Chapter VI: Part 6

X. The lake then, being in so many respects horrible and affrighting, it is no wonder that from these circumstances, poetic fancy should place it in the region of horror, or at the entrance of it.

XI. The fable of the boatman Charon, who for an obolo, an Athenian piece of money worth a little more than our halfpenny, carried the souls of the dead over the lake, was derived from an Egyptian story, related by Diodorus Siculus. There was in Egypt a lake, over which dead bodies after they were embalmed, were carried to the opposite shore to be buried; and there were judges appointed to attend at the place of embarkation, to examine into the course of life which had been led by the dead persons; and after this inquiry, to pronounce whether they were or were not, worthy to be interred; which office was exercised with such severity, that this common honour has been denied to some of the royal family. To this story there is annexed a tradition, which the Abbé Fourmont says, subsists in that part of Egypt at this day. The tradition is as follows; that there was once a farmer of the revenues of one of the Pharaohs, who laid a tax upon this transportation of the dead, which brought in vast sums. Thus you see, that both in Greece and Egypt, there were found true materials, wherewith to fabricate the fable of the Stygian Lake, to build the boat which conveyed the dead bodies to the abyss, and to erect a monument, to eternize the avarice of the boatman Charon.

XII. The fable of the river Lethe, whose waters the dead are obliged to drink, to make them forget all they ever saw or knew in the region of the living, and also that of the boatman Charon, are both of African origin. This river rises near the great bog or quicksand, and after running under ground, and being hid for some miles, shews itself again near to the city of Berenica, now Bernick or Bernisho, greatly increased in size, by the addition made to it, by subterraneous waters; and this made it thought, that it was not the same river which they had before seen bury itself under ground, and was also the circumstance, that gave rise to its deriving its source from Hell.

XIII. The river likewise which was antiently called Lethe, but now goes by the name of Limia, and runs through my native country; and concerning which, there was once a prevailing opinion among the Romans, that it had the same properties which the poets attributed to the infernal river, causing forgetfulness, not only in those who drank of its waters, but also in those who waded through it, and it not being then certain whether this error or preoccupation with respect to the river Lethe, and the fiction of its source originating in Hell, took its rise from the river Lethe of my country; or whether the fable of the river Lethe coming from Hell, and the property of its waters being then established, might have occasioned the confounding the river Lethe of Galicia with the other.

XIV. I say, however this was, the opinion of the qualities of the river Lethe, was so rooted and fixed among the vulgar of the Romans, that when the consul Decimus Brutus, as Florus calls him, or Aulus Brutus, as he is called by Paterculus, was engaged in the conquest of Galicia, and who on account of his having conquered it, obtained the surname of Gallego; I say, when this consul came to the river Lethe, which is fordable, none of his soldiers, for fear of incurring that general forgetfulness, would venture to wade through it, till the consul who was not preoccupied with the vulgar error, passed thro’ it to the opposite shore; and when he was arrived there, turned about and called some of his countrymen by their names, by which he gave them to understand, that he had not incurred the forgetfulness they so much dreaded; and said further to them, as Florus informs us, _Formidatum Romanis fluvium oblivionis_.

XV. The story of Dedalus, and his being obliged to fly from the resentment of Minos, by means of the invention of wings, for having facilitated to Pasiphaë her abominable commerce with a bull, was meant to describe nothing more, than her having been enamoured with Taurus, who, according to Plutarch, was one of the principal generals in the army of Minos; and Dedalus’s having assisted, by exerting the ordinary means practised on such occasions, in bringing about the completion of the lovers wishes; after finishing the business he fled from the vengeance of Minos, in a vessel that had sails, which might properly enough be compared to wings, and which the imagination being put to the stretch to find out a way of escaping, they were then supposed to have been first invented: or if the idea had before been entertained, that was the first time of its being carried into practice.

XVI. The chimerical feats of Jason, and his stealing the golden fleece, are historically explained by the celebrated Samuel Bochart, who, by the help of his knowledge of the Phœnician language, discovered, that there were some words of equivocal meaning in that idiom, which gave occasion to the fabrication of this portentous fable. The Syriac word _Gaza_, in the Phœnician language, signifies both a treasure and a fleece; the word _Saur_ also, in the same language, signifies both a wall and a bull; and the word _Nachas_, is also indifferently used to express a dragon and iron. Thus, instead of saying that Jason, by breaking down or scaling a wall defended by armed men, had made himself master of the treasure of the king of Colquida; they represent him, as having tamed the bulls which breathed fire, and the tremendous dragon, which guarded the golden fleece, and by that means had made himself master of it. Neither in the love of Medea for Jason, or in her running away with him, was there any thing extraordinary, or that required the assistance of Minerva, for a natural passion, accompanied with resolution, could without any other aid, surmount all the difficulties in such an undertaking.

