by her father.\n\nLI. The magnanimous Aretaphila, whom we have already mentioned, having\nattempted to take away the life of her husband by a poisonous draught\nbefore she entered into a conspiracy against him, which was to be\ncarried into execution by force of arms, was surprized and detected\nin the fact, and being put to the torture to discover who were her\ncomforters and abettors, the force of the torment was so far from\nextorting the secret, or depriving her of the possession of herself,\nor the use of her reason, that, after owning she intended to give\nhim the poison, she had the address to persuade the tyrant it was a\nlove-philter, and contrived for the purpose of increasing his passion\nfor her. In fact, this ingenious fiction had the effect of a philter,\nfor Nicotratus\u2019s love of her was afterwards greatly increased from\nthis persuasion, that she, who was solicitous to excite in him an\narduous and excessive desire for her, could not do otherwise than\nentertain a sincere tenderness and affection for him.\n\nLII. In the conspiracy set on foot by Aristogiton, and which was begun\nto be executed, by putting to death Hipparchus, the brother of Hippias,\na courtesan woman, who had been trusted with the secret, and knew all\nthe accomplices, was put to the torture; but she, to convince the\ntyrant of the impossibility of extorting the secret from her, cut her\ntongue asunder with her teeth, and let the end drop before his face.\n\nLIII. When the first indications of the conspiracy of Pison against\nNero, began to shew themselves, many of the most illustrious men of\nRome shrunk under, and gave way to the rigour of the torture. Lucan,\nfor example, discovered his own mother as an accomplice, and many\nothers their most intimate friends; and there was only one Epicharis,\nan ordinary and obscure woman, who was acquainted with the whole\ntransaction, on whom neither whips nor fire, nor all the martyrdoms\nthey could invent, had power to tear from her breast the least\ninformation.\n\nLIV. I knew a certain one myself, who, being examined by the torture,\ntouching an atrocious crime which had been committed by her master\nand mistress, resisted the force of that rigorous test, not to save\nherself, but only to skreen them; for so small a portion of the fault\ncould be imputed to her, either on account of her ignorance of the\nmagnitude of the crime, or from her having acted by the command of\nothers, and from various circumstances of mitigation, that the law\nwould not have condemned her to a punishment, any thing comparable to\nthe severity of that she underwent.\n\nLV. But of women, from whom the power of torture could not tear the\nsecrets of their breasts, the examples are infinite. I heard a person\nwho had been used to assist upon such occasions declare, that, although\nhe had known many of them confess, rather than be stripped naked to\nprepare them for the execution of the punishment of the rack, the\ninstances of their having confessed after undergoing this martyrdom of\ntheir modesty, were very rare. A truly great and shining excellence\nin the sex this, that the regard for their modesty, should have more\nweight with them than all the terrors of an executioner.\n\nLVI. I do not doubt, but this parallel I have drawn of the sexes, may\nappear to many somewhat flattering to the women; but I shall reply\nto these, that Seneca, whose rigid Stoicism removes all doubts of his\nimpartiality, and whose severity sets him at a great distance from all\nsuspicion of flattery, has made a comparison not a jot less favourable\nto the side of the women, for he absolutely asserts them to be equal\nto the men, in all the valuable natural faculties and dispositions.\nThese are his words: _Quis autem dicat, naturam malign\u00e8 cum muliebribus\ningeniis egisse, & virtutes illarum in arctum retraxisse? Par illis\nmihi crede, vigor, par ad honesta (libeat) facultas est. Laborem,\ndoloremque ex \u00e6quo si consuevere patiuntur._ (in Consol. ad Marciam.)\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nLVII. We are come now to defend the great article of all, which is the\nquestion of the understanding; and, I must confess, if my reason does\nnot assist me in arguing this point, that I expect but little help or\nresource from authorities; because all the authors who have touched\nupon the matter, with the exception of one or two particular ones only,\nhave wrote so much on the side of the vulgar opinion, that they almost\nuniformly speak of the understandings of the women with contempt.\n\nLVIII. And truly, I might reply to the authority of the greatest part\nof these books, with the fable of the lion and the man, inserted by\nCarducius in one of his dialogues, which is to this effect. A man and a\nlion travelling together, fell to dispute whether lions or men were the\nbravest animals: and as they proceeded on their road, they came to a\nfountain, at the top of which, there was exhibited carved in marble, a\nman tearing a lion in pieces; upon seeing this, the man turned short on\nthe lion, and in the tone of a conqueror, asked, if he could make any\nreply to so convincing an argument; to which the lion answered with a\nsmile, this is very pretty reasoning of yours, the carving was designed\nand executed by a man; we lions are none of us sculptors; if we had,\nand were capable of doing this sort of work, I will venture to assure\nyou, the representation would have been made quite the reverse to what\nyou there see it.\n\nLIX. The case is, they were men who wrote those books, in which the\nunderstandings of the women are held so cheap; had they been written by\nwomen, the men would have been placed in the inferior class: and there\nhas not been wanting a woman, who has done something of this sort;\nfor Lucretia Marinella, a learned Venetian lady, among other works\ncomposed a book with this title, _The Excellences of Women, compared\nwith the Defects and Vices of Men_; the sole object of which, was to\nprove a preference of her own sex to ours. The learned jesuit John of\nCarthagena says, that he saw and read this book with great pleasure at\nRome, and that he saw it also in the royal library at Madrid; but the\ntruth is, that neither she nor we can be judges in this plea, because\nwe are parties to the suit; and therefore the sentence and decision\nmust be confided to the angels, who being of no sex, are impartial.\n\nLX. And in the first place, those who hold the understanding of\nwomen in such contempt, as hardly to allow they are endued with more\nthan pure instinct, are unworthy to be admitted as parties in the\ncontroversy; neither are those, who maintain, that the greatest reach\nof a woman\u2019s capacity, does not extend farther than to qualify her for\nmanaging a hen-roost.\n\nLXI. Some prelate, who is quoted by Don Francisco Manuel in his Guide\nto Married People, said, that the understanding of the most knowing\nwoman did not exceed the bounds of ordering how a chest of clean\nlinen should be packed. Let those who adhere to such opinions, be as\nrespectable as they will in other points of view, they do themselves\nno sort of credit by such declarations; for the most favourable\ninterpretation they admit of, is, that they were intended as hyperbolic\njokes. It is a fact of public notoriety, that there have been women,\nwho well understood the ordering and governing religious communities,\nand also women, who are equal to the government and direction of whole\nstates.\n\nLXII. These discourses against the women, are the works of superficial\nmen; who, seeing they in general understand nothing but household\nbusiness, which is commonly the only thing they are instructed in, or\nemployed about, are apt to infer from thence, without being aware that\nthey draw the inference from that circumstance, that they are unfit\nfor, or incapable of any other matter. The most shallow logician knows,\nthat it is not a valid conclusion, to suppose that because a person\nforbears to do an act, that he is unable to do it, and therefore, from\nthe women in general knowing no more, it cannot be inferred, that they\nhave not talents to comprehend more.\n\nLXIII. Nobody understands radically and well, more than the subject\nhe has studied; but you cannot deduce from hence, without incurring\nthe note of barbarism, that his ability extends no farther. Sir Thomas\nMore, in his Utopia, states the following question: suppose all men\nwere to dedicate themselves to agriculture, in so close and strict a\nmanner, as to occasion their understanding nothing else; would this\nbe a foundation whereon to argue and insist, that they were incapable\nof understanding any other thing? With the Druses, a people of\nPalastine, the women are the only repositories of the little learning\nthat subsists among them, for almost all of these can read and write;\nin consequence of which, the little literature they can boast of, is\ntreasured up in the heads of the women, and totally hidden from the\nmen, who devote themselves solely to agriculture, war, and handy-craft\nbusiness. If the same custom prevailed all the world over, the women\nwould undoubtedly consider the men as unfit for, or incapable of\nliterature, in which light, the men at present consider the women; and\nas such a judgment would certainly be erroneous, in the same manner is\nthat mistaken, which we at present make, because it proceeds upon the\nsame principle.\n\n\nSECT. X.\n\nLXIV. And perhaps father Malebranche adopts the same mode of reasoning;\nfor, although he was much more benign towards the women, and in his art\nof investigating truth acknowledges, that in the faculty of discerning\nsensible things, they are known to have the advantage of the men;\nstill he insists, they are much inferior to them in the comprehension\nof abstract ideas; and assigns as the reason of it, the softness of\ntheir brains. It is very well known, that people search for these\nphysical causes, and after some experience, when they are, or fancy\nthey are sure of their effects, apply them in their own manner, to suit\ntheir own doctrines. This being the case, the consequence which results\nfrom hence is, that the author himself falls into the same intellectual\ndisease, of which he had intended to cure all mankind. This error, is\nproduced by common pre-occupations, and principles ill considered and\ndigested. He without doubt made this judgment, either to avoid being\nled away by the common opinion, or from having observed, that women of\nability, or those who are reputed such, reason with more facility, and\ntalk more pertinently than the men, on such subjects as appertain to\nsensible things, and with no less precision than them (if in such cases\nthey do not observe a total silence) on abstracted matters; but this\nproceeds, not from an inequality of talents, but from a difference of\napplication and practice. Women employ themselves, and think much more\nthan the men, about dainty eatables, setting out a table, ornaments of\ndress, and other things of this kind; from whence it happens, that they\ndiscourse and talk of them more pertinently, and with greater facility\nthan those of the other sex. On the contrary, it is very rare, that\nany woman attends to questions of theory, or bestows the least thought\non the subject of abstract ideas, and therefore it is no wonder they\nseem dull, when the conversation turns on such matters. If you observe\nthem, you will find, that women who are informed, and are of a gay\ncast, and who sometimes take pleasure in discoursing on the delicacies\nof platonic love, whenever it happens that they argue with the men on\nthis point, they greatly out-do even the most discreet ones, who have\nnot applied themselves to explore these bagatels of fancy: this in a\ngreat measure confirms the remarks we have made above.\n\nLXV. In general, any person whatever, be his capacity ever so great,\nwill appear more rude than a man of little penetration, if he talks\nwith him of such matters as the other has had experience in and he has\nnever applied himself to understand. A labourer in husbandry, whom God\nhas endowed with a most penetrating genius, which is no uncommon case,\nif it happens that his attention has never been fixed on any other\nthing but his work, would appear greatly inferior to the most heavy\npolitician, if he should ever chance to converse with him about reasons\nof state; and the most wise politician, if he is merely a politician,\nwho should set himself to talk about the disposition of troops, and the\nfighting of battles, would utter a thousand absurdities; insomuch,\nthat if a man skilled in military affairs was to hear him, he would\nbe apt to conclude he was mad, as Hannibal thought the great Asiatic\norator was, who, in the presence of king Antiochus and him, undertook\nto argue about the art and conduct of war.\n\nLXVI. It happens exactly the same in the business we are now treating\nof. A woman of excellent understanding, whose thoughts are constantly\noccupied on domestic management and the care of her house, without\nscarce ever hearing matters of a superior nature talked of, or, if\nit does happen that she hears any such thing, she rarely pays much\nattention to it: her husband, though much inferior to her in talents,\nconverses frequently abroad with able men of various professions, by\ncommunicating with whom, he acquires variety of knowledge, or he enters\ninto public business, and receives important information. Instructed\nin this manner, if it happens at any time that in the company of his\nwife, these matters are talked of, she, who by the means and in the way\nwe have just mentioned, can gain but little aid or assistance, if she\nhappens to speak just what occurs to her on the subject, from the want\nof instruction, must appear a little defective in point of knowledge,\nlet her be ever so acute and penetrating. Her husband, and the others\nwho hear her, conclude from thence, that she is a fool; and he in\nparticular, plumes himself on his superior talents and abilities.\n\nLXVII. As it fared with this woman, so it fares with an infinity of\nothers, who, though they may have much more sense than the men they\nhappen to be in company with, are condemned by them as unfit to reason\non any kind of subject: but the truth is, that their not being able to\nreason at all, or their reasoning ill on such matters, does not proceed\nfrom a want of talents, but from a want of being properly informed;\nand without this assistance, a person, endued with even an angelic\nunderstanding, could not discourse pertinently on any subject whatever.\nThe men at the same time, although inferior to them in understanding,\nshine and triumph over them with an air of importance, because they\nhappen to be better provided with information.\n\nLXVIII. Over and above this advantage of being better informed, the\nmen have another, which is of great moment, to wit, that they are much\naccustomed to meditate, discourse, and reason upon such matters, it\nbeing in a manner their daily practice; while the women hardly ever\nbestow a thought on them: on which account, whenever these things are\nstarted in conversation, the men are prepared to talk upon them, and\nthe women are taken by surprize.\n\nLXIX. Finally, men, by their reciprocal communication with each other\nupon such subjects, gain mutual instruction, each individual, receiving\nlights and information from the observations and experience of those we\nconverse with; and therefore, when they argue upon these matters, they\nnot only make use of their own understandings and improvements, but\nthey likewise avail themselves of what they have acquired from their\nneighbours; so that many times, what is expressed and explained by the\nmouth of one man, is not the produce of one understanding only, but of\nmany. The women, who in their ordinary conversations, don\u2019t discourse\non these sublime questions, but rather of their domestic amusements and\nemployments, furnish to each other no reciprocal lights or assistance,\nwith respect to these great points; in consequence of which, whenever\nthey happen to be present when such subjects are agitated, you should\nadd to their talking unprepared, the disadvantage, of each of them\nbeing confined to the use of no more than their own proper lights and\nideas.\n\nLXX. These advantages, by means of which, a man of very short\npenetration, may say much more, and much more to the purpose, upon\nnoble subjects, than a woman of great perspicuity, are of such moment,\nthat one who has not attended to the above reflections, if he should\nhappen to be present at a conversation of this sort, between a very\nkeen woman and a very heavy man, might be apt to conclude, that he was\na discreet person, and she a fool.\n\nLXXI. In fact, the want of these reflections, has engendered in many\nmen, and some of them in other respects wise and prudent ones, this\ngreat contempt for the understanding of women; but what is most\nlaughable and ridiculous, they have exclaimed so much and so loudly\nagainst them, and have asserted with such confidence the poverty and\nscantiness of their understandings, that many, if not the bulk of the\nworld, have been idle enough to believe them.\n\n\nSECT. XI.\n\nLXXII. And it seems to me, that not even those, who approaching nearer\nto reason, admit, that though the men in general excel the women in\nunderstanding, still own there are women of solid and perspicuous\nparts; I say, not even these have, to my satisfaction, established\nthe inequality in point of understanding between the two sexes. If\nthey had attended to the circumstances I have before-mentioned, and\nwhich frequently occur, they would have perceived, that, in the cases\nspecified, women, of much better understandings than the men they\nconversed with, would appear greatly inferior to them.\n\nLXXIII. Nor do I conceive, what other foundation this pretended\ninequality can be built on, than that I have mentioned, the\nequivocation and fallibility of which, I have just pointed out. For if\nI am told, the thing has been demonstrated by experience, I am prepared\nwith a reply, and shall answer, that the experience they alledge is\ndeceitful, and that I have exposed its fallacy in many instances;\nbesides this, with regard to the matter of experience, I shall cite two\nwitnesses of great credit in favour of the women. The first is, the\nsagacious and discreet Portugueze Don Francisco Manuel, who wrote a\nlittle treatise, called, A Guide to Married People.\n\nLXXIV. In this Cavalier, all the circumstances that can be desired\nconcur, to make his vote of singular weight in the question we are\ntreating of; because, in addition to his being a man of remarkable\nknowledge and information, he had travelled through many countries,\nwhere he was generally charged with and negotiated important concerns;\nin consequence of which, and by means of his elevated genius and\ncourteous deportment, he had opportunities of being introduced to, and\nconversing with, ladies of rank and fashion in all places, as may be\nseen by his writings.\n\nLXXV. It appears by this author, that, not satisfied with considering\nthe women as equal to the men in their intellectual capacities, he\ninclines to allow them some advantage over the other sex in this\nparticular. In the book before quoted, fol. 73, after reciting, that\nthe general opinion with respect to the women is otherwise; he says,\n_I am of a different sentiment, and am certain, that many women are\nexceedingly judicious and sensible, I having seen and conversed with\nabundance of such, both in Spain and other countries; and it appears to\nme, that, on account of their having the advantage of us in quickness\nof perception, and readiness of repartee, it is necessary to use great\ncaution in talking with them_: and a little lower he speaks thus;\nalthough it would be unjust to dispute the purity of the metal with\nwhich Nature formed their understandings, we may nevertheless take\nprecaution to save and guard them, in situations where they may be\nled into danger, and ourselves may be injured. The testimony of this\nauthor, as I have before said, is of great weight, because to his great\nexperience and discretion, we may add, that in the treatise we have\nquoted, he is not very favourable to the women; and even at the end of\nit, he does not scruple, nor is he ashamed to accuse himself of being\ntoo severe upon them.\n\nLXXVI. The second evidence, is that most learned Frenchman, the\nAbb\u00e9 Bellegarde, a man who was also used to courts, and learned his\nknowledge of the world in the great theatre of Paris. This author, in\na book he published, intitled, _Curious Observations on Literature\nand Morality_, affirms, that the minds of women, for the purpose of\nobtaining a knowledge of all sorts of sciences and arts, and also every\nkind of business, are in no manner inferior to those of men. I have\nnot seen this author, but the editors of the Memoirs of Trevoux, in\nthe month of April, 1702, quote him on the subject. The author of the\nJournies in the Coaches of Madrid and Alcala, who, let him be who he\nwould, was a man of note, maintains the same sentiment (pag. 45); and\nfather Buffier, a celebrated French writer, in a book intitled, _An\nExamination of vulgar Prejudices_, which he wrote expressly for the\npurpose of doing it, proves the same thing.\n\n\nSECT. XII.\n\nLXXVII. Having then answered the arguments alledged to be built upon\nexperience, there only remains, that they prove to us the pretended\ninequality by some physical reason. But I affirm no such can be\nassigned, because recourse can only be had in this matter, either to\nan entative inequality of souls, to a distinct organization, or to a\ndifferent temperament of the bodies of both sexes.\n\nLXXVIII. From the entative inequality of souls, nothing can be deduced,\nfor it is a generally received opinion among philosophers, that all\nrational souls, in point of physical perfection, are equal. I well\nknow, that some quote St. Austin as entertaining an opposite sentiment,\nin his 15th book, chap. 13, on the Trinity; but I can\u2019t find, that St.\nAustin in that chapter, does even so much as touch upon the matter. I\nknow likewise, that the faculty of Paris condemned a proposition, which\naffirmed the soul of our Lord Christ was not more perfect than the soul\nof the treacherous Judas. To this the great Scottish master answered,\nthat, as the condemnation was not confirmed by the holy see, we are not\nbound to observe it. In strictness this is so; but I think it would be\nright that such a proposition should be blotted out of every book in\nwhich it is found, as dissonant, harsh, and offensive to weak people,\nwho in souls, can\u2019t distinguish the physical from the moral; but this\ndoes not in any manner affect the truth of the general opinion, which\nassents to a total physical equality of souls.\n\nLXXIX. But if we were to admit of an entative inequality of souls, how\nwould they prove to us, or make us believe, that God chose the best for\nthe men, and left the least-perfect for the women? We ought rather to\nbelieve in this matter, that the soul of holy Mary was the best which\ncould be possessed by a pure creature; and, in fact, the famous Saurez\naffirms, that, physically speaking, it was most perfect; so that the\nwomen may be firm in asserting, that the soul is neither masculine nor\nfeminine, because such an assertion is well founded.