XVII. The Centaurs, half men and half horses, which make a great figure in the heathen mythology, were nothing more, according to the best authors, than types or representations of some of the inhabitants of Thessaly, who were the first people that were known to fight on horseback, and to train and break horses, for the use and business of war; and it was in that region, the poets placed the Centaurs, and it was from thence, that they say Hercules expelled them.

XVIII. The harpies (who could suppose it?) were no more than great swarms of locusts, which in the reign of king Phineus, desolated Paphlagonia. In the dictionary of Moreri (vid. the word Harpies) you may see the proofs of this, which I shall omit inserting here, as that dictionary is so well known.

XIX. In the same manner, from portions of profane history, may be explained many other parts of the heathen mythology; such as the fable of Perseus, that of Belerophonte, that of the Hesperides, that of the Gorgons, and many more. But this is not a matter of sufficient importance to dwell upon.

XX. I also confess, that there are some parts of profane mythological history, that may be opportunely explained by the sacred, as those who have embraced the general system of deducing the first from the last, have clearly proved; but their success in some of these particulars, has been the cause of their great error, as it has encouraged them in the absurd and incongruous attempt, of deducing from scripture, the whole Pagan mythology. I will here venture, notwithstanding this has been a path so much trodden, to point some especial marks of similitude and identity, between a deity of the gentiles, and a conspicuous person of holy writ. This is the example I before promised to give, and which relates to the resemblance between the father of the faithful with one of the most antient of the Pagan deities, that is, between Abraham and Saturn. But I must premise, that the reader is not indebted to me for this beautiful parallel, but to the Abbé Boissy, a member of the Academy Royal of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres at Paris, who is the person that advanced it in that famous assembly; and I shall translate it here in the sense of the language of the author, as I find it inserted, in the first volume of the History of that academy.

XXI. He says that Saturn, according to the relations of the poets and historians, was the person who first introduced the detestable custom of sacrificing human victims. The Saturn of the Pagans, is in the judgment of the best critics, the Abraham of scripture; and a fragment of Sanchionata, which is produced by Eusebius, does to appearance, put the thing out of all doubt. The fragment runs as follows; _Saturn, whom the Phœnicians call Israel, was after his death classed among the gods, under the name of a planet, which at this time is called Saturn. In the days of this prince’s reign in Phœnicia, he had by a nymph named_ Anobret, _an only son whom he called_ Jeud, _a word which even to this day, among the Phœnicians signifies_ only son. Finding that he had engaged his country in a dangerous war, he adorned his son with the vestments and insignia of royalty, and sacrificed him on an altar erected by himself. In another fragment of the same Sanchionata, we find, that this same Saturn circumcised himself, and obliged all his family to do the like. Nicholas Damascenus, Justin, and other authors, give to Abraham the rank and quality of a king; and even the scripture remarks, that he made alliances, and treated with other kings as with his equals; and besides this, the patriarchs were known to exercise royal authority in their own families. Berosus, as we are informed by Josephus, adds, that Abraham had great skill in astrology; and Eupolemus, as we are told by Eusebius, says, that he was the inventor of the science of the Chaldeans. There needs nothing more to persuade us, that the Phœnicians were disposed to place him among the gods and the planets. They called him Israel, either from their confounding the grandfather with the grandson, or because they gave that name to the people who were descended from him. The name of _Jeud_, his only son, has the same meaning as that of _Isaac_; and _Anobret_, as Bochart informs us, signifies _ex gratia concipiens_, which signification, is very applicable to the circumstances of _Sarah_. Finally, and as the last instance of conformity between them, Saturn circumcised himself, and obliged all his family to do the same; a remarkable particular this, and which can agree only with the circumstances of Abraham. Thus far the before cited author.

XXII. I say the same of the two systems, that derive all the fictions of Paganism, the one from sacred, the other from profane history, that I say of all the other systems; which is, that there is somewhat of truth in every one of them, but that they all in general are false. Father Kircher inclined to the sentiment, that all the fables derived their origin from the language, or hyerogliphical characters of the Egyptians; although it is necessary, in order to support this opinion, to suppose that they all originated in Egypt, which is very wide of the truth; but as that kingdom in the ages of antiquity, made a great figure in the world, and was in an especial manner venerated as the metropolis of the sciences, it is probable, that the language of it, and the mysterious expressions of some of its inhabitants, which were ill understood, or not understood at all by the vulgar, might have given rise to some of the mythological tales.

XXIII. Bochart pretends to demonstrate, that they were all derived from the equivocal meaning of words in the Phœnician language, and with respect to some of them, has succeeded very happily in illustrating this sentiment; as for example, in his explanation of the fable of the golden fleece. But the general system is absurd, even if you suppose there is no other thing to object against it, than the chimera, that Phœnicia is the country from whence the whole of the fables are descended; but in order to prove this, it will be necessary to shew, that no histories depraved with fictions, were communicated to other kingdoms, but in Phœnician manuscripts.

XXIV. The Platonists imagined, that nothing else was concealed under the veil of fables, but documents and maxims of natural philosophy. And there certainly is something of this sort implied in them; as for example, in the description which Homer gives of Aurora, as the daughter of the air, and the office which other poets assign to her, of the guardianship or custody of the gates of the east, which she is to open every morning with her dewy fingers, taking care to send the zephyrs before to dispel the dark shades. All which imagery at the bottom, means nothing more, than to describe the properties of the morning air, and to display the appearances of day-break in the east, before the sun rises above the horizon.

XXV. Others have imagined, that all the fables were meant to convey some moral or political lessons, and that the authors designed nothing more when they invented them, than to inculcate under a species of allegory, rational maxims, which might be useful in human life; and there are really some of them, that seem to have been written with no other view. The fable of Phaeton for example, appears to have been calculated, to represent the dangers to which people expose themselves, by attempting things greatly superior to their power or abilities; and that of Narcissus, to represent the extravagance and folly of self-love or admiration. But saying that all the fables were written with this design, would be a manifest chimera.

XXVI. Finally, the infatuated alchymists, or at least some of them, have dreamed, that the fables of which we have been speaking, contain enigmatically, the doctrine of the philosophers stone; that is, that they teach in a mysterious way, all the operations which are necessary to be gone thro’, for attaining the happy secret of transmuting all other metals into gold. Perhaps what occasioned this silly apprehension, was their finding in the idiom of their art, the names of the seven principal deities of the Pagans, which are the same as those of the seven planets, applied to the seven metals they make use of; but the application of those names to the metals, was posterior many ages, to their being given to the deities and the planets. The first alchymists who called the metals by those names, were excited to do it by the same motive, which has ever induced them to give to all the materials, operations, and effects of their art, strange and sounding names, which they do, either to conceal their pretended secrets, or by the mysterious magnificence of their stile, to attract the respect and admiration of the vulgar; and the resemblance of the splendor of the sun’s rays to the colour of gold, and the light of the moon, to that of silver, was favourable to their intention, and assisted them in making the application.

XXVII. This system, is not only in its complex or whole substance, but in each, and every one of its parts, destitute of all foundation, and is therefore not worthy to be controverted, but should be treated with that contempt, which both this, and all the other imaginary productions of the alchymists deserve.

XXVIII. If this letter shall afford you neither entertainment nor instruction, it will at least serve as an apology for my conduct, and incline you to retract the censure, which you have fulminated against me, and my discourse of the _Divorce of History from Fable_; and I hope that at all events, your resentment will be calmed, and your apprehensions quieted by the following reflection; that although in that discourse I have weakened the bond of matrimony between the two parties, I have in this letter, on one of the sides, established a degree of affinity between them.

ON BOOKS OF INSTRUCTION, WITH RESPECT TO POLITICS.

SECT. I.

I. We scarce ever hear the antients talked of, with that judgment and moderation which good sense dictates. They are either treated with excessive veneration, or else they are scoffed at and despised, and this is generally governed by the subject matter on which you discourse. If this happens to be science or learning, the antient professors are talked of, as men much superior in abilities and comprehension to any of the moderns; and it will scarcely be admitted, that these last have discovered any thing, which was not known to the others long before. But when political sagacity or industry becomes the subject of conversation, all the advantage is given to these latter times; and to such an excessive degree, that the men of former ages, compared to the moderns, are considered as a sort of demi-brutes, who were actuated by a blind ferocity, and who exercised power, unrestrained by reason, and with a daring hardiness, void of all address.