\n\nLXXX. With regard to organization, I am inclined to think, that the\nvariation of it, may greatly vary the operations of the soul; though\nwe don\u2019t to this day know, which organization is best suited to,\nor conduces most to, distinguishing and reasoning well. Aristotle\npretends, that those with small heads are the best reasoners, a\nconjecture, which before he committed it to writing, he took care\nshould correspond with the measure of his own head. Others give their\nvote in favour of large heads; these we may conclude, are not of the\nlittle-headed race, if they had, we might suppose they would have\nbeen on the side of Aristotle. Cardinal S\u2019frondati, in his Curso\nPhilosophico, says, that the reasoning organs of Cardinal Richelieu\nwere double, to which he attributes the signal perspicuity, and\nintellectual agility of that minister. I apprehend, that he must mean\ndouble in magnitude, and not in number, for that would be monstrous;\nand this corresponds with what many others say, that the larger the\nbrain is in quantity, the better people reason, which they collect\nfrom having observed, that the human brain is bigger in proportion\nthan that of any other animal. Martinez and others, in their books of\nanatomy, excluding the great heads and the little ones, maintain, that\nthose of the middle size are the best adapted for the operations of\nthe understanding. Those who go about taking measure of the members\nof the body, in order to compute the value of the soul, may say what\nthey please; but experience shews, that among men with large heads, you\nwill find some stupid, and others ingenious, and that the same thing\nis to be observed among those with small ones. If a difference in the\nmagnitude of the head or the brain, was to induce an inequality in the\noperations of the understanding, we should find a great difference\nin point of comprehension, among men of unequal stature, because in\nproportion as they were larger or smaller, so would their sculls and\nbrains be; but this is contrary to observation.\n\nLXXXI. But with all this, and even admitting what Pliny says to be\ntrue, that the material substance of the brain, is larger in men than\nit is in women, touching which matter, I beg leave to suspend my\njudgment, till the assertion is affirmed by some able anatomists; but\nI say, admitting the thing to be true, it proves nothing; for if the\ncomprehending better, was to be governed by this material exceeding in\nthe substance of the brain, it would follow, that an ingenious man,\nshould have forty or fifty times more brain than an ideot, and that men\nof large bulk should be people of much more perspicuity than those of\nsmall stature, as we must suppose their brains to be in proportion to\ntheir size; but those, he who writes this can persuade to believe it,\nshould return him thanks, for broaching a doctrine so well suited to\ntheir capacities.\n\nLXXXII. I agree however, that the greater or less degree of clearness,\nor facility of understanding, depends in a great measure upon the\ndifference of organization; though not upon a sensible different\norganization of the larger parts, but upon the insensible different one\nof the most minute parts, such as the different texture or firmness of\nthe most subtile fibres, or the freeness from obstruction, or clearness\nof the delicate passages through which the animal spirits circulate,\nand also upon the tension and elasticity of the membranes which form\nthose passages; although, we can know nothing about whether these are\ndifferent in men and women, nor can even the anatomical spectacles, pry\ninto the secret, or assist us with such a discernment or discovery;\nneither can the Cartesians, with all the microscopes they are capable\nof inventing, explore, whether the pineal gland, which they assign as\nthe seat of the soul, is of a different texture in women, from what it\nis in men.\n\nLXXXIII. That a different sensible organization, does not produce a\nvariety in the rational operations, is manifest, at least, if this\ndifference is not very enormous; there being men differently organized,\nwho are of equal abilities; and men organized as nearly alike as\npossible, who, with respect to the faculties of the soul, are very\ndissimilar. The frigid \u00c6sop, was in every part of his body, so deformed\nand ill-shaped, that he scarce appeared a human creature; on which\naccount, his name in succeeding ages, was used to express an extreme\ndegree of deformity; with all this, it is well known, that he was of\na delicate and penetrating mind. Socrates, did not differ much from\n\u00c6sop in the irregularity of his make; notwithstanding which, antiquity\nknew no man of a clearer or better understanding. But supposing we were\nto admit, that a distinct sensible organization produced a distinct\nintellectual ability, what could you in this case infer from it? Why\nnothing, because women are not formed differently from men in the\norgans which administer to, or assist the faculty of reasoning, but are\ndistinctly formed in those only, which Nature has appropriated for the\npropagation of the species.\n\n\nSECT. XIII.\n\nLXXXIV. Neither in the difference of temperament, can be founded the\nimagined inferiority of feminine understanding; but I don\u2019t deny, that\nthe temperament has much influence, and conduces greatly to the just or\ndisorderly exercise of the faculties of the soul; so far from it, I am\nrather persuaded, that a distinct temperature, occasions more variety\nin the operations of those faculties, than a different organization:\nfor there is no man, who must not have experienced in himself, that,\naccording as his mind is variously disposed, or he is in good or bad\nspirits, without finding the least bodily alteration, he is more or\nless fit for all sorts of operations; with all this, there is scarce an\nintemperance that offends the body, which does not at the same time,\nmore or less disturb the functions of the soul; but what species of\ntemperament or disposition, conduces most to understanding or reasoning\nwell, it is not easy to ascertain.\n\nLXXXV. If this point is to be settled by the doctrine of Aristotle,\nwe might conclude, the feminine temperament is best adapted for the\npurpose. This philosopher, who subjects all the effects which appear\nin the extensive field of Nature, to the dominion of his four first\nqualities, says, in the 24th Sect. of his Problems, qu\u00e6st. 15, that\nmen of a cold temperament have better intellects, and reason better,\nthan men of a hot temperament; notwithstanding which, he enters upon\nthe same question, with supposing, that in hot climates the men are\nmore ingenious than in cold ones, which I can hardly believe, because\nit would follow from thence, that the Africans are more ingenious than\nthe English or the Dutch: but pursuing the thread of his discourse,\nand explaining the efficacy of the qualities by the power of the\nantiperastis, he affirms, that in the coldest countries the men\nare most ardent, and in the hot ones most cold. _Etenim, qui sedes\nfrigidas habent, frigore loci obsistente, longe calidiores, quam sua\nsint natura, redduntur._ He thinks people of warm constitutions, so\nmuch inferior to those of cool ones with respect to their reasoning\npowers, that he makes no scruple to declare, the last compared to the\nfirst, are like men whose heads are turned by drinking too much wine.\nHe proceeds immediately after the words before-cited, thus: _Itaque\nvinolentis admodum similes esse videntur, nec ingenio valent quo\nprospiciant, rerumque rationes inquirant._ This philosopher, when he\nclassed the hot and stupid together, had quite forgot his disciple\nAlexander, though he not only forgot, but bore him in mind at the same\ntime: for it is very certain, that he wrote the greatest part of his\nworks, after Alexander, on account of the doubts he entertained of his\nfidelity, had discarded him; and after he had retired to Athens, where\nhe experienced a fresh disgust, to wit, being witness to Alexander\u2019s\nsending without taking the least notice of him, thirty talents of gold\nto his school-fellow Xenocrates as a gratuity; but it is doubtful,\nwhether his resentment carried him so far, as to conspire with\nAntipater against Alexander\u2019s life, and to consult with him about the\nbest method of carrying their purpose into execution by poison. But let\nus return to our subject.\n\nLXXXVI. The same Aristotle teaches, and in this, all the naturalists\nand medical people agree with him, that the dissimilarity of\ntemperament in the two sexes, consists, in the men being hot and\ndry, and in the women being cold and moist: _Est autem vir calidus,\n& siccus, mulier frigida, humidaque._ Sect. 5. Quest. 26. The cold\ntemperament, in the opinion of Aristotle, being then the best adapted\nfor reasoning, and the hot the opposite, the women being cold, and the\nmen hot, it follows, that the feminine temperament is better suited to\ncomprehend and reason well, than the masculine.\n\nLXXXVII. This proof is conclusive, to those who believe every thing\nAristotle has said; but I protest for myself, that it has not the least\nweight with me; for I neither believe that the geniuses are better in\nhot countries than in cold ones, nor that men of cold temperaments are\nmore ingenious than those of hot ones; and much less do I believe, that\nthose of fiery dispositions are in a manner insensible; and as to the\npretended power of the antiperastis, let it for the present remain in\nthe state of doubt, which is annexed to, and inseparable from it.\n\nLXXXVIII. Moisture and dryness, are the other two distinct qualities\nof the two compositions or temperaments; and by attending to them, it\nmay also be inferred from the doctrine of Aristotle, that the women are\nmore perspicuous than the men. Those who maintain, that the larger the\nquantity of the brain, the better the faculty of the understanding,\nfound their opinion, upon having been taught, that a man has a larger\nbrain in proportion than any other animal: and they argue thus,\nAristotle says, that man is of a more humid temperament than any other\nanimal. _Homo omnium animantium maxime humidus natura est._ Sect.\n5, Qu\u00e6st. 7. From hence, if it may be inferred, that from a man\u2019s\nhaving a larger brain than brutes, is to be imputed his having more\nunderstanding; in the same manner it may be inferred, from his being\nmore moist than them, as humidity is productive of knowledge, that he\nknows more. A woman then is of a more humid composition than a man, and\nconsequently must be more intelligent than him.\n\nLXXXIX. Although this argument proves nothing, and ought only to be\nused by way of retortion on those who maintain opposite opinions;\nfor the principles on which such conclusions are founded, to speak\nliberally, are uncertain and doubtful. Who told Pliny, that the brain\nof a man was larger than that of any other animal? Has any one, think\nyou, undertaken the prolix labour of breaking the skulls of the whole\nsensitive species, in order afterwards to weigh their brains? Or who\ntold Aristotle, that man is more humid than any of the brute creation?\nCan it be supposed, that this philosopher had squeezed them all in a\npress, in order to ascertain the quantity of moisture contained in\neach? There seems more probability in supposing, that certain domestic\nbrutes, the greatest part of insects, and almost every species of fish,\nare more humid than men. Nor even admitting it to be true, that the\nhuman brain is larger in proportion than that of any other animal,\ncould it be inferred from thence, that a great share of understanding\nin the human species is the effect of a larger portion of brain. A man\nin many other parts of the body, differs greatly in the proportion of\nhis make from brutes, but an excess of those parts in some individuals,\ndoes not argue a greater degree of excellence. It would be necessary,\nin order to make this inference, to have observed, that, among the\nbrutes themselves, those which had the largest brains, had the\nstrongest or best instinct; but I believe this is not the case, for if\nit was, a total want of perception would be the consequence of a total\nlack of brain, which is not so; for, according to Pliny, there are many\nsensitive beings, without blood and without brains, notwithstanding\nwhich, they preserve their instinct.\n\n\nSECT. XIV.\n\nXC. But waiving these proofs, which proceed upon Aristotelic doctrines,\nwhich are either false or uncertain, and which on this account, can\nonly be serviceable to the cause of the women, by way of retorting upon\nthose rigid partizans of Aristotle, who approve of all their master\nhas said: I say, waiving these proofs, let us proceed to enquire, if,\nfrom the cause of the humidity in which a woman exceeds a man, there\ncan be deduced any objection to her intellectual aptitude. On this\nground, those commonly take their stand, who are desirous of proving\nby physical arguments, the inferiority of feminine understanding; and\ntheir reasoning seems to have an air of probability, because an excess\nof humour, either of itself, or by means of the vapour it attracts, is\napt to retard the course of the animal spirits, by occupying in part,\nthe narrow passages through which these exceeding fine substances flow.\n\nXCI. But with all this, the argument is evidently fallacious; for if\nit was not, it would prove, not that the minds of women were less\ndiscerning than those of men, but that they were more slow and dull of\ncomprehension than them, which is false; for most men allow, that in\npoint of quickness they have the advantage.\n\nXCII. Further; many men, who are keen, ready, and profound, abound\nwith habitual defluxions and catarrhs, which are caused by a quantity\nof excrementitious moisture collected in the most remote recesses\nof the head, and within the very substance of the brain, as may be\nseen in Riberius, where he treats of catarrhs. The excessive humidity\nof the brain then, does not obstruct the ready or right use of the\nunderstanding; and if an excrementitious moisture does not obstruct\nit, much less can a natural one have that effect.\n\nXCIII. And as a reason why a natural one does not hinder it, we may\nadd, that, according to the doctrine of Pliny, the brain of a man\nis more humid than that of every other living creature: _Sed homo\nportione maximum & humidissimum._ Lib. 11, Cap. 37. Nor is it credible,\nthat Nature should place in an organ destined for our most perfect\nknowledge, a temperament, capable of obstructing, or making the\noperations of our reason slow and defective. If I should be told, that,\nnotwithstanding this native humidity, in which the brain of man exceeds\nthat of a brute, it remains tempered in the exact proportion which is\nbest suited to the operations of reason, and that the humidity of the\nbrain of a woman exceeds that proportion; I answer, even supposing that\nhumidity, by means of its natural quality, does not obstruct, nobody\nknows in what proportion, or to what degree, the brain, for the best\nexercising its functions should be moist; and therefore it is vague to\nsay, there is a greater proportion of it in women than in men, or in\nmen than in women.\n\nXCIV. There may be opposed however, to this doctrine of humidity, the\nopinion of many, who affirm, that the humid and cloudy countries\nproduce heavy dull spirits; and, on the contrary, that in the bright\nand clear countries, are born ingenious and sprightly ones. But be\nthose few or many who say this, they say it without more foundation,\nthan having imagined, the clouds of the horizon are translated to the\nsphere of the brain; as if in rainy countries, the opacity of the\natmosphere was a dark shade, which obscured the soul, and that in\ncountries which are blessed with a serene sky, the greater splendor\nof the day, would communicate greater clearness to the understanding.\nThey might, with more aptness and propriety, say, that in the regions\nwhich are most bright and clear, the objects being more visible, they,\nthrough the windows of the eyes, enter in such numbers, that they\ndistract the soul, and render it less fit for reflection and reasoning;\nand hence it is, that, in the obscurity of the night, we find the\nthread of our reason the least interrupted, and that we deduce our\nconclusions with more firmness than in clear day-light.\n\nXCV. Let those, who maintain humid regions to be ill-suited to the\nproduction of subtile men, cast their eyes on the Venetians and the\nHollanders, who are some of the most able men in Europe: the first of\nthese, stole part of their territories from the fish; and the last\nmay be said to live in lakes and bogs. Even here in Spain, we have\nan example of this sort in the Asturians, who, notwithstanding they\ninhabit a province, the most beset with clouds, and the most subject\nto rain, of any in the whole peninsula, are generally reputed for\nsubtile, ready, and expert people. But our wonder at this will lessen,\nif we consider the beavers, who live almost continually in the water,\nnotwithstanding which, Nature has produced no brutes of so noble an\ninstinct, nor who approach so near to men, both in their love for them,\nand in the imitation of their customs: for you may read in Conradus\nGesnero, that they take particular care of their aged parents, and they\nhave been seen to direct men in their navigation, and to assist them\nin fishing; and there has such an attention been observed in them to\nthe dead, that they withdraw and conceal the carcasses of their defunct\nspecies, at the hazard of their being devoured by other aquatic beasts.\n\nXCVI. On the contrary, those birds, who the greatest part of their\ntime, breathe the most subtile pure air, and the most divested of\nvapours, one while fleeting on the winds, and at other times placing\nthemselves on the tops of mountains, ought to be more sagacious than\nterrestrial brutes; which is not the case.\n\nXCVII. By the same mode of reasoning, the Egyptians should be the\nkeenest people in the world, because they dwell under the brightest and\nmost serene sky that is to be found in all the globe. There is scarce\na cloud passes over Egypt in the course of a year, and the land would\nbe totally barren, if it was not refreshed and fertilized by the waters\nof the Nile; and although for some ages, antiquity venerated that\nregion as the seat of the sciences, which is manifest from Pythagoras,\nHomer, Plato, and other Greek philosophers, having traveled thither to\nimprove themselves in philosophy and the mathematics; this does not\nprove, that they were more subtile and ingenious than other mortals,\nbut rather, that the sciences had gone wandering about the earth, and\nthat sometimes they took their stations in one country, and at others\nin another. The same thing may be said of the valley of Lima, the\ninhabitants of which country do not know what rain is, the land being\nfertilized by a light dew, assisted by a happy temperament of air,\nwhich is neither hot nor cold; notwithstanding which, the natives are\nnot people of a delicate ingenuity, but rather the contrary, for the\nPizarras found them more easy to be subdued by a few stratagems, than\nCortez found the Mexicans, with all the arts he could employ, assisted\nby the whole power of his arms.\n\nXCVIII. I am not ignorant, that the inhabitants of B\u0153otia were\nantiently looked upon, as a most rude, dull people, and that _B\u0153oticum\nIngenium_ and _B\u0153tica Sus_, were proverbial terms of contempt, and\nused to express or denote, a heavy stupid person; and also, that this\nstupidity was attributed to the gross atmosphere, loaded with vapour,\nwhich prevails in that country; hence the expression of Horace in\none of his epistles: _B\u0153oticum in crasso jurares a\u00ebre natum._ But I\nbelieve, and with some foundation, that the antients quoted did not\ndo that country justice; imputing the ignorance which proceeded from\nwant of application, to the want of capacity; and B\u0153otia\u2019s lying on\nthe confines of Attica, where learning flourished, seems to strengthen\nthis opinion; for it is hardly probable, that within sight of a\nprovince, which is the theatre of wisdom, you should view another,\nwhich is a colony of ignorance and stupidity. On the other hand, it\nis certain, that B\u0153otia has produced some geniuses of the first rate;\nsuch as Pindar, the prince of Lyric Poets, and the great Plutarch,\nwho, in the opinion of lord Bacon, was full equal to the first men of\nantiquity; and I suspect, that by looking back to the more early times\nof antiquity, we shall find a period, in which the B\u0153otians, in their\nculture of the arts and sciences, excelled, not only their neighbours,\nbut all the other nations of Europe; because Cadmus, when he came from\nPh\u0153nicia, was the first who introduced the letters of the alphabet into\nGreece, and was the first person in Europe, who invented the art of\nwriting; and we learn from history, that he settled in B\u0153otia, where\nhe founded the city of Thebes. To this may be added, that in B\u0153otia\nis found Mount Helicon, dedicated to the Muses, and from which they\nderive their name of Heliconides; and that from this mountain, descends\nthe famous Aganippe fountain, consecrated to the same fictitious\ndeities, the water of which, they feign to have been the wine of the\npoets, which enraptured and inspired them, and lighted up the fire of\nenthusiasm in their brains. It seems as if all these fictions could\nhave no other origin, than poetry having in some former time flourished\nin that region.\n\nXCIX. But admitting the B\u0153otians by nature to be rude and stupid,\nhow can it be proved, that this is derived from the humidity of the\ncountry, and not from some other hidden cause; especially, when we\nsee moist or damp countries, on which this stigma is not fixed? Let\nhumidity then, be acquitted of the false accusation which has been\nraised against it, to wit, of being at war with, and an enemy to\ningenuity; and let it be settled, that from this principle, no proof\ncan be deduced to ascertain, that the women in point of understanding,\nare inferior to the men.\n\n\nSECT. XV.\n\nC. Father Malebranche, reasons in another way, and denies the women\nhave equal understanding with the men, on account of their brains being\nmore soft and tender than those of the other sex. I really don\u2019t know\nwhether what he supposes about this greater degree of softness be true\nor not, but I have read two treatises on anatomy, and did not find the\nleast mention of it in either of them. Perhaps, from having taken it\nfor granted, that the brains of women were more humid, he concluded\nthey were more soft; but this is not always a certain consequence, for\nice is humid and not soft, and melted metal is soft, but not humid; or\nperhaps, from having observed the women were of a more soft and docile\ndisposition than men, he inferred, that in their material composition\nthey were the same; for there have been people so superficial, as to\nform ideas upon these sort of analogies, which afterwards, for want of\ndue reflection, have been adopted by persons of great perspicuity.\n\nCI. But taking all this for granted, I would be glad to know, how a\ngreater degree of softness in the brain, produces or occasions, an\nimperfection in the understanding? I should rather think, that on\naccount of its being more pliable to the impression of the spirits, it\nwould be an instrument or organ, better suited or adapted to mental\noperations. This argument, is strengthened by the doctrine of the\nauthor, because he says in another place, the vestiges or traces,\nwhich the impression of the animal spirits leaves on the brain, are\nthe lines, with which the faculty of the imagination, forms on it the\neffigies of objects; and the larger or more distinct these vestiges\nor impressions are, the greater will be the force and clearness,\nwith which the understanding must perceive the objects. _Cur igitur\nimaginatio consistat in sola virtute, qua mens sibi imagines objectorum\nefformare potest, eas imprimendo, ut ita loquar, fibris cerebri, certe\nquo vestigia, spirituum animalium, qu\u00e6 sunt veluti imaginum illarum\nlineamenta erunt distinctiora, & grandiora, eo fortius, & distinctius\nmens objecta illa imaginabitur._ (Lib. 2. de Inquirenda Veritate, part\n1, cap. 1.)