II. I am of opinion, that this comparison between the antients and moderns should be inverted, and the things placed in a quite opposite point of view. I say, the moderns should be considered as superior to the antients in science, but not in political industry. The reason is, because science is communicated by books; and as we find expressed in those all which the antient professors ever attained, we by them are enabled to enrich our minds with the discoveries, not only of one, but many learned men. Thus a modern, of equal application and ingenuity with an antient, may consider himself as a river, which is enlarged by the stock flowing from all those fountains, and who has over and above this, a source in his own reason, with which he may add somewhat to the whole.

III. But this is not the case with political industry. For there is scarce any man who possesses a greater stock of policy, than what arises from the funds he has within himself. It is true, that you will find books full of political documents, and histories which exhibit numerous examples of them, which are still more instructive than the documents, because they represent more strikingly the application of them to practice, when circumstances for applying them to practice occur. But if we attend to the thing with subtle reflection, we shall find, that this instruction is only apparent; and although it makes a figure in theory, is useless in practice.

IV. The reason is, because when we are desirous of carrying those precepts into execution, there never occurs in the contingent we would apply them to, the same complex of circumstances which we find in the book. Never? Is it not possible that in one or another case we may meet with the same? No certainly, for it is absolutely necessary that one must always be wanting, which is the intervention of the agent who acted in the business. This circumstance, which nobody adverts to, is of the greatest weight. The same political maxim, which in the hands of one man may be most beneficial, conduced by another, may be found useless, and even pernicious.

V. The manner of doing things is of as much importance, and sometimes of more, than the substance of the things themselves; and this is hardly ever to be imitated. Every man has a peculiar, and an especial something, which is characteristic of himself, and distinguishes him from all others; and this is apt to vary in the same individual, according to the different temperament or disposition of his body or mind. A frank sentence, delivered with energy and grace, may be capable of exciting the admiration, respect, and applause, of the same person, whom it might offend, if spoken in a different manner; and the very same thing, pronounced timidly, ungraciously, and with an unpleasant countenance, might excite contempt, or indignation.

VI. A pirate who had fallen into the hands of Alexander, told the conqueror to his face, that he was a greater robber than himself, which was so far from exciting the indignation of that prince, that he rather seemed pleased with the man’s frankness. The liberty that Clitus took with him, was not near so insolent or injurious, and Alexander run him through with a lance. From whence could this extreme difference in Alexander’s feelings arise? Why from the pirate’s speaking with an heroic and serene firmness; and from Clitus his having spoken with a coarse impatience, and rustic impetuosity. This difference of manner is never to be acquired by study, but is the production and effect of innate genius.

VII. It is commonly said, that flattery is one of the most certain means by which a man can make his fortune; but with all this, how many thousands of flatterers do we see despised and neglected? The reason is, because there are very few of them, who know how to give to flattery that nice application which communicates strength to it, and makes it appear meritorious. Nor is it of any avail, to those who are so unfortunate as not to hit upon the mode of doing this, to study by detail the motions, the words, the air, and gestures of the fortunate, as the application we have mentioned, depends upon an innate genial quality, which can never be counterfeited by imitation; for how many people do we see make themselves ridiculous, by imitating the very thing, which when done by others, makes them respected?

VIII. Every political negotiation, may be compared to a machine, composed of many wheels, every one of which, by being more rigid, or more pliant, than is consistent with its just proportion, renders the whole machine useless; or it may be compared to a chemical process of long duration, whose success depends upon the different degrees of heat, to be applied with great nicety and precision, in the different stages of the process. But all the books that were ever written, either upon chemistry or mechanics, can never teach how to preserve this exact proportion of rigidity or pliability in the metals, or to apply this nice degree of heat to the fire, which is necessary for the completion of the business, and to answer the purposes intended. Even in these material operations, where the most nice and delicate parts of them, and the ultimate degree of exactitude in their execution, must be confided to a gift or innate talent in the artificer, we find that precepts are unequal to teach their performance; how then in political ones, where there is neither rule nor limits to determine their extension, their degrees of suspension, delay, or acceleration, with a thousand other contingent circumstances, can modes be prescribed for their execution?

SECT. II.

IX. The impossibility of imitating political examples, will be found still more manifest, if we consider, besides the person who acts, the people he is to act with. What is it to the purpose, that such an ambassador, has negotiated perfectly well at such a court, by employing such means? This example will be of no use to another ambassador, because, abstracted from an infinite number of other circumstances, a repetition of whose perfect assemblage will scarce ever happen, he does not negotiate with the same ministers; and every different genius, has a different door, through which you must enter to have access to his spirit.

X. I may be told, that the political books have provided against this inconvenience, and have accommodated negotiators with a variety of prudent precepts, suited to the various geniuses with whom you are to treat. This is nothing to the purpose, but is all talking at random. For the examination of these geniuses, must be made by the negotiator, and not by the author of the book, and the difference and variety of geniuses, is totally incomprehensible to the human understanding. Every man has his distinct one, which is no more exactly like that of other men, than the features of his face. The terms in which these are described, both in books of morality and politics, are general. They tell you, that one man is passionate, another gentle; one ambitious, another moderate; one avaricious, another liberal; one courageous, another timid, &c. Do you think that these are the ultimate, and only differences to be found in geniuses? No, they are not; but are sorts or species, every one of which, contains within itself innumerable differences. Have you not seen a man, who was remarkable for facing his enemy in battle, and timid in supporting his opinion in conversation? and another who is very patient under acute pain, and outrageous upon hearing any thing injurious said against him? What does all this amount to, but that these are different degrees of valour, and of patience, which we have no names for? and it would be impossible to give names to all of them, because they are innumerable.

XI. These things may be compared to colours. If you should be asked how many species of colours there are, you would begin by reckoning up eight or ten; such as the red, the green, the blue, the white, &c. But can you suppose, that these are the ultimate and only species? No, they are subalterns, as the logicians call them, or sorts, every one of which, has innumerable species. To convince you of this truth, examine the leaves of a hundred plants of different species. You will find them all green, but not in any one of them, will you find a green perfectly like to that of any other plant. To every different species of plant, there is a correspondent different texture of the insensible particles of its leaves, and a different texture of the insensible particles, occasions a different reflexion of the light, in which, according to the most probable opinion, consists the diversity of the colours.

XII. In the same manner, there is no man who has not a distinct particular temperament, and different from that of all other men; and to a distinct temperament, there is no doubt, but there must be annexed a distinct genius.

SECT. III.

XIII. Don’t imagine, that in political concerns, these minute differences are of no consequence; for oftentimes the whole depends upon them. Historians represent Philip the second severe; and they also represent the great Tamerlane the same, and even describe him as a ferocious and most cruel prince; but this second charge, is either false or uncertain. Who can comprehend, the difference there was between the severity of the two men? perhaps it might have been imperceptible. But with all this, it was sufficient to produce upon some particular occasions, diametrically opposite effects. A buffoon, with whom Philip was much entertained, said to him upon a certain occasion, a witty thing which the prince thought was indecent, for which he punished him with banishment: a pleasant poet, with whom Tamerlane used to amuse himself, said a satirical thing to him, which expressed a contempt of his person; and in return, Tamerlane made him a handsome present.

XIV. If I should be told, that this may depend not upon the substantial diversity, and let us call it by this name, of the different geniuses, but upon the accidental humour, which at that time prevailed in either of the princes, it being certain, that the same person may have his favourable and unfavourable moments, according as various internal or external causes affect his mind, and dispose it, either towards anger, or complacency; I reply, that for the support of my argument, one of these causes answers my purpose as well as the other. This same accidental disposition, is for the most part impenetrable, and is only known by experience from bad success, and after the mischief is done. The clouds of the soul, are sometimes seen on the brow of the countenance; but they for the most part do not appear; nor do we perceive them, till they are manifested to us by the flash of anger.

XV. So that all this upon reflexion, is but adding difficulty to difficulty. A man who has business, or pretensions to advance, should examine the genius of the prince or great person he is to negotiate with; and when by dint of much labour and industry, he has arrived at a thorough knowledge of him, he should watch the benign or adverse motions of the planet, whose auspices he is to observe, which he will never find instructions for doing, in any political almanack whatever.