\n\nCII. Now then, it being admitted, the softer the brain is, with greater\nease will the animal spirits make impressions on it, and that, for the\nsame reason, the vestiges or traces will be larger and more distinct;\nthey will make them with greater ease, and bigger, because the matter\nresists less; more distinct because the fibres being somewhat rigid,\nthey would, by means of their elasticity, make efforts to restore\nthemselves to their former shape and position; and thus, the path on\ntraces made by the course of the animal spirits, would be very faint,\nif not quite effaced. The fibres of the brain of a woman, being then\nmore flexible than those of the brain of a man, they are capable of\nhaving larger and more distinct images impressed on them, and they must\nconsequently, according to this doctrine, perceive objects better than\nmen.\n\nCIII. But I would not be understood to admit, that the women have\nmore understanding than the men; I only mean to retort on father\nMalebranche, the doctrine, from which he pretends to infer the\nadvantage to be on the side of the men, in contradiction to what in\nanother place, he himself has asserted. My own opinion of the matter\nis, that, by such sort of philosophical reasoning, you may prove every\nthing, when in reality you prove nothing. Every one philosophizes in\nhis own mode, and if I was to write with a view of flattering, or\nfrom caprice or ostentation, or with a design of making parade of my\ningenuity, I could easily, by deducing consequences from admitted\nprinciples, elevate the understandings of the women, superior to\nthose of the men, by many degrees; but this is not my nature, or\ndisposition; on the contrary, I had much rather propound my sentiments\nwith sincerity; and therefore I say, that neither father Malebranche,\nnor any other person, even to this day, has known the punctual actings,\nor specific man\u0153uvres, by which the organs of the head, administer to\nthe faculties of the soul. We don\u2019t know as yet, how fire burns, or how\nsnow occasions cold, although they are things which are manifest to\nour sight and our touch; and would father Malebranche, and the other\nCartesians, persuade us, that they have registered and examined all\nthat passes in the most hidden and remote corners of the cabinet of\nthe rational soul? Neither do these maxims appear to me well founded,\nwhich, by reducing every thing to mechanical principles, figure to us\nthe spirit, stamping materially the images of objects on the brain, in\nthe same manner, that impressions are made on copper with a chissel.\nI am also aware of the serious difficulties, that are attendant on,\nand annexed to, the intentional species of Aristotle. But what is the\nresult of all this? Why, that none of us have done more, than just\ntouch the outside covering of Nature. We all walk blindfold, and he\nis the most blind, who fancies he perceives things with the greatest\nclearness, and may be compared to a servant of Seneca, named Harpacta,\nwho was so infatuated, after having lost all his visual faculties, and\nhaving become stone-blind, as to fancy he could see. It is certain,\nthat those who live in a confidence, that they can penetrate and look\ninto Nature, are the most exposed to dangerous errors; because he who\nwalks on with much boldness, having but a dim light to guide him, runs\nthe most hazard of falling; on the contrary, he is the furthest from\nthis danger, who knowing the way is dark, proceeds with caution.\n\nCIV. But granting to father Malebranche, and the rest of the\nCartesians, that the representation of objects to the mind, is made by\nmeans of these material traces, which, in their course, the spirits\nimpress on the brain; what follows from it is, that the brains of\nwomen being softer than those of men, the marks, on account of the\npliability of the matter, will be larger and more distinct in the\nfirst, than in the last; and what can be inferred from this? Why, by\nthe doctrine of father Malebranche, you may make whichever of the two\nfollowing inferences you like best, either that the women comprehend\nbetter than the men, or that they do not comprehend so well. The\nfirst, may be inferred from the place we a little before cited; and\nthe second, because where he explains himself with regard to what he\nhas said against the women, he maintains, that the excessive lively\nimaginations, which result from these large images or impressions,\nare unfavourable to the right comprehension of objects. _Cum enim\ntenuiora objecta ingentes in delicatis cerebri fibris excitent motus,\nin mente protinus etiam excitant sensationes ita vividas, ut ijs tota\noccupetur._ Lib. 2. part ii. cap. 1.\n\nCV. But this second is contrary to all reason, for it does not follow\nfrom this doctrine of large images, that small ones do not represent\nobjects well, for in some cases they rather conduce to represent them\nbest; atoms, for example, being better seen through a microscope than\nlarger bodies; and liveliness of imagination, if it does not extend to\nmadness, contributes much to a perspicuous understanding of things.\n\nCVI. But, in reality, from this greater softness of the brain, it\ncannot be deduced, that the understandings of women are either larger\nor smaller, because you cannot infer from it, that the impressions\nmade by the spirits on the organ, are bigger or less; which is the\nprinciple, from whence you must conclude both the one and the other;\nthe reason is, because it seems most probable, that the impulse of the\nspirits is proportioned to the docility of the matter, and thus, that\nspirits feebly impelled, do not make a larger impression on a soft\nbrain, than that which is made on a more firm and tense one, by spirits\nwhich move with greater force and impetuosity; in the same manner,\nthat by regulating the force of your hand, you may make as superficial\na mark with a tool on wax, as you may on lead. My opinion of the matter\nis, that from this system of the brains of women, all you can infer is,\nthat the corporeal movements in them, are less vigorous than they are\nin men; on which account, the nerves which have their origin in the\nfibres of the brain, and the spinal marrow, have less power in women,\nor move with more feeble impulses in them than they do in men; but not\nthat their mental operations are more or less perfect.\n\n\nSECT. XVI.\n\nCVII. I think it is now time to depart from the labyrinths of physics,\nand to enter on the open and pleasing plains of history, and to\npersuade by examples, that the understandings of the women, are not\ninferior to those of the men, even for the attainment of the most\ndifficult sciences. This is the best method, which can be fallen upon\nto convince the vulgar, who are generally more influenced by examples,\nthan arguments. To recite all that occur, would be tiresome, and\ntherefore, I shall only mention some of those women, who, in these\nlatter ages, have been the most eminently distinguished for their\nlearning, and who have flourished in our own country Spain, and in the\nneighbouring kingdoms.\n\nCVIII. Spain, which strangers hold cheap in this particular, has, to\nthe honour of literature, produced many women, remarkably eminent for\nall sorts of learning. The principal ones are the following.\n\nCIX. _Donna Anna de Cervaton_, lady of honour to the Germanic Queen\nde Fox, second wife of Don Ferdinand the Catholic; she was a most\ncelebrated woman, but more so on account of her learning and rare\ntalents, than for her uncommon beauty, which was so striking, that she\nwas generally allowed to be the finest woman about the court. In Lucio\nMarino Siculo, may be seen the Latin letters which that author wrote\nher, and the lady\u2019s answers in the same idiom.\n\nCX. _Donna Isabel de Joya_, in the sixteenth century, was esteemed a\nwoman of great learning. It is told of her, that she preached in the\nchurch of Barcelona, to the amazement of a great concourse of auditors.\nI suppose the prelates who permitted it, judged that the injunction of\nthe Apostle, which in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, prohibits\nwomen to speak in the church, admitted of some exceptions, in the\nsame manner the injunction did, which prohibits them to teach in\nthe Epistle to Timothy; for it is a fact, that Priscilla, who was\nthe companion of this same apostle, taught and instructed Apollo\nPontonicusin the evangelic doctrine, as appears from the Acts of the\nApostles; and that afterwards passing to Rome in the pontificate\nof Paul III. she, in the presence of the cardinals, much to their\nsatisfaction, explained many of the difficult passages in the books of\nthe subtile Scotus; but what redounded most of all to her honour, was\nher having converted in that capital of the world, a great number of\nJews to the catholic faith.\n\nCXI. _Luisa Sigea_, a native of Toledo, but of French extraction,\nbesides being skilled in philosophy, and sound literature, was\nornamented in a singular manner, with a knowledge of languages, for she\nunderstood Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac; and it is said,\nshe wrote a letter to pope Paul III. in each of these languages. Her\nfather, Diego Sigea, being afterwards called to the court of Lisbon,\nas preceptor to Theodosius of Portugal duke of Braganza; the infanta\nDonna Maria of Portugal, daughter of the king Don Manuel, and of his\nthird wife, Donna Leonora of Austria, who was a great lover of letters,\ntook much pleasure in the company of the learned Sigea; who afterwards\nmarried with Francisco de Cuevas, the Lord of Villanasur, and a\ncavalier of Burgos, from which marriage, as Don Luis Salazar informs us\nin his history of the house of Farnese, there descended a fine progeny,\nwhich are now living in Castile.\n\nCXII. _Donna Oliva Sabuco de Nantes_, a native of Alcaraz, was a\nwoman of sublime penetration, and of an elevated genius, eminent for\nher knowledge of physical, medicinal, moral, and political matters,\nas may be seen by her writings; but the thing which most illustrated\nand distinguished her, was her new phisiological system, where, in\nopposition to all the antients, she maintained, that it is not the\nblood which invigorates the body, but a white fluid issuing from the\nbrain, which pervades the whole nervous system; and she attributes\nalmost all disorders to this vital dew being vitiated. This system,\nwhich the incuriosity of Spain neglected, the curiosity of England\nembraced with eagerness, and now we receive from the hands of strangers\nas their invention, that, which in reality was originally our own.\nFatal genius of Spaniards, who, in order that what is produced in\ntheir own country should seem pleasing to them, must have it first\nmonopolized by strangers, and afterwards by those strangers sold to\nthem again. It seems also, that this great woman was beforehand with\nRenard Descartes, in broaching the opinion, that the brain was the\nseat of the rational soul, though she did not, like Descartes, confine\nits habitation to the pineal gland only, but supposed it to occupy\nthe whole substance. The confidence which Donna Oliva had in her\nown abilities to defend her singular opinions, was such; that in an\nepistle-dedicatory addressed to count Barajas, president of Castile,\nshe intreats him to use his authority, to convene together the most\nlearned natural philosophers, and doctors of medicine in Spain, and\nthat she would undertake to convince them, that the physics, and\nmedicinal doctrines, which were taught in the schools, went all on\nerroneous principles. She flourished in the reign of Philip II.\n\nCXIII. _Donna Bernarda Ferreyra_, a Portuguese lady, the daughter\nof Don Ignatio Ferreyra, a knight of the order of St. Jago, besides\nknowing and speaking with ease various languages, understood poetry,\nrhetoric, philosophy, and the mathematics. She left many poetical\nwritings; and our famous Lopez de Vega, had such a veneration for the\nextraordinary merit of this lady, that he dedicated to her his elegy,\nintituled La Philis.\n\nCXIV. _Donna Juana Morella_, a native of Barcelona, was a woman of\nwonderful learning. Her father having killed a man, was obliged to\nfly, and carried her with him into Lyons in France, where this\nextraordinary child, betaking herself to study, made so rapid a\nprogress, that at twelve years of age (which was in the year 1607)\nshe defended conclusions in philosophy publicly, which she afterwards\ncommitted to writing, and dedicated to Margaret of Austria, queen of\nSpain. At the age of seventeen, according to the relation of Guidon\nPatin, who lived at that time, she entered upon public disputations in\nthe jesuits college at Lyons. She understood philosophy, music, and\njurisprudence, and it is said, that she spoke fourteen languages. She\ntook the veil, in the Dominican convent of saint Pr\u00e6xedis at Avignon.\n\nCXV. The celebrated nun of Mexico, _Sor Juana Ines de la Cruz_, is so\nwell known to every body by her learned and ingenious poetical works,\nthat it is needless to say any thing in her eulogium. I shall only\nmention, that the least of her accomplishments was her talent for\npoetry, although that was the thing, for which she was most celebrated.\nMany Spanish poets have been superior to her in point of poetical\ngenius, but perhaps no one has equalled her, with regard to her\nuniversal knowledge, in all kinds of faculties. Her poetry was natural,\nbut she wanted energy. In the critical part of the sermon of father\nViera, he gives her credit for her ingenuity; but to speak the truth,\nshe was not equal in that respect, to that learned jesuit himself, of\nwhom she was the opponent: nor is there any thing extraordinary, in a\nwoman\u2019s being found inferior to a man, who, for elevation of thought,\nreasoning with perspicuity, and explaining himself with clearness, has\nnot yet been equalled by any preacher whatever.\n\nCXVI. The panegyric of the late _duchess of Aveiro_, is also needless,\nas her memory is still recent at court, and all over Spain.\n\n\nSECT. XVII.\n\nCXVII. The learned ladies of France, are very numerous, because there,\nthey in general have more opportunities of studying, and more time\nallowed them for doing it, than they have in most other countries; I\nshall therefore, only recite such of them as were most famous.\n\nCXVIII. _Susana de Hubert_, wife of Charles Jardin, an attendant of\nHenry III. understood philosophy and theology, and was well versed in\nthe writings of the fathers. She had learned the Spanish, Italian,\nLatin, Greek, and Hebrew languages; but her christian piety, which was\nexceedingly exemplary, contributed more to the advancement of her true\nglory, than her vast erudition.\n\nCXIX. _Maria de Guernay_, a Parisian of illustrious family, to whom the\nlearned Dominic Baudio gave the name of the Syren of France, arrived to\nsuch a pitch of glory and fame, for genius and literature, that there\nwas scarce a learned man of her time, who did not esteem it a great\nhonour to keep-up a literary correspondence with her; and hence it\nwas, that there were found in her cabinet when she died, letters, from\nthe cardinals Richelieu, Bentivolio, and Perron; from San Francisco de\nSales, and other enlightened prelates; from Charles the First, duke of\nMantua, from the Count de Ales, from Erycio Puteano, Justus Lipsius,\nMessrs. Balzac, Maynard, Heinsius, C\u00e6sar Capacio, Carlos Pinto, and\nmany other men, of the most shining parts and learning in that age.\n\nCXX. _Madalena Scuderi_, who was called with great reason the Sappho\nof her age, as she equaled that most celebrated Greek lady, in the\nelegance of her compositions, and excelled her much, in the purity of\nher manners. She was eminent for her learning, but incomparable for\nher judgment and discretion, as her many and excellent works testify.\nHer Artamenes, or Cyrus the Great, and her Clelia, in which tracts,\nin imitation of Barclay\u2019s Argenis, under the figure of novels, much\ntrue history is contained, are pieces of consummate value, and in\nmy judgment, are preferable to any thing of the kind that has been\nwritten in France, or any other country, the Argenis only excepted.\nThe nobleness of the thoughts, the harmonious combination of the\nnarrative, the pathetic efficacy of the persuasion, the liveliness\nof the descriptions, and the native purity, majesty, and force of\nthe style, make a composition, which all together, is admirable and\nenchanting; to this we may add, by way of enhancing the value of the\nperformance, that the amorous passages, are described with all the\ndelicacy and decency possible, the moral virtues, represented in the\nmost engaging and attractive light, and the heroic ones, with the most\nbrilliant splendor. As a proof of the prodigious talents of this woman,\nthe honour of having her entered as a member of their societies, was\nindustriously sought after, by all those academies, whose institutions,\nallowed of admitting among them persons of her sex. She in the year\n1671, gained the prize of eloquence in the French academy, which\namounted to the same thing, as that truly-noble body, having pronounced\nher the most eloquent person in all France. The most Christian king,\nLewis XIV. whose attention, no elevated merit escaped, settled on her a\npension of twelve hundred livres a year, and cardinal Mazarine had long\nbefore, by his will, bequeathed her a legacy of the same value, and she\nreceived another donation to about the same amount, from the learned\nchancellor of France, Louis de Boucherat; by the help of which, she\nwas enabled to pass through a regular, glorious, and long life, which\nterminated in the year 1701.\n\nCXXI. _Antonieta de la Guardia_, beautiful both in shape and features,\nwith which bodily perfections, the sweetness of her disposition, and\nthe charms of her soul corresponded; so that it seemed as if nature\nhad taken pride, with respect to her, of uniting in one woman, all\nthe graces of person, and attractions of mind. She was so eminent for\npoetry, that, at a time in which this art was much cultivated, and\nin high estimation in France, there was not any man whatever in that\nextensive kingdom, who excelled her in it. Her works were collected\nin two volumes, which I have not seen. She died in 1694, leaving a\ndaughter, the heir of her genius and accomplishments, who won the prize\nfor poetry in the French academy.\n\nCXXII. Lady _Maria Madalena Gabriela de Montemar_, daughter of the duke\nde Montemar, and a Benedictine nun, who was born with all the natural\nqualifications or dispositions, necessary for attaining the most\nabstracted, and difficult sciences, for she was endowed with a happy\nmemory, a subtile ingenuity, and a right judgment. In her early time of\nlife, she learned the Spanish, Italian, Latin, and Greek languages;\nand at fifteen years old, being presented to Maria Teresa of Austria,\nqueen of France, just at her first arrival in that kingdom, she amazed\nall the court, to hear her speak the Spanish language with elegance\nand propriety. She acquired a knowledge of all that is now understood,\nboth of the antient, and new philosophy, and was consummately versed\nin scholastic, dogmatic, expositive, and mystic theology. She made\nsome translations, the most admired of which, were the first books\nof the Iliad. She wrote upon various subjects, and discussed points\nof morality, criticism, and such as related to academic matters. Her\nletters were held in the highest esteem, and Louis XIV. received and\nread them with great pleasure. She composed admirable verses, though\nthey were but few in number, and those, after once reading them, she\nused to throw into the fire; which was a sacrifice, her humility\ninduced her to make of many other of her works; and she would have\nmade it of all of them, if by friendly interposition, she had not\nbeen prevented from following the dictates of her own inclination.\nHer piety, and talent for governing, shone forth in equal proportion\nto her learning; and in consideration of these eminent qualities, she\nwas elected abbess of the congregation of Fontevrauld, of the order\nof St. Benedict, which has this peculiarity belonging to it, that\nalthough it is composed of a great number of monasteries of both\nsexes, which are scattered about in four provinces, that they all\nacknowledge as their universal prelate, the abbess of Fontevrauld, a\ndistinguished monastery, which is no less famous for being the theatre\nof nobility, than of virtue; for they reckon among their prelates,\nfourteen princesses, five of whom were of the royal house of Bourbon.\nLady Montemar filled this high employment, much to the satisfaction,\nand edification of the world, and also to the benefit and increase of\nher congregation, exhibiting a woman, commanding the men with dignity,\nand who in the opinion of those who were under her direction, if she\nwas not superior, was at least equal in point of understanding to the\nwisest man living. She died in 1704, full of merit and much esteemed.\n\nCXXIII. _Maria Jacquelina de Blemur_, a Benedictine nun, who the most\nlearned Mabillon, in Estud. Monostic. Bibliot. Ecclesiast. Sect. 12,\ntells us, composed a work, called the Benedictine Year, of seven\nvolumes in quarto; and another, intitled Eulogiums on many illustrious\nPersons of the Order of Saint Benedict, of two volumes in quarto.\n\nCXXIV. _Anna la Fevre_, commonly known by the name _Madam Dacier_,\ndaughter of the most learned Tanaquildo le Fevre, proved equal to her\nfather in erudition, and superior to him in eloquence; and also in\nthe faculty of writing with elegance and delicacy, her own language.\nShe was a critic of the first rate, so that in this particular, at\nleast with respect to profane authors, there was not a man of her\ntime, neither in France nor out of it, who excelled her. She made\nmany translations from Greek authors, which she illustrated with a\nvariety of comments. Her passion for Homer, excited her to write many\ndissertations, the object of which was maintaining the superiority\nof the Greek poet Homer, over the Latin one Virgil, in which, the\nvivacity of her genius, and the rectitude of her judgment, shone\nforth with equal splendor; she was chiefly stimulated to do this,\nfrom a desire of replying to, and confronting Mons. La Mote, who was\na member of the French Academy, and of a contrary opinion; this she\ndid so well, that some partizans of the Latin poet, who had sided\nwith Mons. la Mote, could not deny, that his judgment in comparison\nof her\u2019s, had but little weight, for want of his having a competent\nknowledge of Greek, the language Homer wrote in, which his opponent\nunderstood to perfection. With regard to the merits of the case,\nit should be observed, that there are only some Latin authors who\ngive the preference to Virgil, but that there is not a single Greek\none, who will allow him to be superior, or even equal to Homer. The\ncircumstance of this last, having in his favour all the Greeks, and\nmany Latins, among whom, one of the most conspicuous is the celebrated\nhistorian Velleius Paterculus, who bestows on him the high eulogium,\nthat there never yet was any one who could imitate him; and declares\nfurther, that, in his opinion, there never will be any one capable of\ndoing it in time to come: I say, when all this is considered, it should\nhave great weight in determining the question in Homer\u2019s favour. Anna\nle Fevre, I think, has been dead but a few years.\n\n\nSECT. XVIII.\n\nCXXV. Italy is little inferior to France, in numbers of learned women;\nbut, for the same reason for which we curtailed the recital of the\nFrench ladies, we shall do so by the Italian ones.\n\nCXXVI. _Dorothea Bucca_, a native of Bologna, having from her infancy\nbeen destined to the study of letters, advanced in the profession with\nsuch giant strides, that the famous university of that city, made\nin her favour, the singular, and till then unheard-of precedent, of\nconferring on her the degree of a doctor; and she continued in the\nuniversity as a professor of divinity, for a long time. She flourished\nin the fifteenth century.\n\nCXXVII. _Isota Nogarola_, born at Verona, was the oracle of her age;\nfor, over and above being very learned in philosophy, and theology, she\nadded to it, the accomplishment of understanding various languages,\nand being deeply read in the Fathers; and in point of eloquence, it\nis asserted, that she was not inferior to the greatest orators of\nthat age. The proofs of her ability in this science, are not vulgar,\nfor she spoke many times before the popes Nicholas V. and Pius II. in\nthe council of Mantua, which was convened, for the purpose of uniting\nthe Christian princes against the Turk. That illustrious protector of\nletters, cardinal Bessarion, having seen some of the works of Isota,\nwas so charmed with the spirit of them, that he took a journey from\nRome to Verona on purpose to see her. This lady, died at the age of\nthirty-eight, in the year 1466.\n\nCXXVIII. _Laura Ceretti_, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, at\nthe age of eighteen, taught philosophy publickly, with great applause.\n\nCXXIX. _Cassandra Fidele_, a Venetian lady, was so celebrated for\nher knowledge of the Greek language, and likewise for understanding\nphilosophy, theology, and being deeply read in history, that there\nwas scarce an illustrious prince of that time, who did not give her\ntestimonies of his esteem; and they reckon among the admirers of\nCassandra, the popes Julian II., Leo X., Louis XI., king of France, and\nour Catholic king Ferdinand, and his queen Isabel. She wrote several\nworks, and died at the age of a hundred and two, in the year 1567.\n\nCXX. _Cathalina de Cibo_, dutchess of Camerine, in the March of\nAncona, understood Latin, Greek, Hebrew, philosophy, and theology. Her\nvirtue gave splendor to her learning; she built the first convent the\nCapuchins possessed, and died in the year 1557.\n\nCXXXI. _Martha Marchina_, a Neapolitan of low birth, but elevated\ngenius, who, surmounting the impediments annexed to her humble fortune,\nmanaged so as to get herself instructed in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew\nlanguages, which she attained a competent knowledge of, with wonderful\nvelocity, and was no vulgar poetess; but her excellent talents were not\ncapable of raising her above the sphere of life in which she was born,\nthe influence of her adverse stars, obstructing the advancement of her\nfortune. She removed to Rome, where she supported herself and family\nby making wash-balls: but it is probable, if she had had the same\nopportunities of studying which have fallen to the lot of other women,\nthat she would have been a prodigy among the females; and even among\nthe men also. She died at the age of forty-six, in the year 1646.\n\nCXXXII. _Lucretia Helena Cornaro_, of the illustrious family of the\nCornaro\u2019s of Venice, who, though in the series of this memorial, is the\nlast of the learned Italian women, on account of her being the most\nmodern, we may truly say, without doing injustice to any one, that she\nin dignity is the first. This woman, who was an honour to her sex,\nwas born in 1646. From her tender infancy, she manifested a violent\ninclination for letters, with which inclination, the wonderful rapidity\nof her progress corresponded; for she not only instructed herself\nwith uncommon facility, in the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages,\nbut she learned also, almost all the living languages of Europe. She\ndistinguished herself so conspicuously in mathematics, philosophy,\nand sacred theology, that the university of Padua, had resolved to\nconfer on her the degree of a doctor of divinity, which would have been\ndone, if cardinal Barbarigo, the bishop of that city, had not opposed\ncarrying the resolve into execution, on account of some scruples\nhe entertained of the propriety of the thing, it being contrary to\nthe maxim of St. Paul, which prohibits women from administering, or\nteaching in the church; and thus, to prevent violating this canonical\nrule, and at the same time, not to be wanting in the proper regard\ndue to the deserving merit of Helena, they fell upon the expedient of\nmaking her a doctor of philosophy; the ceremony of conferring which\ndegree on her, was graced and honoured, with the attendance of many\nprinces and princesses, from various parts of Italy. Her eminence in\nscientific knowledge, could only be exceeded, which in reality it was,\nby her exemplary piety. At twelve years of age, she took the vow of\nvirginity. And although afterwards, a German prince, solicited with\nardour, the hand of Helena, and offered to obtain from the pope a\ndispensation of her vow, and was likewise assisted in his suit with\nthe intreaties of all her relations, it was impossible to subdue her\nconstancy. In order to cut off at a stroke, the hopes of many other\nimportunate admirers, she was desirous of immediately entering herself\na Benedictine nun; but being prevented by her father, she did all she\ncould, which was, to renew by a written instrument, her promise of\nvirginity, together with the addition of the other religious vows,\nusually taken by nuns; which, after having executed, she delivered\ninto the hands of the abbot of the monastery of St. George, as an\noblation to the Benedictine religion. This sacrifice of her liberty,\nwas followed by her leading so exemplary a life within the walls of her\nfather\u2019s house, as might excite the envy of the most austere nun. Her\nlove of retirement was so great, and such was her shame of appearing\nin public, that, although in obedience to her father\u2019s commands, she\nsuffered herself sometimes to be seen; her conforming to do it gave her\nsuch pain, that she was used to say, that obedience would cost her her\nlife. In effect, this was but short, for she passed from it to another,\nat the age of thirty-eight years, with equal rejoicings of the angels,\nand lamentations of mankind, leaving many works, which are sufficient\nto eternize her fame. A number of authors were the panegyrists of\nthis extraordinary woman, among whom, was Gregory Leti, who, in his\nselect extracts from history, gives her the epithets of the heroine of\nletters, and a monster of science; calling her at the same time, an\nangel of beauty and candour.\n\n\nSECT. XIX.\n\nCXXXIII. Germany, in whose frozen region, Apollo has more power to\ninspire the mind, than to thaw the limbs, presents us with a spark from\nthe sun, in the person of a woman of that country.\n\nCXXXIV. This was the famous _Anna Maria Surman_, the glory of both\nUpper and Lower Germany; for although she was born at Cologne, her\nparents and ancestors were from the Low Countries. There never had\nappeared, till her time, a person of either sex, of more universal\ncapacity. All the arts, and all the sciences, recognized, and submitted\nwith equal obedience to the empire of her genius, and none of them\never made the least resistance, when this heroine undertook their\nconquest. At six years of age, she, without any instruction, cut,\nwith scissars in paper, estimable and delicate figures. At eight,\nshe learned in a few days to paint flowers, and did actually, at the\nend of that time, paint some, which were much prized. At ten, it did\nnot cost her more than three hours labour, to acquire the art of\nembroidering with elegance, but her talents for more exalted exercises\ncontinued hid, till at twelve years of age, they were discovered in\nthe following manner. She had two brothers, who studied at home, and\nit was remarked, that at various times, upon their repeating their\nlessons, when the memory of the boys failed them, the girl would set\nthem right, which she was able to do without any studying, having\nretained the lessons, from only casually hearing her brothers repeat\nthe words of them, while they were getting them by heart. This mark,\njoined to the others she had shewn, of being endowed with a capacity\nthat was quite extraordinary, determined her father to permit his\ndaughter to pursue her career in study, which was so correspondent\nwith the bent of her inclination; but the swift motion, with which\nshe passed over the extensive plains of sacred and profane erudition,\nought more properly to be called a flight, than a career; and the\nshort time in which she possessed herself of almost all the human\nsciences, together with sacred theology, and a great knowledge of the\nscripture, is as astonishing. She understood perfectly, the German,\nDutch, English, French, Italian, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee,\nand Arabic languages. She was also endued with the gift of poetry, and\ncomposed many very sensible works in verse. In the liberal arts, she\nacquired applause equal to that which she had obtained in sciences\nand languages. She understood music scientifically, and played many\ninstruments with dexterity. As a painter, and a statuary, she was\nexcellent; as likewise in the art of engraving. It is related of her,\nthat, having made her own effigy in wax, some artificial pearls, which\nshe had introduced as ornaments to the figure, appeared so natural,\nthat nobody would believe they were wax, till after having made the\nexperiment of pricking them with a pin. Her letters were esteemed,\nand sought after, not only for the beauty of the stile, but for the\nelegance of the hand-writing also, insomuch, that all who saw them\nthought they were inimitable; hence, almost every trace of her pen, was\nindustriously collected, as furniture worthy to adorn a cabinet. There\nwas scarce a great man of her time, who did not give her testimonies\nof his esteem, and who did not solicit a literary correspondence with\nher. The illustrious queen of Poland, Louisa Maria Gonzaga, after being\nmarried at Paris by proxy to king Stanislaus, in her passage to that\nkingdom through Germany, condescended to visit Surman at her own house.\nShe would never marry, although a matrimonial connection with her, was\narduously solicited by many men of rank and fortune; particularly by\nMons. Catec, pensionary of Holland, and a famous poet, who had made\nsome verses in her eulogium, when Anna Maria was but fourteen years\nold. At length, this woman, who was worthy of being immortal, died in\n1678, at seventy-one years of age.\n\n\nSECT. XX.\n\nCXXXV. I shall omit mentioning many more learned women, which ennobled\nGermany and other countries, to conclude with a recent example from\nAsia, as a proof, that female literature is not confined and shut up\nwithin the limits of Europe.\n\nCXXXVI. This shall be the charming, discreet, and generous _Sitti\nMaani_, wife of the famous traveller, Pedro de la Valle, a Roman\nknight. Maani was born in Mesopotamia, in order that that country,\nwithin whose bounds, some expositors believe the garden of Paradise\nwas planted, might be the happy spot which had produced two eminent\nRachaels; for it is certain, that Haran, where the beloved wife of\nJacob was born, was a place of Mesopotamia. The fame of the nobleness\nof her genius, the vivacity of her understanding, and the beauty of\nher person, had been blazoned abroad when she was very young; this\nexcited the curiosity of Pedro de la Valle, and he was desirous of\nseeing a lady, of whom he had heard so many encomiums. His experience,\nupon the interview which was permitted him, confirmed the truth of all\nhe had heard, inflamed in his bosom the passion of love, and caused\nhim anxiously to solicit obtaining her for a wife, which purpose he\neffected; and Maani, after marrying him, not only forsook the Chaldean\nrites in which she had been bred up, and turned catholic herself, but\npersuaded her parents to do the same. It is almost incredible, what\nthis amiable Asian acquired in a few years, and indeed the years of\nher life were but few; for she not only attained a knowledge of all\nthe learning, which those countries, still strangers to the sciences,\ncould afford, but she arrived at understanding twelve different idioms.\nBut the bulk, as well as perfection, of her moral virtues, exceeded\nthat of her acquisitions; among which, though not common to her sex,\nher courage shone the most brilliant, for she fought armed in three\nencounters, and with great bravery, in defence of her husband. This\nwoman, in many ways extraordinary, eminent for her talents, and famous\nfor her travels and voyages, in one of them, near Ormuz, became the\nvictim of a fever, which was truly malignant, having deprived her of\nlife at the age of twenty-one. Thus died, to the great grief of all\nwho had known her, this new Rachael, who was so like the antient one,\nthat it seems, as if Nature and Fortune had studiously formed the\nparallel; both natives of Mesopotamia; both beautiful in extreme; both\nmarried to very deserving men, who were strangers to them, and came\nfrom other countries; both alike, with respect to their determination,\nof forsaking the rites of their country, and following the religion\nof their husbands; both equally conforming, to lead a wandering life,\nand follow the steps of their consorts; and, in the end, both dying\nin the flower of their age, and on the road. But the behaviour of the\ntwo husbands, at the time of the fatal crisis, seems to have been\nvery different; Pedro de la Valle at that period, appearing to have\nconducted himself with much more delicacy, than the patriarch Jacob.\nThe last, buried his Rachael on the road, at the place where she died;\nthough it would have corresponded better with the merit of his wife,\nif he had paid the same care and attention, and had taken the same\nprecaution about her dead carcase, that he did with regard to his own,\nwhen he strictly enjoined his son Joseph, to convey it to the sepulchre\nof his ancestors, which was in Hebron. The tender care and regard for\nhis wife in this last office, which seems to have been little attended\nto by that fond patriarch, though we should suppose it happened from\nsome powerful reason, either mysterious or natural, which he had for\nomitting it, shone forth with respect to Pedro de la Valle, in acts of\nthe most punctual and precise reality; and which, in the most refined\nand nice manner, expressed the affection he bore his departed consort:\nfor after having embalmed the dead body of his adored Maani, he carried\nit about with him inclosed in a costly urn, four whole years, all\nwhich time, he continued to travel through, and explore various parts\nof Asia; with his eyes ever attentive to her ashes, and his heart and\nmemory to her virtues: till upon returning to Rome, he deposited the\nremains of his beloved object, in the sepulchre of the noble family of\nthe Valles his ancestors, which they have belonging to them, in the\nchapel of St. Paul, appertaining to the church of Santa Maria de _Ara\nC\u0153li_: this was done with such funeral pomp, that a more magnificent\nshew of this sort had scarce ever been seen, Pedro de la Valle himself,\npronouncing the funeral oration; in doing which, his eyes expressed\nmuch more than his lips, as in a short time his lips ceased to move,\nand left the eyes to speak the rest; for it so happened, that his\nthroat through excessive grief, was obstructed, and he was near being\nchoaked; so that he was unavoidably obliged to leave the oration\nunfinished; but such of the eloquent clauses as were congealed and\nobstructed in the passage, melted down, and flowed in tender tears,\nmixed with sighs, the true and proper accents of grief, which were\nresounded and echoed back, by a numerous concourse of sympathetic\nauditors.\n\nN.B. Sitti is a title of honour among the Persians, and equivalent to\nlady with us.\n\n\nSECT. XXI.\n\nCXXXVII. That the relation should not appear tedious, we have omitted\nmany modern learned women in this catalogue, and have designedly\nforbore to mention the antient ones, as an account of them, may be\nfound in an infinite number of books; but we have said enough to\nevince, what seems of most importance in this argument, which is, that\nalmost all the women, who have dedicated themselves to study, have\nbecome eminent, and made considerable figures in the literary world;\nwhereas, there are scarce three in a hundred, among the men devoted to\nliterature, who have been remarkable for their advances in the science,\nor who could truly and properly, be stiled people of learning and\nability.\n\nCXXXVIII. But because this reflection may occasion the women to fancy\nthemselves persons of much superior capacity to the men, it is but just\nand necessary, by way of checking such presumption, to observe, that\nthis inequality of improvement by study, proceeds, from none of their\nsex being devoted to it, except those, in whom the people who have had\nthe care of their education have remarked peculiar talents for such\npursuits, or those, who have found in themselves a great propensity for\nliterature, and a particular disposition for attaining a knowledge of\nthe sciences; on the other hand, the men are not left to their choice\nin these matters; the parents, with a view of advancing their fortune,\nwithout attending to their capacities, or considering whether they are\ndull boys, or lads of genius, destine them to the career of letters;\nand the bulk of mankind being people of scanty abilities, it must\nunavoidably follow, that a few only can make a figure in the learned\nworld.\n\nCXXXIX. My opinion of the matter however is, that there is no\ninequality, in the capacities of the one and the other sex. But if\nthe women, to repress the vain contemners of their aptitude for the\narts and sciences, should be disposed to pass from the defensive to\nthe offensive, and by way of playing at disputation, to contend for a\nsuperiority over the men, they may make use of the arguments I have\nmentioned above, by which, from the same physical maxims, wherewith the\nmen pretend to bear down, and depreciate the capacities of the women,\nwe have shewn, that it may with more probability be inferred, the\ntalents and aptitude of the tender sex, excel those of the robust.\n\nCXL. To this, we shall add the authority of Aristotle, who in various\nplaces teaches, that in all the animal species, expressly including the\nhuman, the females are more penetrating and ingenious than the males;\nparticularly in his ninth book, _de Histor. Animal. cap. 1_, where he\nexpresses himself in these words: _In omnibus ver\u00f2, quorum procreatio\nest, f\u00e6minam, & marem simili fer\u00e8 modo Natura distinxit moribus, quibus\nmas differt \u00e0 f\u0153mina: quod pr\u00e6cipu\u00e8 tum in homine, tum etiam in iis,\nqu\u00e6 magnitudine pr\u00e6stent, & quadrupedes vivipar\u00e6 sint, percipitur: sunt\nenim f\u0153min\u00e6 moribus mollioribus, mitescunt celerius, & malum facilius\npatiuntur; discunt etiam, imitanturque ingeniosius._\n\nCXLI. This authority of Aristotle, which gives the advantage to the\nwomen, not only in docility, and softness of disposition, but allows\nalso, that they exceed the men in ingenuity; ought to have great\nweight with those, who are such admirers of Aristotle, as to call\nhim the penetrating genius of Nature, and the sum and perfection of\nhuman intelligence. But I must caution the women, not to put too much\nconfidence in Aristotle: because, although in the place we have just\ncited, he ennobles them with a superiority in point of perspicuity;\na little lower down, he is very liberal in his abuse of them, and\nsays, they are greatly addicted to mischief: _Verum malitiosiores,\nastutiores, insidiores f\u0153min\u00e6 sunt_; and although just afterwards, he\nconcedes them the preference to the men, in the noble attribute of\ntenderness or compassion, he instantly stigmatizes and marks them,\nwith the blemishes of envy, evil-speaking, inveteracy, and other such\nbad qualities: _Ita quod mulier, misericors magis, & ad lacrymas\npropensior, quam vir est: invida item magis, & querela & maledicentior,\n& mordacior._ Upon the whole, I am not clear, whether the ladies will\naccept the advantage of ingenuity which this philosopher has thought\nfit to confer on them, loaded with the charges he has been pleased to\nannex to it; we may however conclude from the premises, that when such\na man, who was so ill disposed towards them, admits as a fundamental,\nthat they are more ingenious than men, the evidence of their abilities\ndoes not rest on slight ground.\n\n\nSECT. XXII.\n\nCXLII. It occurs to me here, that it is necessary to say something\nof the aptitude of women for those arts, which are more elevated\nthan those they commonly exercise themselves in; such as painting,\nand sculpture. Very few women have dedicated themselves to these\napplications, but of those few, some have turned out excellent artists.\nWe have already said of the admirable Maria Surman, that she was\neminent in painting, sculpture, and engraving.\n\nCXLIII. In Italy, the three sisters, _Sophonisba_, _Lucia_, and _Europa\nAngosciola_, were celebrated painters; the first of which, Isabella,\nqueen of Spain, the wife of Philip the Second, took into her service,\nand she was in such high repute, that pope Pius IV. solicited a\nportrait of that queen, done by the hand of Sophonisba.\n\nCXLIV. _Irene de Spilimberg_ was so excellent in the same art, that\nher paintings were often taken for those of Titian, who was her\ncontemporary. Fate snatched her away at the age of twenty-six, which\nevent caused universal grief, and drew tears from the eyes of her\ncompetitor.\n\nCXLV. _Teresa de Po_ was held in great estimation at Naples as a\npainter; and precious traits of her pencil, may be seen in the cabinet\nof the most excellent marquis of Villena, who employed her when she was\nvice-queen of Naples.\n\nCXLVI. And even in statuary, Italy has produced famous women.\n_Propercia de Rossi_ was generally applauded for her beautiful designs,\nand well-wrought statues in marble; but the distinguished _Labinia\nFontana_, acquired greater applause than her, or indeed than any one\nelse. I have had information of but one female painter in France,\nthough she was of the first rate. This was _Isabela Sophia de Cheron_,\nknown by the name of _Madame le Hai_; who, over and above possessing\ntalents beyond the degree of mediocrity, for music and poetry, was a\nmost finished painter; and became so celebrated for her skill in this\nart, that the dauphin, who was son to Louis XIV. employed her to paint\nhim and all his children: and Casimir, king of Poland, who, after his\nvoluntary abdication of that crown, resided in Paris, caused her to\ndo the same for him, and many people of the first rank and quality\nin France followed their example; and even deigned to go and sit at\nthe house of Isabela, which the prince of Cond\u00e9 did several times.\nThe emperor Joseph, endeavoured to draw her to Vienna, by the offer\nof a large pension; but not being able to prevail on her, he sent\nher the drawings of his own likeness, and those of all the imperial\nfamily, that from them she might paint their portraits. Her designs and\ncolouring, were exquisite, and her facility of execution, wonderful,\nfor she would continue to bear a part in whatever conversation\noccurred, without giving the least relaxation to the operations of the\npencil; but her christian and generous actions, added to the piety of\nher spirit, made her more esteemed, than the traits of her hand; and\nshe died as she lived, in the year 1711.