XVI. From all that has been said, it may be inferred, that written directions, are of little, or no service in these cases. They make politicians for a coffee-house, but not for the cabinet; and may teach people to talk, but not to act; for the hoping to find the circumstances of the business to be treated upon, the same with those of the case or cases in the book, would be entertaining a metaphysical and uncertain expectation: on account, both of the substantial and accidental diversity of the geniuses with whom you are to treat; and also, on account of the diversity in the mode of acting by the same agent, at different times. This last circumstance, which is but little attended to, is sufficient of itself, for the reasons we have mentioned before, to produce effects, totally different from those, we are taught to expect by the documents.

SECT. IV.

XVII. If the instruction of great masters was capable of making a man a politician, Richard Cromwel, the son of Oliver, should have been one of the greatest the world ever produced. The same Oliver, who after the tragical death of Charles the First of England, which he had a principal hand in accomplishing, erected himself into the tyrant of that kingdom, under the title of a Protector; and without doubt, Cromwel the father was one of the most able politicians which either that, or any other age had ever seen. His industry and his valour, raised him from a middling station of life, to the highest degree of military and magisterial rank. His address and resolution, enabled him to accomplish that unexampled attempt, of trying, and with all the formality of a legal process, condemning his own Sovereign to an ignominious death. When the King was dispatched, he abolished the house of Lords, and vested the whole authority of parliament in the Commons; whom he afterwards divested of all their power, by driving the members when they were assembled, ignominiously out of their house; and as a testimony of the arbitrary authority with which he acted, and to shew that was not a transitory expulsion, he caused a board to be nailed on the outside of the door, on which was the following inscription, _This house to be let_. In fine, he ruled that kingdom to his last gasp, with a more absolute sway, than any King who had ever gone before, or since his time has succeeded to the throne; bringing about, that a parliament being convened by himself for the purpose, should declare the title and office of Protector hereditary in his family. All this he executed in a nation, so fierce and zealous of their liberties as the English, which is the clearest proof that can be given, of his supreme political abilities. In reality, I am disposed to believe all circumstances considered, that there never to this day, has appeared a man, who did so much, or has shewed so many, and so great marks of political ability, as Oliver Cromwel.

XVIII. In the school of this great man, his son Richard was tutored many years, and not only with instructions purely theoretical or verbal, but practical and executive. He saw all the movements, and various expedients, which his father exerted and played off, according to the various exigencies of his affairs; neither was the reason of proportioning these means, to attain particular ends, concealed from him. And of what use was all this to the disciple? Of none, because instead of teaching him how to acquire something more than he possessed, it did not so much as instruct him how to preserve that which his father had left him firmly established in; and before a year had passed over his head after his father’s death, notwithstanding it had been secured to him by act of parliament, he found himself deposed from the rank of Protector, and obliged to live retired like a private gentleman, in a country house. If within the same kingdom, and negotiating with the same people, and in the same situation of affairs, where the views were directed to the same objects, all the lessons both of theory and practice which he had received from his father, were unprofitable to this man, who did not retain one political arcanum, of the great number that had been communicated to him from the vast fund of knowledge and penetration of so able a master; and if a school of politics so circumstanced, was of no use to him who studied in it for so many years, what occasion have we to expect, that by the simple reading of books, a man should ever attain the art, of skilfully directing the business of a state?

XIX. Nor is there any reason to suppose, that Richard was a stupid man, and totally incapable of receiving instruction; for nobody has described him as such; nor is it credible, if he had been such a sort of person, that the English would have permitted him to have continued with the rank of Protector as the successor to his father, for the little time he enjoyed it. The truth is, that he was much inferior to his father in natural talents; and that no political instructions were capable of supplying this defect. Oliver was not only a man of great capacity, but of a genius that was apt and suitable to every thing, and equally understood how to command an army, or to direct a state. Over and above this, he was magnanimous, and possessed a stout heart. There was not known a more courageous soldier, in the age in which he lived. When the town of Hull was besieged by King Charles, and in a weak state of defence, Oliver at the head of only twelve horsemen, threw himself into the place, by breaking through the centre of the royal army, exposed to the fire of showers of bullets; and the preservation of the town, was owing to the many prodigies of valour which Oliver exerted in its defence. In one of the battles in which he was engaged, he took with his own hands, two standards of cavalry, and the colours of a regiment of infantry. In another battle, where one wing of the parliament army was totally routed, and the Earl of Manchester the general put to flight, Oliver, without giving himself scarce time to have a dangerous wound he had received in the battle bound up, flew to stop the earl and the fugitive troops, on whom his ardour and eloquence had so much weight, that they returned with him to the charge, and intirely put to flight and dispersed the royal army. These and other acts of extraordinary valour, joined to the many victories he obtained by dint of his intrepid courage, gained him the respect and esteem of the English, who are naturally enamoured with bravery, and idolizers of military glory.