\n\nCXLVII. But where the equal degree of aptitude in the women for the\nnoble arts, compared to that of the men, is most conspicuous, is in the\ninstance of music, which is a faculty suited indifferently to either\nsex; as the females who apply themselves to it, in proportion to the\ntime they study, generally make as great progress as the men do; nor\ndoes a master of this art, find more difficulty in teaching girls than\nboys. I knew one girl of this profession, who, before she arrived at\nthe age of fifteen, was a composer. I have purposely, in the mention of\nso many illustrious women, avoided touching on the exquisite endowments\nof our most enlightened queen, Donna Isabel of Farnese, because it\nwould have been presumption in so gross a pen as mine, to undertake\nthe discussion of so sublime a subject; and because another, much\nbetter cut, and superiorly qualified for the task, has, between the\nescutcheons of her royal house, drawn some traces of the excellencies\nand splendor of her person.\n\n\nSECT. XXIII.\n\nCXLVIII. I am aware now, that against all I have said, it may be\nreplied to me to this effect: If women are equal to men, in their\naptitude for arts, sciences, political \u0153conomy, and government, why\nhas God established the mastery, and superiority in the men, by the\nsentence in the third chapter of Genesis, which says, _Sub viri\npotestate eris?_ Because it is probable, he gave the government to that\nsex, which he knew to be most capable of executing it.\n\nCXLIX. I answer first, that the specific meaning of the text is\nnot certainly known, on account of the variation in the versions.\nThe reading in the Septuagint is: _Ad virum conversio tua._ In the\nAquilean: _Ad virum societas tua._ In the Samaritan: _Ad virum\nappetitus, vel impetus tuus._ And the learned Benedict Perceyra says,\nthat by translating the Hebrew literally, the sentence will run thus:\n_Ad virum desiderium, vel concupiscentia tua._\n\nCL. I answer secondly, that it might be insisted, the political\nsubjection of the woman was absolutely a punishment for her sin, and\ntherefore, that in the state of innocence there was no such thing. The\ntext at least does not contradict such an opinion; for it rather seems,\nthat if it had been intended the woman should obey the man in the state\nof innocence, God would have intimated this subjection, at the time he\nformed her; and from these premises, it cannot so properly be inferred,\nthat God gave the man the preference, on account of his possessing an\nunderstanding superior to the woman\u2019s, as that it was done, because she\ngave the first occasion to sin.\n\nCLI. I say thirdly, that admitting, God from the beginning gave the\nrule over the woman to the man, it does not follow from thence, that\nhe endued him with an understanding superior to her\u2019s; but it rather\nseems likely, this was done for the sake of maintaining family order\nand decorum, for allowing them to be equal in point of talents,\nunless the government and direction was vested in one, all would be\nanarchy and confusion. Among the probable species of governments, the\nmoral philosophers, copying after Aristotle, have held or considered,\nthat which is called the Timocracian, to be the worst and most\nexceptionable: for by this, all the individuals of the republic have\nequal authority, and an equal voice; but in the case of a man and his\nwife, this mode of directing, with respect to \u0153conomical government,\nwould not only be imperfect, but impossible; for among a multitude\nof people, where there is a variety of opinions, the dispute may be\ndecided by a plurality of votes; which cannot be done between a man\nand his wife, for they are one, to one; and thus if they should happen\nto be of different sentiments, unless one of them had the superiority,\nthe point could never be settled; but it may be said, why, if their\ncapacities were equal, should God think fit to give the superiority\nto the men? Various reasons and motives may be assigned for this,\nsuch as his excelling the women in many other useful qualities, for\nexample, constancy and courage; which virtues, are necessary for making\nproper determinations, and for supporting them after they are made, by\nsubduing and bearing down all the obstacles, produced by vain and light\nfears; but we should do better, instead of reasoning in this way, to\nconfess, we for the most part are ignorant of the motives of divine\nresolutions.\n\n\nSECT. XXIV.\n\nCLII. I shall conclude this discourse, by endeavouring to set aside\nan exception that may be made to the undertaking; which is, that\npersuading mankind of the intellectual equality of both sexes, does\nnot seem to be productive of any utility to the public, but is rather\nlikely to occasion mischief, as it tends to foment in the women,\npresumption and pride.\n\nCLIII. I might reply to this scruple, by only saying, that, in whatever\nmatter that may present itself to our reflection, knowing the truth,\nand setting aside error, is an utility which is apparent, and of itself\nsufficient to justify our enquiry. The right understanding of things,\nis of itself estimable, without regard to any other end or object in\nthe creation. Truths have their intrinsic value: and the stock, or\nriches of the understanding, does not consist of any other money. Some\npieces are more valuable than others, but none are useless. Nor can\nthe truth we have proved, of itself, induce in the women vanity or\npresumption. If they, in the perfections of the soul, are truly equal\nto us, there can be no harm in their knowing, or being sensible of it.\nSt. Thomas, speaking of vain-glory, says, this sin is not incurred by a\nman\u2019s knowing, or being convinced of the perfection he possesses, and\nwhich is contained in him: _Quod autem aliquis bonum suum cognoscat,\n& approbet, non est peccatum (2 Qu\u00e6st. 132. Art. 1.)_ and in another\nplace, speaking of presumption, he says, this vice is always founded\nin some error or mistake of the understanding: _Pr\u00e6sumptio autem est\nmotus appetitivus, quia importat quondam spem inordinatam, habet\nautem se conformiter intellectui falso (Qu\u00e6st. 22. Art. 2.)_ The\nwomen then, by knowing what they are, if they don\u2019t estimate their\nqualifications above their real value, can never become vain-glorious,\nor presumptuous; but by attending to the thing, it will be found, the\ndeception this chapter is calculated to remove, will rather have a\ndifferent effect; and instead of adding presumption to the women, will\ntake it away from the men.\n\nCLIV. Though I go further, and maintain, the maxim we have established,\nis not only incapable of occasioning any moral evil, but that it\nmay be productive of much good. Consider, how many men the imagined\nsuperiority of talents, has emboldened to attempt criminal conquests\nover the other sex. In every encounter, the confidence, or diffidence\nof a person\u2019s own strength or power, goes a great way towards\ndetermining the event of the conflict. The man, presuming on the\nadvantage of his superior understanding, proposes boldly; the woman,\njudging herself inferior, listens with respect. Who can deny, that\nsuch circumstances promote a great tendency and disposition, to his\nbecoming a conqueror, and her falling a victim?\n\nCLV. Let the women then know, that, in point of understanding, they\nare not inferior to the men. They will then determine with confidence,\non repelling and refuting those sophisms, by which, under the colour\nand pretence of reason and arguments, the men attempt injustice and\ninjuries. If a woman can be persuaded, that a man compared to her,\nis an oracle, she will lend an attentive ear to the most indignant\nproposition, and will reverence as an infallible truth, the most\nnotorious falsehood. It is very well known, into what acts of turpitude\nmany women have been drawn, by the sect called Molinists, who, before\ntheir practices upon them, were esteemed very virtuous persons. This\nperversion, proceeded from no other cause, than their having considered\nthese Molinists, as men of superior lights and talents, and their\nhaving entertained an extreme distrust of their own understandings,\nwhen they represented to them clearly, the falsity of those venomous\ndogmas.\n\nCLVI. There is another consideration to be attended to, which is of\ngreat importance in this matter. It is certain, that every one submits\neasily, and without reluctance, to a person, who he is sensible has\nsome notable advantage over him. A man serves another man without\nregret, who is more noble than himself, but he does it with great\nrepugnance, if they happen to be equal in birth. The same thing is\nobservable, or may be applied to the case we are treating of. If a\nwoman is under the mistake, that a man is of a much more noble sex than\nherself, and that she, from a defect in her\u2019s, in comparison to him,\nis a poor contemptible animal of little value, she will think it no\nshame to submit to him; and by these pre-disposing circumstances, being\naided with the flattery of obsequiousness, she may be betrayed into\nesteeming that as an honour, which in reality is ignominious. To use\nthe words of St. Leon\u2019s exclamation to the men, let the women then know\ntheir dignity, and let them be sensible, that, in point of intellectual\ncapacity, our sex has no advantage over them, and that it will ever\nbe opprobrious and vile in them, to allow a man the dominion of their\nbodies, save when he is empowered to claim it, by the authority, and\nunder the sanction, of holy matrimony.\n\nCLVII. I have not yet told all the utility, which, in a moral sense,\nwill result to both the men and the women, by extricating them from the\nerror they lay under, with respect to the inequality of the sexes. I\nfirmly believe, this error is the cause, of many marriage-beds having\nbeen dishonoured and contaminated with adulteries. It may seem that I\nam entangling myself in a strange paradox, but this is not the case; I\nhaving done no more, than assert an established truth. Attend.\n\nCLVIII. A few months after the souls of two consorts, are united\ntogether by the matrimonial bond, a woman begins to lose that\nestimation, which she at first obtained, as a delectable object newly\nacquired, and recently possessed. The man, passes from tenderness to\nlukewarmness, which lukewarmness many times, comes to end in contempt,\nand positive disestimation. When the husband arrives at this vicious\nextreme, he, presuming on the advantages which he supposes to be\nannexed to the superiority of his sex, begins to triumph over, and\ninsult his wife; instructed by, and versed in those sentences, which\npronounce, that the most which a woman can attain, may be attained\nby a boy of fourteen years old, and that it is in vain, to seek for\neither sense or prudence in them, together with other ridiculous,\nand injurious reflections of the same kind; treating every thing he\nobserves in his wife, with the utmost contempt. In this situation, if\nthe poor woman attempts to remonstrate, she is accused of raving; all\nshe says, is impertinent, and foreign to the purpose; all she does\nis wrong. If she is handsome, the attraction of her beauty stands\nher in little stead, for its charm is dissolved, and the security of\npossessing it, has made it of no value. The husband only recollects,\nthat his wife is an imperfect animal; and if he neglects her, will\nupbraid the most spotless woman with being a vase of impurities.\n\nCLIX. When the unhappy woman is in this humiliating and dejected state,\na gallant casts fond, or, as we commonly say in Spain, good eyes\non her. To her, who at all times is condemned to see nothing but a\nfrowning brow, it is natural to suppose, a pleasant countenance appears\nvery delightsome: and such a leading circumstance conduces much to\nbring on, and facilitates a conversation between the parties; in which,\nthe woman hears nothing but what is flattering and pleasing to her.\nBefore this, she used to be accosted in nought but terms of reproach\nand contempt, and now, she is addressed in expressions of tenderness\nand adoration. She lately was treated as something beneath a woman; and\nnow, she is elevated to the sphere of a divinity. She was accustomed\nlately to be called nothing but fool; and now, she is told that she\npossesses a sublime understanding. In the language of her husband,\nshe was all imperfections; in that of her gallant, she is all charms\nand graces. The partner of her bed, lorded it over her like a tyrant\nmaster; the other, throws himself at her feet as an humble slave; and\nalthough the lover, if he had been her husband, would have acted just\nas the husband did: this reflection escapes the miserable wife, and she\nonly sees that sort of difference between them, which there is between\nan angel and a brute. She views in her husband, a heart full of thorns;\nand in her gallant, one crowned with flowers. There a chain of iron\npresents itself to her sight; here a golden one. There slavery; here\ndominion. There a dungeon; here a throne.\n\nCLX. In this situation, what can the most resolute woman do? How can\nshe resist two impulses, directed to the same point, one that impels,\nand the other which attracts her? If heaven does not stretch forth a\npowerful and a friendly hand to support her, her fall is inevitable.\nAnd if she does fall, who can deny that her own husband forced her over\nthe precipice? If he had not treated her with indignity and abusive\nrailing, the flattery of the lover would have been of no avail. It was\nhis ill-treatment which occasioned her downfall. All this mischief,\nmost frequently proceeds from the mean opinion, which married men are\napt to entertain of the other sex. Let them renounce these erroneous\nmaxims, and the consequence will be, that their wives will become more\nfaithful and constant. Let them cherish and esteem them, for God has\ncommanded they should love them; and I can\u2019t understand, how love and\ncontempt, with respect to the same object, can be entertained, and\naccommodate themselves together in one and the same heart.\n\n\n\n\n    ON\n    CHURCH MUSIC.\n\n\nSECT. I.\n\nI. In ancient times, if we believe Plutarch, music was used only in\ntemples, and that afterwards it passed to theatres. Formerly, it\nserved as an ornament to divine worship; afterwards, it was used to\nstimulate vice. Heretofore, the melody of sacred hymns only were heard;\nafterwards, we began to listen to profane songs. Music originally,\nwas used as an obsequies to the Deities, it was afterwards applied to\ninflame the passions. In old times, it was dedicated to Apollo, but it\nseems as if afterwards, Apollo had divided the protection of this art\nwith Venus; and as if to poison the soul, and paint on the theatres\nthe charms of vice, the finest colourings of rhetoric, joined to the\nharmony of poetic numbers, were not sufficient, they, to render these\ncharms more attracting, and make the venom more active, confectioned\nand compounded rhetoric, poetry, and music together.\n\nII. This diversity of uses to which music was appropriated, induced\na difference in the composition of it: and as it was necessary in\nthe temple, and in the theatre, to excite distinct affections, they\ncontrived distinct modes of melody, to correspond, as their echoes,\nwith the different affections of the soul. The Dorian mode, as grave,\nmajestic, and devout, was reserved for the temple; and in the theatres,\nthey adopted different modes, suited to the diversity of the matters.\nIn the amorous representations, they used the Lydian mode, which was\nsoft and tender; and when they had a mind to give the movement a\nstronger effect and expression, they applied the mixed Lydian, which\nwas more pathetic and striking than the Lydian by itself. In warlike\nrepresentations, they used the Phrygian mode, which is terrible and\nfurious; and in affairs of mirth and jollity, or favouring of the\nBacchanalian, they adopted the \u00c6olian, which was sprightly and comic.\nThe Subphrygian mode, was appropriated to calm the transports, raised\nby the Phrygian; and thus, to produce other effects, they had other\nmodes of melody.\n\nIII. Whether these modes of the antients, corresponded with the\ndifferent tones used by the moderns, is not clearly ascertained. Some\nauthors affirm they do, others doubt it. I myself, am inclined to\nthink they do not, because the diversity of our tones, have not that\ninfluence to vary the passions, which was experienced in the different\nmodes of the antients.\n\n\nSECT. II.\n\nIV. Thus music, in those remote ages, was divided between the temple\nand the theatre, and was applied promiscuously, to worship at the\naltar, and to the corruption of manners. But although this was a\nlamentable falling-off, it was not the greatest abuse which has been\npractised on this noble art, the accomplishment of its perversion\nbeing reserved for our times. When the alteration in the application\nof music, which was employed heretofore only in divine worship, took\nplace, the Greeks made a very judicious division and distribution of\nit; reserving to the temple, that which was proper for the temple; and\ngiving to the theatre, that which was suitable to the theatre; but\nwhat has been done in these latter times? Not content with keeping\ntheatrical music for the use of the theatre, they have translated it to\nthe church.\n\nV. The church chants of these times, with respect to their form and\nmanner, sound like the songs of a jovial company sitting round a\ntable. They are all composed of minuets, recitatives, light airs, and\nallegros; at the end of which, they substitute something which is\ncalled grave; but this is done very sparingly, lest it should seem\ntiresome and disgusting. What can this mean? Should not all the music\nin a church be grave? Ought not the whole composition to be calculated\nto impress gravity, devotion, and decency? The instrumental music is\nthe same; but what effect can these Canary-birds airs, so predominant\nin the taste of the moderns, produce in the soul? This music, so\nreplete with jigs, that you can scarce find a piece without one, can\nraise no other emotions in the imagination, than those of frolic and\nlevity. He who hears on the organ, the same minuet which he heard at\nthe ball, what effect will it have on him? No other, than reminding him\nof the lady with whom he danced the preceding night. Thus the music,\nwhich ought to translate the spirit of him who listens to it, from the\nterrestrial to the celestial temple, conveys it from the church to the\nbanquet; and the ideas raised in the imagination of the person who\nhears this, if either from constitution, or vicious habits, he is ill\ndisposed, will not forsake him at the church door.\n\nVI. O good God! is this the sort of music, which expressed from the\nbreast of the great Austin, while he was still wavering between God and\nthe world, sighs of compunction, and tears of piety? _Oh how I wept_,\nsaid the saint, addressing himself to God in his confessions, _moved\nand excited, by the salutary hymns and canticles of thy church! Those\nwords and sounds, made a lively impression on my ears, and through\nthem, thy truths penetrated my mind. My heart burned with affection,\nand my eyes melted in tears._ This was the effect of the church music\nof those times; which, like the lyre of David, expelled the evil\nspirit, that had not quite forsaken the possession of St. Austin, and\ninvoked the good one; the music of these times expels the good one,\nif such resides, and invites the evil one. The ecclesiastical chant\nof those days, was like the sound of the trumpets of Joshua, which\nthrew down the walls of Jericho, that is, the passions which fortify\nthe strong town of Vice. The chant of the present times, resembles the\nsongs of the Syrens, which lead navigators on rocks and shoals.\n\n\nSECT. III.\n\nVII. How much better was the church with the plain chant, the only one\nknown in it for many ages, and which, for the most part, was composed\nby the monks of St. Benedict, who were the greatest masters in the\nworld at that time, among whom, should be first reckoned Gregory the\nGreat, and the celebrated Guido Aretinus; after them came John Murs,\na doctor of the Sorbonne, who invented the notes, which mark the\nvarious duration of the points; and truly, the simplicity of that\nchant, was not deficient in melodies, capable of moving the passions,\nand sweetly suspending the hearers. The compositions of Guido Aretinus\nwere reckoned so pathetic, that cardinal Baronius tells us, that, in\nthe year 1022, pope Gregory VIII. sent for him from his convent of\nArezzo, and would not let him depart his presence, till he had taught\nhim to sing a short verse of his Antiphonario. This was the person who\ninvented the modern system of music, or artificial progression, which\nis now used, and called the scale of Guido Aretinus. He also contrived\nthe harmonious combination of voices, in different tones; which art,\nwas in all probability known to the antients, but all traces of it were\nthen lost.\n\nVIII. The plain chant, executed with proper pauses, has a peculiar\nexcellence for the use of churches, which is, that being incapable\nof exciting such affections as are raised by theatrical music, it\nnecessarily follows, that it must be the best adapted to induce such\nas are proper for the church. Who, by the sonorous majesty of the\nhymn _Vexilla Regis_, by the festive gravity of the _Pange Lingua_,\nby the mournful tenderness of the _Invitatorio de Difuntos_, would\nnot feel himself excited to veneration, devotion, and contrition? We\nhear these chants every day, notwithstanding which, they always seem\npleasing; when at the same time, after half a dozen repetitions, modern\ncompositions grow tiresome and unsavoury to us.\n\nIX. I would not however, on this account, quarrel with the figured,\nor, as it is commonly called, the organ chant; as I am sensible, it\nhas great advantages over the plain; because it preserves and marks\nthe accents on the words, which in the plain chant is impossible; and\nbecause the different duration of the points, produce to the ear that\nagreeable effect, which is caused to the sight, by a well-proportioned\ninequality of colours. It is only the abuse that has been introduced in\nthe organ chant, which makes me prefer the plain one; and am in this\nrespect, like a man who anxiously covets plain food, and avoids the\nmore delicate, when he knows it is corrupted.\n\n\nSECT. IV.\n\nX. What good-disposed ears can, in sacred chants, endure those enormous\nbreaks, and lascivious inflections, which offend against the rules of\ndecency, and are contrary to those of music? I speak of those flights\nand wanderings, which seem as if they had been studied, and which\nthe voice takes by straying from the subject of the melody; of those\nlanguishing falls from one point to another, that run not only through\nthe semi-tone, but also through all the intermediate comas, and are\ntransitions, which are not contained in art, nor does Nature allow them.\n\nXI. Experience shews, that the changes which the voice makes in the\nchant, by running through small intervals (such passages containing\nin themselves a degree of effeminate softness, if not a lascivious\ntendency), are apt to produce in the minds of hearers, an effect,\ncorrespondent to such sort of ideas, and impress on the fancy certain\nconfused images, which represent nothing good. On this account, many\nof the antients, and particularly the Laced\u00e6monians, reprobated as\npernicious to youth, the sort of music called Chromatic, which by the\nintroduction of B-flatts, and sostenutos, divides the octave into\nsmaller intervals than the natural ones. Hear what Cicero says of this:\n_Chromaticum creditur repudiatum pridem fuisse genus, quod adolescentum\nremolesccrent eo genere animi; Laced\u00e6mones improbasse ferentur. (Lib.\n1. Tuscul. Qu\u00e6st.)_ It may be supposed, they would have found more\nreason for prohibiting the Enharmonic also; which, by the addition of\nmore flats and sostenutos, and by being joined to the two other sorts,\nthe Diatonic and Chromatic, which must necessarily precede it, and\nby making the interval less still, divides the octave into a greater\nnumber of points: in consequence of which combination (the voice, by\nsometimes deviating from the natural point, through spaces which are\nyet shorter, that is to say, the minor semi-tones) there results a\nmusic, more soft and effeminate than the Chromatic.\n\nXII. Is it not much to be lamented, that the Christians don\u2019t use the\nsame precaution the antients did, to prevent music from perverting the\nmanners of youth? But we are so far from doing this, that already no\nmusic is allowed to be good, in which there is not introduced at every\nturn, both in the human voice, and in the instruments, points, which\nthey call foreign, and which pass through all parts of the diapason,\nfrom the natural point to the accidental one; and this is the mode.\nThere is no doubt but these transitions, managed with moderation,\nart and genius, produce an admirable effect; because they mark the\nexpression of the words with more vivacity and spirit, than the pure\ndiatonic progressions; and there results from so contriving things,\na more delicate and expressive music. But the composers who are\ncapable of doing this, are very few, and those few are the occasion\nof an infinite number of others losing and exposing themselves; who,\nby endeavouring to imitate them, for want of talents and address to\nmanage the business, fail in the attempt, and form with their foreign\nintroductions, a ridiculous music, which sometimes is insipid, and at\nothers harsh; and when they mistake the least, there results from their\nlabours, an unmeaning softness, and lascivious delicacy, which has no\ngood effect on the mind, because there is no expression in it, capable\nof exciting any noble emotion. If, notwithstanding all that is objected\nto it, composers are desirous such music should go down, because it is\nthe fashion, let them apply it to the use of the theatres and concert\nrooms; but don\u2019t let them introduce it into the churches, as fashions\nwere never contrived or calculated for them; and if the divine offices\ndo not admit of change of modes, either in vestments or rites, why\nshould they be admitted in musical compositions?\n\nXIII. The case is, that this change of modes, contains at the bottom\na certain venom, which Cicero gives an admirable description of;\nfor he remarks, that in Greece, with the same pace manners declined\ntowards corruption, music declined from its antient majesty, towards\nan affected softness; either because an effeminate music corrupted\nthe integrity of men\u2019s minds, or because a vitiated and depraved music\ndebauches their taste, and inclines them to relish those bastard\nmelodies, which, as symbols of, are best suited to their perverted\nmanners: _Civitatumque hoc multarum in Gr\u00e6cia interfuit, antiquum\nvocum servare modum: quarum mores lapsi, ad mollitiem pariter sunt\nimmutati in cantibus; aut hac dulcedine, corruptelaque depraviti, ut\nquidam putant: aut cum severitas morum ob olia vitia cecidisset, tum\nfuit in auribus, animisque mutatis etiam huic mutationi locus._ (Lib.\n2. de Legibus.) So that the taste for this effeminate music, is the\neffect or cause of some relaxation in the mind. I would not however be\nunderstood to say, that all those who have a taste for such music, are\ntainted with this defect. Many of strict and incorruptible virtue, whom\nno vitiated music can warp, seem to approve it; but they in general do\nthis, because they hear it is the fashion: and even many, though in\nreality they do not relish it, are led to say they do, only because\nthey would not be looked upon as people wedded to, and prejudiced in\nfavour of antiquated customs, and as persons, who are not possessed of\nfaculties, capable of relishing the fine taste of the moderns.\n\n\nSECT. V.\n\nXIV. I am ready however to confess, that there have lately been\npublished some excellent compositions, both with respect to the\npleasing elegance of their taste, and the subtilty of the art displayed\nin them; but by way of contrast to these, which are very rare, an\ninnumerable quantity of others have been produced, that to the ears are\ninsufferable. This arises, partly from people undertaking to compose,\nwho are not capable of doing it; and partly from ordinary composers\npretending to take licences, which should only be attempted by great\nmasters.\n\nXV. It fares with music at this time, as it fares with surgery. In the\nsame manner, that every blood letter of middling ability, takes upon\nhim the name and occupation of a surgeon, every organist and violin\nplayer, of reasonable dexterity, sets himself up for a composer. This\nthey can do, with little difficulty or labour, for they have only to\nget by heart, the general rules of consonance and dissonance; and then,\nfrom the numberless manuscripts, or printed violin sonatas with which\nthe world abounds, take the first light air which occurs, or seems\npleasing to them, and apply the tone of that air to the words; and\nas the voice proceeds, they, by those general rules, go on covering\nit with a dry accompanyment, which contains neither imitation nor\nexcellence; and between the pauses of the voice, they may introduce\na burst of violins for ten or a dozen bars, more or less, provided\nthat is the stile of the sonata from whence they made the theft. If\nthey would content themselves with doing no more than this, we might\nbe brought to endure their productions: but the worst of the evil\nis, that from an affectation of being thought superior to trivial\ncomposition, they introduce false concords, without preparing, or being\nable to resolve them, and by that means, make terrible blemishes,\nand commit faults, that are inexcusable; and because also, they see\nsome illustrious composers, dispense with the common rules, and take\nliberties, such as writing two-fifths, or two octaves immediately\nfollowing each other, which they do only for the sake of introducing\na good passage, or to attain some excellence of harmony, and which,\nwithout taking such a liberty, they could not have effected: and\nalthough these never take such a latitude, but under particular\ncircumstances, and subject to certain limitations; the others have the\naudacity to attempt it, out of time, and when it can answer no purpose\nwhatever; by which means, they are thrown to the ground with such\nviolence, that the stroke of their fall is shocking to the ear.\n\nXVI. Middling composers, although, by endeavouring to tread in the\nsteps of the excellent ones, they do not fall into such gross errors,\ngenerally form a music, which at some times is lifeless, and at others\nturgid. This is occasioned by their introducing accidentals, and\nchanging the keys in the same piece; which method, if practised by\ngreat masters, who used it seasonably and opportunely, not only gives a\ngreater sweetness to the music, but communicates to the words, a more\nstriking impression, than they of themselves, without this assistance,\ncould convey or produce. Some strangers had a happy talent at doing\nthis; but no one understood it better, than our Don Antonio de Literes,\na composer of the first rate, and who is perhaps the only one, who\nknows how to unite all the majesty and sweetness of the antient music,\nwith the bustle and hurry of the modern; but in the management of\nthe accidental points, he has a singular address, for almost every\ntime he introduces them, they give an energy to the music, which is\ncorrespondent to, and strengthens the signification of the words they\nfall on. To do this, requires both genius and science, but much more\ngenius than science. From this deficiency in point of genius, we find\nmasters in Spain, of great knowledge and comprehension, who were\nnot so happy as to succeed in this way; so that, although in their\ncompositions we admire the subtilty of their art, their works do not\nobtain the approbation of our ears.\n\nXVII. Those who are unassisted by genius, and who, on the other hand,\ndo not possess more than a moderate knowledge of music, make false\nconcordances, introduce accidentals, and change the keys, because doing\nso is the fashion; and because they are fond of having it thought, they\nknow how to manufacture these sort of airs; although, in reality, they\nseldom produce any air at all; and notwithstanding their compositions\nare conformable to the common rules, still they are unsavoury, and\ndisagreeable; and when they are performed in the church, instead of\nproducing that sweet calm, and inward composure which are requisite to\ndevotion, they excite perturbations in the hearts of the hearers.\n\nXVIII. Between the first and second of these, there comes in another\nsort of composers, who, though in point of abilities, are above\nmediocrity, they for sacred compositions are the worst of all. These\nare they, who sport with, and run the changes, upon all the delicacies\nmusic is capable of; but dispose them in such a manner, that the melody\nproduced, has the sound of pantomime airs. All the irregularities\nthey practise, either in false concordances, or accidentals, are\nintroduced as graces, but graces very different from those recommended\nby St. Paul in his Epistle to the Colossians: _Ingratia cantantes in\ncordibus vestris Deo_: instead of such; they are graces of banter, and\nharmonies of indecency; and are a sort of passages, the best of which,\nthe musicians themselves call childish and apish. Are such proper for\nthe church? Let them, in God\u2019s name, be sent to the courts of the\ncomedies, and the halls of the dance. But is it not an impious abuse,\nto introduce into the house of God, things which are trifling, apish\nand indecent? And is not the blending them with divine worship, an\nabominable error?\n\nXIX. Is not this attempting to banish from music, all enlivening\nchearfulness, except that which savours of the puerile and buffoon?\nMusic may be exceedingly chearful, and at the same time, impregnated\nwith a majestic gravity, capable of exciting in the hearers, affections\nof respect and devotion: or, to speak more properly, the most chearful\nand delectable music of all, is that which induces a sweet tranquillity\nin the soul; collecting it within itself, and let us say, elevating it\nwith a kind of extatic rapture, superior to the body it is attached to;\nthat the mind may take a flight, towards the mansions of bliss, and\ncontemplate divine things in a nearer point of view. This is the sort\nof chearful music, which St. Austin approved as useful in churches,\nand which he treated St. Athanasius with excessive severity for having\nobjected to; because its proper effect, is elevating those hearts to\nnoble affections, which are oppressed and weighed down with earthly\ninclinations: _Ut per h\u00e6c oblectamenta aurium infirmior animus in\naffectum pietatis assurgat._ (Lib. 10. Confess. cap. 32.)\n\nXX. It is true, that the masters capable of forming this noble kind\nof melody, are very few; but those who can\u2019t attain this degree of\nperfection, should content themselves with doing something less; taking\ncare however, that their compositions should tend to excite such\ndispositions, as are suitable to divine offices; or at least being\ncareful, that they should not conduce to promote inclinations of an\nopposite nature; and at all events, although it should be at the hazard\nof disobliging the multitude, to shun those skittish sort of airs,\nwhich have a certain occult relation to forbidden affections; but of\nthe two evils into which church music is in danger of falling, that of\nits being offensive to the ears, is a less mischief, than that of its\nbeing an incentive to vice.\n\nXXI. The power of music to stir the passions, and raise in the minds\nof men, dispositions to virtue or vice, is very well known. It is\nrelated of Pythagoras, that, having by music adapted to produce such an\neffect, inflamed the heart of a certain youth to a dishonourable amour,\nhe afterwards, by changing the tone, reduced him to the dominion of\ncontinence. It is also related of Timotheus, a musician of Alexander\nthe Great, that he could irritate the martial fury of that prince to\nsuch a degree, that he would seize on his arms, and put himself in\nan attitude, as if his enemies were in front, and he on the point of\ncharging them. This effect, however, was the less surprising, because\nthe natural disposition of the prince, conspired to assist the skill\nof the artist. Some add, that after having enraged, he calmed him; and\ncaused Alexander, who never turned his back on any danger, to become a\nfugitive from his own rage. But what is told of the power of another\nmusician, which was exercised on Henry II. King of Denmark, called the\nGood, is more extraordinary than all this; for it is said, that by a\nmovement and touch, calculated to excite choler, he inflamed the rage\nof that prince to such a degree, that he fell upon, and put to death,\nthree or four of his domestics, and would have carried the havoc and\ndevastation still further, if he had not been restrained by violence.\nThis was the more wonderful, because the king\u2019s natural disposition,\nwas gentle and peaceable.\n\nXXII. I don\u2019t imagine the musicians of these times can perform such\nmiracles, neither perhaps did the antient ones; for these histories\nare not extracted from Holy Writ. It is however certain, that music,\naccording as the melody is varied, induces in the mind a variety of\ndispositions, some good, others bad. With one we find ourselves moved\nto sorrow, with another to mirth; with one to clemency, with another to\nblood; with one to fortitude, with another to pusillanimity; and so on\nwith respect to other inclinations.\n\nXXIII. There is no doubt of the justness of this remark; neither is\nthere any, that a master, who composes for the church, should dispose\nthe music in such a way, and write it in such a stile, as is best\ncalculated to promote the spiritual welfare of souls; and to sustain\nthe majesty, decorum, and solemnity of divine worship. St. Thomas,\ntouching upon this point, says, the chant was a salutary institution\nin the church, because it excited sickly souls, that is, such as were\nweak in spirit, to devotion. But, alas! what would the saint say, if\nhe was to hear in the church some of the airs of these times, which,\nso far from fortifying the sick, enfeeble the healthy; which, instead\nof promoting devotion in the breast, banish it from the soul; and\ninstead of elevating the mind to pious reflections, bring to the memory\nforbidden things? I repeat it again, that it is an obligation on\nmusicians, and a very serious one, to correct this abuse.\n\nXXIV. Truly, when I reflect on the serious turn of mind for which\nSpaniards heretofore were remarkable, I can\u2019t help being struck\nwith amazement, to find at present, that we can relish no other but\npuppet-shew music. This looks as if the celebrated Spanish gravity, was\nreduced to nothing more, than stalking stiff and erect up and down the\nstreet. The Italians, by means of the false flattering insinuation,\nthat music has been improved of late days, have made us the slaves of\ntheir taste. I, for my own part, believe what they call improvement, to\nbe ruin and destruction, or something very near it. All intellectual\narts, of whose excellencies, the understanding and the taste, cloathed\nwith an equal degree of authority are judges, have their points, or\nzenith of perfection, which when they are once arrived at, he who\nattempts to advance them, commonly occasions their decline, and puts\nthem in a train, which leads to their destruction.\n\nXXV. It will perhaps, with respect to the science of music, happen\nto Italy very soon, if it has not happened there already, just as\nit happened to it with regard to the Latin language, oratory, and\npoetry. These faculties, in the age of Augustus, arrived to that state\nof propriety, beauty, elegance, and natural energy, in which their\ntrue perfection consisted. Those who succeeded to that age, pretended,\nby the violent introduction of improper ornaments, to refine them;\nby doing which, they precipitated them from Nature to affectation,\nand from thence they afterwards fell into barbarism. The poets who\nsucceeded Virgil, and the orators who succeeded Cicero, were thoroughly\npersuaded in themselves, that they had given new graces, and new\nexcellencies to the two arts; but the keen Petronius Arbiter, after\nupbraiding them with their ridiculous and pompous affectation, told\nthem very plainly, what in reality they had done: _Vos primi omnium\neloquentiam perdidistis._\n\n\nSECT. VII.\n\nXXVI. To see whether the music of these times suffers the same\nshipwreck, which the before-named sciences underwent; let us examine,\nin what the music, which is now practised, differs from that of the\nantecedent age. The first and most remarkable distinction which occurs,\nis the diminution of the figures. The shortest points which were\nformerly known, were demi-semi quavers; and with them, it was imagined,\nthey had given to the execution of the chant, and the instruments, as\ngreat a degree of velocity, as without doing violence to both, they\nwere capable of attaining. This did not seem sufficient, and a little\nwhile afterwards, they invented dividing the demi-semi quavers into\nthirds, by which means, the movement became one part in three quicker\nthan it was before. The extravagance of composers did not stop here,\nfor they doubled the demi-semi quavers, and made a movement, that, for\nits rapidity, seems to have gone beyond the reach of imagination, which\ncan scarce conceive, how it is possible, in the compass of a bar, to\narticulate or express sixty-four points. I don\u2019t know whether before\nthis age, any double demi-semi quavers ever appeared figured in any\ncomposition; except it was in the song of the Risuenor, which father\nKircher, in the middle of the last century, caused to be printed, in\nthe first book of his _Musurgia Universalis_; and I am even inclined\nto think, that solfa savours of the hyperbolic; for it is not easy to\npersuade me, that that bird, with all his agility and flexibility of\nthroat, could articulate sixty-four points, in the space of raising and\nfalling the hand, within the compass of regular time.\n\nXXVII. I now say, this diminution of figures, instead of perfectioning\nmusic, entirely spoils and ruins it; for two reasons: the first is,\nthat it will be very difficult to find a person, who either with\nthe voice, or an instrument, is capable of executing points of such\nvelocity. The before-cited father Kircher, says, that having made some\ncompositions which were out of the common track, and of difficult\nexecution, (though I believe they were not so difficult as those which\nare now the fashion) he could not find in all Rome, a singer capable\nof performing them. How then can you expect to find in every province,\nand in every cathedral, instrumental performers and singers, who, in\nexact time, and with the due intonation, are capable of executing these\nexceeding minute figures; and to this difficulty, we may likewise add,\nthat of the many extravagant flights and jumps, which at present are\nthe fashion also. To articulate such a solfa, requires a throat of\nprodigious volubility; and to express such music on an instrument,\ndemands admirable agility, and dexterity of hand; and, therefore, such\ncompositions are only fit for one or two very singular executionists,\nwhich may be found in this or that particular court; but they should\nnot be printed for the use of the world at large; for the same singer,\nwho, with a natural and easy solfa, would give pleasure to the hearers,\nwould, by attempting these difficult passages, distract them; and from\nthe same hand, by which a sonata, of easy execution, would sound\ndelightsome and sweet, one of arduous difficulty would sound like the\ntalking of gibberish.\n\nXXIV. The second reason why this diminution of figures destroys music,\nis because it does not give space for the ear to perceive melody. As\nthe delight the eye receives by a well-disposed variety of colours,\ncould not be attained, if each was to pass the sight with so quick a\nmotion, that it could scarce make a distinct impression on the organ,\nand it is the same with all sorts of visible objects; just so, if the\npoints into which music is divided are of so short a duration, as to\nbe incapable of acting distinctly on the ear, this organ, would not\nperceive harmony but confusion. Further, this second inconvenience,\nlike the rest, is increased by the abuse, which, in their practice\nis committed by instrumental performers; who, although they are but\nslow or indifferent hands, generally make ostentation of playing with\ngreat velocity; and commonly strive to execute the sonata, with more\nrapidity than the composer intended, or than the character of the\nmusic requires. From whence it follows, that by a defect in the most\nessential part of the execution, which is precision and exactness,\nthe music loses its true and proper genius; and the by-standers hear\nnothing but a confused clatter. Let every one then pursue the mode,\nwhich is suitable to his talents and abilities; for if he, who is\nheavy and slow of foot, endeavours to run as fast as him who is light\nand nimble, his whole career will be nothing but stumbles: and if he,\nwho can only run, attempts to fly, he will soon fall, and dash himself\nto pieces.\n\nXXIX. The second distinction between antient and modern music, consists\nin the frequency and excess of transitions in this last, from the\ndiatonic to the chromatic and enharmonic stile; and in often changing\nthe tones, by the introduction of sostenutos and B flats. This, as I\nobserved before, has a good effect, if it is done with moderation and\nopportunely. But the Italians of this day, run to such an extravagant\nexcess with these transitions, that they force harmony off its hinges.\nWhoever has any difficulty of believing this, let him, free from\nprejudice or partiality, consult his own ears, whenever he hears any of\nthose sonatas or chants performed which abound much in accidentals.\n\nXXX. The third distinction consists in the liberty which composers at\npresent take, of mixing in their music, all sorts of modulations that\noccur to them; without confining themselves, either to imitation or\ntheme. The pleasure perceived by this music, which I will take the\nliberty of calling loose and dishevelled, is vastly inferior to the\nenjoyment afforded by that beautiful regularity and contrivance, with\nwhich the masters of the last age, introduced a pleasing variety into\na passage; and especially, when the music was calculated for four\nvoices. Strangers are sensible of the high value of such compositions;\nnor are excellent ones of this species wanting in other countries; but\ncomposers in general, avoid writing in this stile, because the doing it\nwell, demands more labour and study, than they are commonly disposed\nto take; so that if now and then they introduce, and begin pursuing\na passage, they quickly leave it, and give a loose to their fancy,\nletting it run where it lifts. Strangers, who come to Spain, are for\nthe most part mere executionists, and therefore not capable of forming\nthis kind of music; because it requires more scientific knowledge, than\nthey are generally masters of; and therefore, to conceal that they are\ndeficient in point of ability, they endeavour to persuade people, the\nmethod of pursuing passages is out of fashion.\n\n\nSECT. VIII.\n\nXXXI. This is the species of music, with which the Italians, by the\nhand of their beloved master Duron, have regaled us; for he was the\nman, who first introduced foreign modes into the music of Spain. It is\ntrue, that since his time, these modes have been so refined, that if\nDuron could now rise from his grave, he would not know them; but still,\nthe blame of all these novelties is imputable to him, for he was the\nfirst who opened the door for their introduction. Virgil\u2019s description\nof the winds, may be applied to the airs of the Italian music.\n\n    _Qua data porta ruunt, & terras turbine perflant._\n\nWith regard to the science of music, we see verified in the Spaniards,\nwith respect to the Italians, that easy condescension in admitting\nnovelties, which Pliny lamented in the Italians themselves, with\nrespect to the Greeks: _Mutatur quotidie ars interpolis, & ingeniorum\nGr\u00e6ci\u00e6 flatu impellimur._\n\nXXXII. With all this, we are not without able composers in Spain, who\nhave not totally fallen in with the fashion, or who jointly, with\nconforming to it, and judiciously combining the antient and modern\ntogether, have wrote some valuable and delectable pieces of grammatical\nmusic; in which, the sweetness and majesty of the old compositions\nhas been preserved. Speaking of this, brings afresh to my memory, the\nsavoury and luxuriant Literes; and I can\u2019t help mentioning him a second\ntime, for he is a composer truly original. A character of elevated\nsweetness, which is proper and natural to him, is resplendent in all\nhis works, and which never forsakes him, even when he sets words to\nmusic, on amorous or profane subjects: so that even in songs of love,\nor comic gallantry, he preserves a kind of sublimity, which can only\ntouch, or be felt by the superior part of the soul; this he manages\nwith such address, that he awakes tenderness, and at the same time\nlulls lust to sleep. I would have this composer always employed in\nwriting for sacred subjects: because the genius of his compositions,\nis better calculated to inspire celestial affections, than to foment\nearthly amours. If some of his music, is less impregnated with that\ntumultuous air and clatter, for which the works of many other authors\nare admired: it, for that very reason, is, in my opinion, better\ncalculated for the use of churches; because music in them, demands a\nserious gravity, which should sweetly calm the mind; and not a puerile\nflightiness, which would excite to dance with castanets. Compositions\nof the last kind are very easy, and are therefore made by many; those\nof the first sort are difficult, and therefore but few attempt them.\n\n\nSECT. IX.\n\nXXXIII. What we have hitherto said of the irregularity and disorders\nof church music, does not extend to chants in the vulgar tongue\nonly, but to psalms, masses, lamentations, and other parts of divine\nservice, because the modes in fashion, have been introduced into them\nall. I have, in printed lamentations, seen the changes of the airs\ncharacterised in the same terms, which are used to describe them in\ncomic music. Here you read _grave_, there _ayroso_, and in another\nplace _andante_. What, can\u2019t we admit of all the music being grave,\neven in a lamentation? And is it necessary to introduce light comedy\nairs into the representation of the most afflicting mysteries? If grief\ncould find a place in heaven, Jeremiah would lament afresh, at seeing\nsuch music applied to his songs of mourning. Is it impossible, that in\nthose complainings, where every letter is a sigh, corresponding with,\nand expressive of the various sensations, arising from the subjects\nof his lamentation; either the ruin of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans,\nthe destruction of the world for sin, the affliction of the church\nmilitant for the persecution of its martyrs; and, to sum up the whole,\nthe anguish and sufferings of our Redeemer, for the salvation of\nmankind. I say, can the feelings produced by such sad and distressing\ncalamities, be expressed with airy tunes and recitatives? In the\nmournful songs of Jeremiah, which some expositors call the Alphabet of\nthe Penitents, should we hear the sound of festive airs and serenades?\nWith how much more reason than him, ought we to exclaim here in the\nlanguage of Seneca, when he censured Ovid, for having introduced\ninto the description of so tragical an event as that of Deucalion\u2019s\nflood, a verse which savoured of gallantry: _Non est res satis sobria\nlascivire devorato orbe terrarum._ The Cythara of Nero, while Rome was\nburning, had not so harsh a sound, as the harmony of dances in the\nrepresentation of such affecting mysteries.\n\nXXXIV. And besides offending in this particular against the rules of\nreason, they sin also against the laws of music, which prescribe, that\nthe tone of the chant, should be suited to the meaning of the words;\nand therefore, when the language is solemn and expressive of sorrow,\nthe tone of the music should be grave and affecting.\n\nXXXV. It is true, that against this rule, which is one of the most\ncardinal, musicians very frequently sin in all sorts of compositions,\nsome from being deficient, and others by exceeding. Those fall into\nthe error of deficiency, who form music without any attention to the\nspirit or meaning of the words to which they apply it; but hardly any\nfall into those gross mistakes, except such as scarce deserve the name\nof composers, and who are capable of doing nothing more, than racking\nor weaving together, shreds and strips, of the compositions of other\nmusicians.\n\nXXXVI. Those err by exceeding or doing too much, who regulate their\nmusic with a puerile nicety, to correspond with the distinct or\nseparate signification of each word, taken or standing by itself,\nwithout having regard to the meaning of the whole context. An example\nproduced by father Kircher to illustrate this abuse, will explain what\nI mean. He instanced the manner, in which a composer had set to music\nthe following verse: _Mors festinat luctuosa_; to the words _mors_ and\n_luctuosa_, he applied a mournful solfa; but to the word _festinat_,\nwhich stood in the middle between them, as it seemed to him, to signify\nvivacity or quickness, he appropriated a career of allegros, that would\nhave caused the most sluggish nag who heard them, to bound about and\ngive cabriols.\n\nXXXVII. I saw something as bad, or indeed even worse than this, in\none of the lamentations I cited before; where to the music adapted\nto express the following sentence: _Deposita est vehementer non\nhabens consolatorem_, was marked ayroso. How ill-suited is an airy\nmovement, to express the lamentable fall of Jerusalem, and also that\nof all mankind bowed down and crippled with the weight of their sins;\nwhich misfortune, was aggravated with the additional and distressing\ncircumstance, of their being destitute of comfort under the calamity?\nBut the blame of all this, was imputable to the adverb _vehementer_,\nbecause to express vehemence, appeared to the composer to require a\nlively movement; and thus, when he came to that word in the sentence,\nhe quickened his pace, and upon the adverb _vehementer_, expended in\nrapid notes, music to the amount of forty crotchets; but the word,\nin the sense it was there used, was intended to signify the same as\n_gravissime_, and to express with energy, the degree of grief and\nsadness, occasioned by the fall of Jerusalem, which, crippled and bore\ndown with the crushing weight of its sins, came to the ground, temple,\nwalls, and houses, all together.\n\nXXXVIII. Nobody was more guilty of this fault, than the celebrated\nDuron, and he committed it to such a degree, that sometimes in the same\ncouplet, just as the signification of the words of the verse varied,\ntaken separately or by themselves, he would vary the affectations of\nthe chant, six or eight times; and although it required great address\nand ability to do this, which he in reality was possessed of; such an\nexertion of his talents was ill applied.\n\n\nSECT. X.\n\nXXXIX. Some (for we would not omit to mention this) judge, that the\ncomposing music adapted to different subjects, consists much, in a\nright choice of the keys; and they assign one for grave subjects,\nanother for chearful ones, and another for mournful ones, and so on;\nbut I believe, this contributes little or nothing to the business;\nfor there is no key whatever, in which there have not been written,\nvery expressive and pathetic compositions, suited to excite all kinds\nof affections. The different place which the two semi-tones occupy in\nthe diapason, and which is what the distinction of keys consists in,\nis insufficient to induce this diversity; because in whatever place\nan accidental is introduced, and they introduce them at every turn,\nthis order is changed; and because various, or the most parts of the\ncomposition, by varying their terminations, fall upon, or catch the\nsemi-tones, in a different position, from that in which they stand or\nare placed, with respect to the diapason. For example; although the\nfirst key-tone, which begins D solre, proceeds in this order, first a\ntone, then a semi-tone, after that three tones, to which there follows\nanother semi-tone, and at last there comes a whole tone. The different\ntraces, or minute passages of the composition, taken each by itself,\ndo not follow this order; because one begins in the first, another in\nthe tone which is next after it, and so on with respect to all the\nother parts of the diapason, and they terminate wherever the composer\nlikes best; by which means, in every trace or minute passage of the\ncomposition, the position of the semi-tones is varied, as much, as in\nthe different diapasons, which constitute the diversity of the keys.\n\nXL. What confirms me in this sentiment, that the suiting music to\nproduce a grave or a sprightly effect, does not depend upon the choice\nof the key it is wrote in, is, that the greatest musicians, are much\ndivided in their opinions upon this point. What one considers as a\nlively key, another thinks a mournful one; what one esteems a devout\nkey, another calls a flighty one. The two great jesuits, father\nKircher, and father Dechales, are so opposite in their sentiments\nupon this head, that the same key, which father Kircher characterizes\nin this manner, _Harmoniosus, magnificus, & regia majestate plenus_,\nfather Dechales speaks thus of: _Ac tripudia, & choreas est comparatus,\ndiciturque propterea lascivus_; and they differ little less, in their\nassignation of the characters of many other keys, if not of all.\n\nXLI. The foregoing, should be understood to relate and apply to the\nessential difference of keys, which consists, in the diversity of\nposition of the semi-tones in the diapason; but not to their accidental\ndifference; which, consists, in their being taken higher or lower. This\nmay conduce something to create effect; because the same music, set\nin low notes, which is religious and grave, transposed to high ones,\nloses of its majesty, and acquires a degree of vivacity, that is ill\nsuited to a solemn subject: and for this reason, I am of opinion, that\nthe movements of church music should not be very quick: because, by\nhurrying the voices in the chant, they occasion them to sound harsh;\nand besides this, prevent that easy play and flexibility of throat,\nwhich is necessary to produce the effect the music requires; and which\nmany times consists, or is contained in the intonations; I say further,\nthat over and above these inconveniences, music composed of quick\nmovements, and set in high notes, is not so well calculated to move the\naffections of respect, devotion, and piety, as that which is written in\nlower tones, and marked to be performed in slower time.\n\n\nSECT. XI.\n\nXLII. For the same reason, I am against the introduction of violins\ninto churches. St. Thomas, in the place I before cited, objects to\nthe admitting any kind of instruments in the church; and the reason\nhe gives for the objection is, that the sensible delight which the\ninstrumental music occasions, hinders devotion. But it is not easy\nto reconcile this reasoning, with what the saint says in another\nplace, to wit, that the delight perceived by the air, excites weak\nspirits to devotion; and he, in the same place, approves of the use\nof musical instruments in synagogues, because the Jews being a hard\nand carnal people, there is a necessity for having recourse to such\nmeans, to provoke and stir them to piety. At least then for people of\nthis stamp, musical instruments in churches would be very serviceable;\nand there being a great many of that disposition who frequent\nchurches; consequently, the instruments would be found exceedingly\nuseful. Besides, I can\u2019t comprehend, how the sensible delight which\ninstrumental music occasions, should induce to devotion those who on\naccount of their hardness are little disposed to it, and obstruct it in\nthose whose hearts are more inclined to divine worship.\n\nXLIII. I acknowledge and confess, that it is much more easy for me to\nmisunderstand St. Thomas, than for St. Thomas to advance any thing\nthat is wrong: but after all, the universal practice of the whole\nchurch authorizes the use of instruments; and the only difficulty or\ndisagreement, seems to rest in the choice of them. I for my own part\nthink, that violins are improper in that sacred theatre; their shrill\nnotes, although harmonious, are still shrill, and excite a puerile\nvivacity in our spirits, very different from that decent attention,\nwhich is due to the majesty of mysteries; and especially in these\ntimes, when those who compose for violins, studiously write their music\nso high, that he who is to execute it, can scarce forbear striking the\nbridge of the instrument with his fingers.\n\nXLIV. There are many other instruments much fitter to be used in\nchurches than violins, their tones being much more respectful and\ngrave; such as the harp, the violincello, and the harpsichord; neither\nwould the inconvenience of the want of trebles in the instruments be\nfelt, by leaving out the violins, but rather, the music by the omission\nwould appear more majestic, which is what is most required in churches.\nThe organ is an admirable instrument; or, to speak more properly, many\ninstruments comprized in one. It is true, that the organists, when\nthey are so disposed, can make a sort of pipe and tabor of it; and it\nis also true, that this disposition seems to come upon them pretty\nfrequently.\n\n\nSECT. XII.\n\nXLV. It would not be foreign, but rather very consonant to the object\nof our present criticism, to say something in this place of the poetry,\nto which they give the epithet of divine, and which is composed to be\nsung in churches, I may without temerity, venture to pronounce, that\npoetry in Spain, is in a worse state of perdition than music. The\nnumber of those who write couplets is infinite, but none of them are\npoets. If I was to be asked, which are the most difficult of all arts,\nI should answer, medicine, poetry, and oratory: and if I was also to\nbe asked, which are the most easy; I should answer, oratory, poetry,\nand medicine. There is no student, who, if he takes a fancy to it, does\nnot write verses. All the religious who mount the pulpit, and all the\ndoctors who have studied and practised physic, find their partizans:\nbut where will you meet with the truly able physician, the compleat\npoet, or the perfect orator?\n\nXLVI. Our most learned monk _Don John de Mabillon_, in his Treatise on\nMonastic Studies, says, that an excellent poet is a very rare treasure,\nand I agree with him in sentiment; for upon strict examination, where,\namong the numbers of poetical essays that are published, will you\nmeet with any one, which (omitting many other requisite qualities) is\nnatural, sublime, sweet and pointed; and at the same time, ingenious,\nand clear; brilliant without affectation, sonorous without turgidity,\nand harmonious without impropriety; that runs without hobbling, is\ndelicate without affectation, forcible without harshness, beautiful\nwithout paint or strained colouring, noble without presumption, and\ncopious and comprehensive without obscurity? I will almost venture to\npronounce, that he who would find a poet capable of writing verses in\nthis stile, should seek for him in the regions inhabited by the Ph\u0153nix.\n\nXLVII. In Spain however, poetry is in so deplorable a state, that\naccording to all appearances, it would be needless to search for such\na one there. He who errs the least, with the exception of here and\nthere a particular one, seems as if he studied how he should commit\nfaults. All his care appears to be placed, in swelling the verse with\nirrational hyperboles, and pompous words; by which means, he produces\na bloated, and confirmed dropsical poem, the sight of which turns your\nstomach, and the perusal fills you with melancholy. Those essential\nqualities, propriety and nature, without which, neither poetry or\nprose can ever be good, seem to have abandoned, and become fugitives\nfrom our compositions. Our authors don\u2019t in their productions, appear\nto have hit upon that native splendor, which gives a brilliancy to\ntheir ideas, but rather, to have disfigured their best thoughts, with\naffected and bombast expressions; so that their original conceptions,\nmay be compared to a fine woman that falls into indiscreet hands to be\ndressed and ornamented.\n\nXLVIII. Thus much in general for modern Spanish poetry; but the worst\nis, that you hear these sort of compositions in the sacred canticles;\nwhich are often so bad, that it would be better, instead of them, to\nsing the couplets of blind men; because these seem to have a tendency\nto promote devout affections, and their rustic simplicity is in some\ndegree the symptom of a good intention. All the gracefulness, or rather\nthe attempt at displaying it, in the church canticles of these times,\nconsists in low equivocations, trivial metaphors, and puerile changes\nand rechanges. The worst is, that they are entirely void of spirit,\nand not at all calculated to excite religious emotions, which are the\nprincipal, if not the only qualities required, and which ought to be\nsought after in such compositions. Don Antonio de Solis was without\ndoubt a person of sublime genius, and one who well understood the\nexcellencies of poetry. He exceeded all others, and even sometimes\nhimself also, in painting the passions with such apt, close, and\nsubtile expressions, that the descriptions of his pen seem to give\nyou a clearer idea of, and make you better acquainted with them, than\nthe knowledge which is gained by experience. But with all this, we in\nhis small sacred tracts, perceive a strange falling-off; because in\nthem, we don\u2019t meet with that nobleness of thought, that delicacy of\nexpression, and that stirring of the passions, which is frequent and\ncommon in his other Lyric Poems. This did not happen because he wanted\ngenius or talents to write sacred compositions; for his dirges upon the\nconversion of St. Francisco de Borja, are some of the best things he\never exhibited, and perhaps the most sublime, which to this day have\nbeen composed in the Spanish language.\n\nXLIX. I believe the badness of the composition of these couplets,\ncalled Letrillas, which are generally written for festivals, has\nproceeded from Solis, and other poets of ability, having looked upon\nthem as trifles; though in reality, no other compositions require so\nmuch study or serious attention. What subjects can be more noble than\nthose, where the eulogium of the saints and martyrs is sung, and the\nexcellency of the divine attributes and mysteries, is represented and\ncelebrated? These are the things, on which men of abilities, should\nexert the whole power of their genius and talents. What employment\ncan be more worthy a man of shining parts, than that of painting the\nbeauty of virtue in such amiable colours, as to make mankind in love\nwith it; and representing the deformity of vice, in so striking a point\nof view, as to make the world abhor and detest it; and to contrive to\npraise God and his angels in such a way, as would stimulate people\nto a desire of imitation, and light up in their minds, the flame of\nadoration and worship? The grandeur of poetry, consists in that active\npersuasion, which the poet instills into the soul, and with which he\nmoves the heart, to follow the course he would wish it should pursue.\nTo write in this stile, says our Mabillon, speaking of poetry, is not\nchildren\u2019s play; much less then, should sacred poetry be only fit to\namuse infants; but after all, that which is sung in our churches is\nnothing better.\n\nL. Even those, whose compositions are held in estimation, do no more,\nthan provide and prepare the first light conceits that occur to them on\nthe subject they are about to write upon; and although they have not\nin themselves, union with respect to time, or tendency to any design\nwhatever, they distribute them in couplets, and notwithstanding one\nleads to Flanders, and another to Morocco, they introduce them into the\ncontext; and provided each couplet says something, for this is their\nexplanation, although it is without life, spirit, or force; nay more,\nalthough it is without order, or direction to any determinate point or\npurpose, they say it is good composition; when, in truth, it no more\ndeserves the name of a composition, than a heap of stones that of an\nedifice, or the throwing or huddling together a number of colours, that\nof a picture.\n\nLI. Keen sentences, wit, airy pleasantry, and lively conceits, are the\nprecise ornaments of poetry; but they should not be introduced into a\npoem, as if they had been studiously sought after; on the contrary,\nthey should seem as if they were always in waiting, and ready either\nfor the poet to lay his hand on them, or to obey his command; who\nshould pursue the rout he has chalked out for himself, and as he\nproceeds on, gather such flowers as he meets on his way, and which grow\nnaturally in the road through which he travels. This was the practice\nof Virgil, Ovid, Horace, and all the illustrious poets of antiquity.\nTo make couplets, which are no more than an unformed mass of little\nconceits, is a thing very easy, and at the same time very useless;\nbecause there is not in them, nor are they capable of containing, any\nof the sublime excellences of poetry. Why do I say sublime excellences?\nNot even the lowest requisites which are of its essence.\n\nLII. But I have not even yet mentioned the worst part belonging to\nthe divine canticles; which is, that if not all, a great many of them\nare composed in a burlesque stile. This is certainly done with great\ndiscretion; because by this practice, the things appertaining to\nGod, are converted to things of interlude. What idea can a thousand\nextravagances, put in the mouths of Gill and Pasquil, give of the\nineffable mystery of the incarnation? I shall leave it here, for the\nthoughts of such an absurdity put me out of all patience; and he to\nwhom such an indignant abuse, does not of itself appear disgusting, I\nshall never be able to persuade or convince, by any arguments whatever.\n\n\n\n\n    The following, which is extracted from the learned Letters of\n    FEYJOO, is an Answer of the Author\u2019s to a Letter from a Friend on\n    the Subject of Music. The Title he gives to the Letter, is,\n\n                                  THE\n\n                      WONDERFUL EFFECTS OF MUSIC,\n\n                        AND A COMPARISON OF THE\n\n                       ANTIENT WITH THE MODERN.\n\n\n    DEAR SIR,\n\nI. Before I ceased to be a young man, or indeed before I became one,\nthe difficulty you now propound occurred to me, and is, in my humble\nopinion, a very grave one. It seems beyond a doubt, that the music\nof these times, does not produce the admirable effects which are\nrelated of the music of antiquity, and it seems also as if this argued\na greater degree of perfection in the antient than the modern. On the\nother hand, it appears difficult to explain, in what this superior\ndegree of perfection in the antient consisted; not so much for the\nreason you mention, as for another, which I shall point out in the\nsequel.\n\nII. We at present know of no musician whatever, who, by the use of his\nart, can excite, or appease a violent passion; but if various authors\ndo not deceive us, the music of antiquity, produced both the one\nand the other of these effects. It is related of the two musicians,\nTimotheus and Antigenides, that they could, whenever they pleased,\nenrage Alexander to such a pitch, as to make him seize on his arms,\nand fall into such excesses of fury, as terrified the by-standers, and\nfilled them with apprehensions that their lives were in danger. They\ntell us also of a trumpeter of Megara, named Herodotus, who perceiving\nthe strength and endeavours of the soldiers of Demetrius, insufficient\nto move a warlike machine of enormous weight towards the walls of\nArgos, which they were then besieging, he, by blowing two trumpets at\na time, so inspired them, that they found their vigour in a manner\ndoubled, and themselves enabled to conduct the machine to the place\nthey wished. They tell us likewise, of a remarkable flute-player, who\nwas a Milesian, that by touching in the Phrygian mode enraged certain\nmen, and by changing to the Doric from the Phrygian, immediately calmed\nthem again. Of the famous musician Terpandro, they relate, that with\nhis lyre, he stifled the flame of a sedition among the Laced\u00e6monians;\nand of Empedocles, that he also with his lyre, disarmed a youth of his\ncholer, who was on the point of committing a parricide. I shall omit\nmany other cases of this kind.\n\nIII. If it appears wonderful, that the antient music should have\ninflamed, and calmed violent passions, it seems more so, that it should\nhave been made use of to cure various diseases; and sometimes, not\nonly in here and there an individual, but even in a whole kingdom; for\nPlutarch says, that Thaletas, a native of Crete, with the energetic\nsweetness of the lyre, freed the Laced\u00e6monians from a plague; and it\nmay be gathered from various authors, that antiently, they used music\nfor the cure of fevers, the falling-sickness, the epilepsy, deafness,\nthe sciatica, and the bite of a viper.\n\nIV. But to tell you the truth, I think these facts should not pass\ncurrent without some critical examination. And first of all, none of\nthe authors who testify these extraordinary instances of the power\nof music over the passions, speak of them, as transactions they had\nbeen eye-witnesses of, or as things that they knew from their own\nexperience. All the facts cited, are much anterior to the author by\nwhom they are handed down to us; so that it seems very probable,\nthe information came to them by tradition, or proceeded from some\npopular rumour unworthy of all credit. In matters that favour of the\nmarvellous, both with respect to natural, and pr\u00e6ter-natural things,\nnobody is ignorant how many fables have been delivered down to us in\nthe writings of the ancients.\n\nV. Secondly, in some of the cases, there seems no occasion to have\nrecourse to miracles for their explanation; I mean there is no occasion\nfor attributing the events they tell of, to the wonderful powers of\nmusic. It required but little impulse, to rouze the warlike ardour of\nAlexander; a spark only will cause a vast conflagration, if it falls\non a large quantity of gun-powder. Athen\u00e6us, who relates the story\nof Herodotus, says, he was a man of gigantic size, and extraordinary\nrobustness. He gives him near eight feet of stature, and says further,\nthat he ate twenty pounds of meat a day, and drank wine in proportion.\nA man of such robustness, could make use of much larger trumpets than\nthose of the common size, and might blow his breath through them with\nsuch an impetus, as might strikingly agitate the mind, and might also\nadd some temporary degrees of vigour to the body; and for accomplishing\nthis, it is not necessary to suppose any special dexterity in the\nmanagement of the instruments, for strength was more requisite to\nproduce such an effect than address; and whoever at this time, should\nbe equally robust with Herodotus, might be capable of doing the\nsame thing. Neither perhaps in the other instances, I mean those of\nirritating and mitigating rage, is there so much to be admired; for\nthe influence of the music, might be applied to subjects, who are\nvery easily moved; some such as we frequently see, that like light\nweather-cocks, are wafted and turned round with the slightest breeze;\nand perhaps some modern musician, might be able to work equal changes\nin the passions, on subjects who are equally susceptible.\n\nVI. Thirdly, the tales of cures which are pretended to have been\nperformed by the means, or power of music, I consider as fabulous\nrelations; at least, I have no doubt of the major part of them being\nsuch. Who, I won\u2019t say can believe, but if he has any understanding,\ncan endure to hear the chimera, that the sound of a lyre banished the\nplague from a whole kingdom? Such tales as these, were written by the\nauthors of last year, in order that the fools of this might believe\nthem.\n\nVII. With respect to the curing some particular diseases, it may be\nproper to allow to music, an equal degree of credit, to that given\nto many other remedies, so much puffed, and blazoned in books, which\nalthough in reality they seldom do any good, still preserve their\nreputation; not so much on account of the few times they have proved\nserviceable, as from the sick person\u2019s having owed his recovery to\nthe assistance of Nature; when at the same time, people vainly and\nmistakingly have attributed it to the application of the chosen remedy.\nIn this manner, and with these explanations and restrictions, we should\nunderstand music as a specific, for this or that disease; for if we\nconsider it, as having influence to cheer the mind, there is no doubt,\nthat it may contribute somewhat to the relief of such sick people, as\nare very fond of it; in the same manner, as any other thing would do,\nwhich gave them special pleasure or delight. I don\u2019t however, find\nany reason to prefer the antient music to the modern, as best suited\nto produce either the one or the other of these effects; for we have\nseen cases, in which we have experienced this last, to have been very\nbeneficial to sick people; and probably the antients never knew one,\nin which the curative excellence of music shone forth with more lustre,\nthan it did in an instance, which happened in the present century, and\nwhich is related in the history of the Royal Academy of Sciences at\nParis, in the year 1707, which I shall here transcribe, in nearly the\nwords of its illustrious author.\n\nVIII. A famous musician and great composer, was attacked with a\nfever, which continued augmenting, till on the seventh day, it threw\nhim into a violent delirium, which remained on him with little or\nno intermission, accompanied with shrieks, lamentations, terrors,\nand perpetual watching. On the third day, one of those natural\ninstincts, which are said to cause sick brutes to seek such herbs\nas are beneficial for them, induced him to request some music for\nhis entertainment. They sung to him, properly accompanied with\ninstruments, some of the compositions of Mons. Bernier, a celebrated\nFrench musician: as soon as the harmony began, his countenance appeared\nserene, his eyes looked more tranquil, the convulsions ceased intirely,\nand he shed tears of pleasure; the fever left him while the music\ncontinued, but when that ceased, the fever and the symptoms returned\nagain. Upon this happy and unexpected success, they repeated the music\nagain and again, and always obtained a suspension of the fever and\nthe symptoms, while the music lasted. A relation of his, used some\nnights to sit up with him, whom he intreated to sing and dance to him,\nand always found great relief from it; and it sometimes happened,\nthat for want of other music, they entertained him with common nurses\nsongs, and such as are used to divert children, and from which he found\ngreat benefit. In fine, ten days music, without any other medicinal\nassistance than one bleeding in the ankle, which was the second that\nhad been prescribed for him, perfectly cured him.\n\nIX. There may be some doubt, whether the total cure of this man was\nowing to music; and I must confess, there is no certainty that it\nwas. He might owe his recovery to the second bleeding; or he might be\nindebted to Nature for it. The transitory relief which he received from\nthe melody, had no more fixed connection with the substantial part\nof the cure, than those intervals of amendment have, which in many\ndiseases, Nature affords of herself. The suspension of the symptoms,\nfrequently proceeds from principles, which have not sufficient\ninfluence to entirely extirpate the malady. The knowing, that in\ngeneral, it can\u2019t be inferred, that the thing is able to perform the\nwhole, which only executes a part, makes such a connection as we have\nmentioned before doubtful. But even if this was admitted, there still\nexists in the case related, an undubitable and marvellous effect of\nmusic; and perhaps, the quick suspension of the fever and the symptoms,\nevery time they repeated the music, is a more striking instance of its\nimmediate and wonderful power, than the perfecting a total cure would\nhave been. I say, this appears more amazing to me, than if the remedy\nhad worked an intire cure, by contributing to the recovery of the sick\nperson, by slow degrees, and by little and little, and which could not\nhave been compleated, but in the course of a considerable number of\ndays.\n\nX. It seems to me also, that those who are of opinion the modern music\nis brought to greater perfection than ever the antient was, may avail\nthemselves of this instance very advantageously; first of all, because\nthere can\u2019t be produced in favour of antient music, another of the\nsame character; and secondly, because it has appeared in the case\nof our sick person, that he not only received relief from concertos\nof excellence, but even from the most trifling and imperfect songs;\nwhereas the cures attributed to antient music, are alledged to have\nbeen effected by that of the first class.\n\nXI. However, let this proof, whose force or debility I shall not\ndwell upon at present, amount to what it will; that which you urge\nin favour of modern music, does not appear to me of any weight or\nefficacy. You say, that at present this art is much more cultivated,\nand by men of more industry, and better informed, than the unlearned\nand barbarous antients of yore, who flourished in the times when these\nextraordinary effects of music are related to have been experienced.\nFrom this supposition it should follow, that the modern music is much\nmore perfect than ever the antient was. But I look both upon the\nopinion, that it is more cultivated at present than it was formerly;\nand likewise, that it is more perfect now than it was then, not only as\nuncertain, but even entirely false and ill-grounded.\n\nXII. Two facts of public notoriety, which are related by Polybius,\nare sufficient to induce a belief, that music was as much, or more\ncultivated among the antients, than it is in our times. The first\nis, that both the Cretans, and Laced\u00e6monians, did not make use of\nthe horrible clang of trumpets, even in battles, but of the melody\nof flutes. The second is, that the Arcadians, from the foundation of\ntheir republic, caused it to be observed as an inviolable law, that all\ntheir sons, from their infancy till they attained the age of thirty-one\nyears, should apply themselves to music. In what kingdom in the world,\nis these at this time, so great and so general an application to this\nart?\n\nXIII. The vast inferiority of the antients, compared to the moderns,\nwith respect to industry and ability, is also a voluntary supposition.\nIf this was so, it ought not only to be inferred, that they were\ndeficient in the science of music, but in all the other arts also; but\nthis is so far from being the case, that it is known to a certainty,\nthere were many men among them, who arrived to the highest pitch of\nexcellence, both as painters, statuaries, and poets, and who were\nsuch, as can hardly be equalled for eminence by any modern whatever.\nOf the two last of these arts, there are still monuments subsisting,\nwhich are invincible proofs, of their great talents for, and masterly\nperformances in both of them; and their skill in the first, may be\nreasonably inferred, from their ability in the other two; for as\nVincentio Carducho, in his _Dialogues on Painting_, justly reasons, if\nthe works of the painters had been defective in any of the material\nrequisites, as some have conjectured, the skill of the statuaries,\nand the perfection of the statues, would glaringly have displayed the\nfaults of the painters; and would consequently, have discredited them\nas artists; but this was not the case, for it is established by the\nauthority of history, that their works were exceedingly prized.\n\nXIV. This proof then, falls to the ground as ill-founded; but the\npartizans of modern music, urge another that is tolerably specious;\nwhich is, that the antient was very limited, both in the modulation\nand harmonies of it. As to what regards the modulation, we should\nobserve, that before the time of the famous musician Timotheus, who\nflourished in the reign of Philip of Macedon, the lyre had no more than\nseven strings, which expressed or marked seven tones or points only;\nbecause to the antient lyre, there were no frets, nor any substitute\nfor them, wherewith they could make on the same string any progression\nof distinct sounds. Timotheus added two strings to it, which made it\nan instrument of nine; others maintain it had nine before, and that he\nadded two to them, and made it one of eleven. But admitting this last\nto be the fact, it then remained an instrument of very small compass,\ncompared to modern instruments. The chant could not exceed the bounds\nof the instrument, and by all this we may perceive the little variety\nand extension of antient modulation.\n\nXV. With respect to harmony and concordances, authors, who have\nexamined the thing with much attention, assure us, the antients knew\nno other than the third, the octave, and the double octave; adding,\nthat they were entirely ignorant of the concerto, or music of different\ntones; and therefore all their accompanyments, either of an instrument\nwith the voice, or of one voice, or one instrument with another, were\nconstantly in unison. It may be asked now, what excellencies could\nbe contained in a music, which was so limited and so simple? Or what\ncomparison can you imagine there is between that and ours, either to\ndelight the ear, or give satisfaction to the understanding?\n\nXVI. I have acknowledged, that this objection is specious, but deny\nthat it is conclusive. In the first place, the parts of Plutarch\u2019s\nworks, as well as those of other authors, from whence they pretend to\nhave collected this system of antient music, are so complicated and\nobscure, that nothing can with certainty be determined on the credit\nof them; hence it comes to pass, that writers, in their reasonings and\ndisquisitions on this subject, are much divided in their opinions.\n\nXVII. In the second place, I do not assent, that music, on account of\nits being somewhat the more simple, is the less delicious or pathetic.\nI acknowledge, that the variety in that, as in all other things,\ncontributes to the delight of it; but then the variety ought to be\nconfined within certain limits, for that, like every other thing,\nhas two vicious extremes, the one of which is incurred by excess,\nthe other by deficiency. If the variety is very small, you soon grow\ntired of it, and it seems rather surfeiting. If it is excessive, the\nsoul is disturbed and bewildered by the many parts of the object, and\nby being tossed and hurried from one to the other, is not allowed,\nnor has it leisure, for that extatic suspension, in which the most\nintense part of the pleasure consists. I have seen an infinite number\nof people, much more regaled by hearing a good voice, accompanied by\na guittar just scraped, than by hearing a concert of many voices and\ninstruments; and I have sometimes seen a person of very good talents\nshed tears of delight and tenderness, on hearing a guittar played\npointedly, and with expression; which never would have happened to\nhim, by hearing a symphony of various instruments, although he should\nhave attended such performances ever so often. The musicians of these\ntimes boast exceedingly of the improvements they have made in their\nprofession, and of having, from an insipid, heavy, coarse harmony,\nadvanced to a sweet, airy, and delicate music; and many of them have\nbeen brought to conjecture, that the practice of this faculty in the\npresent age has been carried to as high a degree of perfection, as\nit is capable of attaining. In my Discourse on Music in the first\nvolume of the Theatrico Critico, I made a comparison between antient\nand modern music; but what seems of the most importance to examine\nhere is, whether the music of the last and present century is so much\nimproved, as to intitle it to be considered as greatly superior to that\nwhich was practised by the Greeks twenty centuries ago. The author\nof the Dialogues of Theagenes and Callimachus, printed at Paris in\n1725, treats this point most learnedly; and affirms, that the antient\nmusicians excelled the modern in expression, delicacy, and variety; and\nalso in the fineness of their execution; and our great expositor of the\nscripture, father Don Augustin in Calmet, is of the same opinion; as\nhe is likewise, with regard to the antient music being more excellent\nthan the modern taken in general. In the first volume of his work,\nintitled _Dissertationes Biblicas_, page 403, where he approves and\nconfirms my sentiment and taste with respect to music, as expressed\nin my before-mentioned discourse, he speaks thus: Many look upon the\nsimplicity of the antient music as rudeness and imperfection; but I\nconsider it as an argument of its excellence, for an art is reputed\nby so much the more perfect, by so much the nearer it approaches to\nNature; and who can deny, but simple music is the most natural, and\nbest suited, to imitate the voice and passions of man? It rises, or\nglides easier from the interior part of the breast, and has a more\ncertain effect to cheer the heart, and stir the affections; besides,\nthe opinion which is generally entertained of the simplicity of antient\nmusic, is erroneous. It is true, that it was exceedingly simple, but\nnotwithstanding that, it was very copious also; for the antients had\nmany instruments, which we are strangers to; and on the other hand,\ntheir music was not wanting in concord and harmony. To this we may\nadd, that it had the advantage of ours in another respect, for it was\na part of the excellence of the antient music, that the sound of the\ninstruments did not confound or interrupt the words of the song, but\nrather enforced or gave energy to them; so that at the same time the\near was delighted with the sweetness of the voice, the mind tasted the\nelegance and nervous expression of the verse. We ought not therefore\nto wonder at the prodigious effects which we are told were produced\nby the music of the antients; because it possessed, joined together\nand united, all those excellencies, which are contained in ours, only\nsingle or divided. Calmet also, in his Dictionario Biblico, gives us\na sheet of engraving, containing twenty different instruments which\nwere in use among the Hebrews; and it is very probable, that among\nthe Greeks, who were a more polished people, and greater lovers of\nmusic than the others, they had many more; neither have we any great\nreason to value ourselves upon our invention in contriving musical\ninstruments being greater or better than that of the antients; for\nthere has never yet appeared among us an hydraulic organ, which was\nin use among the antients, and of which Ctesibius, a mathematician of\nAlexandria, was supposed to be the author, a hundred years prior to the\nchristian \u00e6ra; and Vossius says, they have often tried and laboured\nsince, but without effect, to restore it. It is also proper to observe,\nthat some instruments, which we reckon the invention of latter ages,\nwere in use among the antients; such as the violincello, and violin;\nwhose antiquity the author of the Dialogue of Theagenes and Callimachus\nproves, by a medal which is described by Vignete, and a statue of\nOrpheus, which is at Rome.\n\nXVIII. In the third place, I do not assent, that the antient music was\nso simple as it is pretended to have been; but am rather inclined to\nthink, that in the essential it was more complicated than the modern.\nMy reason for this opinion is, that over and above the Diatonic and\nChromatic species which is contained in our music, and which is\ncommon to both, they, in the division of the octave, made use of the\nEnharmonic also, which our music does not possess or partake of.\nThe Enharmonic consists in the introduction of the tenths, which are\nintervals of no more than the quarter part of a tone, or of two comas,\nand the quarter part of another. It is true, that the moderns give the\nname of tenth to the minor semi-tone; but in the music of antiquity,\ntenths had the signification which I have here assigned to them.\n\nXIX. This, as I said before, creates a very essential variety in a\nmusic, and different from that which consists purely in running the\ncomposition through two, three, or more octaves; and which may be\ncalled accidentals, because the points of one octave are little more\nthan a mere repetition of the correspondent ones of another; and I not\nonly judge this variety of the antient music essential in itself, but\nthink it is likewise so with respect to the effects of it; for it must\nnecessarily produce a greater, and very probably a much more lively\nvariation of the affections. So that by mixing the Harmonic species\nwith the other two, the same advantages will accrue as arose by mixing\nthe Diatonic with the Chromatic; and the music, in consequence of doing\nit, will be as much benefited, as it was by joining those two together,\nwhich made it infinitely preferable to what it was when they used each\nsingly, and by itself.\n\nI have now stated to you the arguments and reasonings on both sides\nof the question, with respect to the competition between antient and\nmodern music; and methinks I already hear you say, to which shall we\ngive the preference? To this I shall only answer, that I have sent\nyou all the pleadings and documents in the cause, and must beg you to\npronounce the sentence, for I must confess, for my own part, that I am\nundecided.\n\n\nTHE END OF THE SECOND VOLUME.\n\n\n\n\nERRATA.\n\n\n    Pag. line.\n\n    123    9 _read_ favourite\u2019s house,\n    140    1 _strike out_ and\n    283   23 _read_ her knowledge\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber\u2019s Notes\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\nThe errata on page 377 have been corrected in place.\n\nItalics are represented thus _italic_.","title":"Essays, or discourses, vol. 2 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the Spanish","tradition":"philosophy-ethics","translated_text":null,"word_count":82254}