XX. To these great talents, Oliver added the lure of hypocrisy, which has vast influence on the populace. At the same time that he was bathing his hands in the blood of Great Britain, and striving to dethrone his legitimate prince, in order to usurp the sovereign power, the name of God was constantly in his mouth; who he endeavoured to make it believed, was the especial director of his conduct, and that he himself was nothing more than an instrument, who in obedience to the divine will, executed the decrees of heaven for the public good, and to advance the prosperity of the kingdom.

XXI. These good and bad qualities, were united in Oliver Cromwel, and all conspired, to enable him to deprive a powerful monarch of his crown and life, and to overturn a great state. But of what advantage was it to his son Richard, to hear his father’s lessons, and to see these examples, if he did not inherit his father’s talents?

XXII. I am already aware, that there will be some, who will be prepared to urge as an excuse for Richard, the apology which Dionysius the younger made for himself; who, when he was asked, how it came to pass that his father from being a private man, acquired the principality of Sicily, and that he who succeeded to him as a prince, found himself reduced to live as a common subject; replied, my father left me his crown, but did not leave me heir to his fortune. But with all this, there is no doubt, that the fall of Richard was owing to his want of ability to conduct himself, and it is very probable, that the disgrace of Dionysius originated from the same cause. There is no indiscreet man whatever, who does not impute to fortune, the mischiefs he brings on himself by his imprudence. Dionysius the younger, was more cruel than his father, and was nothing near equal to him in the capacity of a warrior. Thus, the Syracusians experienced from him, severities that irritated them, and also found, that he wanted the necessary power to keep them in subjection. Between the Cromwels, this inequality was much more conspicuous. The father had an able head, and a great heart. The son had neither head nor heart; and it was for want of resolution, that at the beginning of the revolt, he suffered himself to be overpowered by the leaders of the opposite faction; and it was for want of judgment or a head, that he placed such excessive confidence in the ties of kindred, and relied wholly on his uncle and brother-in-law, who in their hearts were unfriendly to him, and in the end were those who deposed him.

SECT. V.

XXIII. There is not, as I have already said, any instruction whatever, that is capable of supplying or correcting these defects. Tuition, cannot communicate valour to him, who has it not naturally; and the knowledge of what people you can put confidence in, upon such and such particular occasions, is precisely the effect of perspicuity and native sagacity, accompanied with sollicitous and vigilant observation; neither of which, can ever be taught. He, who by his temperament and disposition is slothful, can never be made active; because the temperament is not to be mended or altered. When you have done your best to correct it, you will find, that it is like a dull jadish horse, who, when he is spurred, will be enlivened for a minute, but immediately afterwards reverts to his ordinary sloth.

XXIV. And indeed, intellectual heaviness, is more difficult to be remedied than the other. I defy you to spur a slow understanding into reasoning with any agility; nor can you make it advance a step faster without causing it to stumble; and he who, left to his own natural heaviness, might possibly hit upon something right, if he is hurried, would be for ever making mistakes and blunders. Load such a man with political lessons, and you will find, that it would have the effect of a burden laid upon a dull beast; which would make him to move more heavily than he did before. While he is revolving in his mind precepts and examples, and examining them one by one, to determine which is adaptable to the circumstances and matter he is to determine upon, he lets slip the opportunity of giving his vote in the cabinet, or of acting in the business.

XXV. But supposing the matter in question admits of delay, he will scarce find in all his expedients acquired by study, one, which in all its circumstances, will exactly quadrate with the case in debate, for the expecting to find repeated in their full extent, the same identical complex of accidents, is entertaining a metaphysical idea, and wandering out of the ordinary course of nature. It may be objected to this reasoning, that a person of ability, might modify and suit the doctrines he has been taught, by making a few alterations in them, to fit the case in question: I answer, that the same talents that it would require to do this, would enable him, without resorting to this auxiliary aid, to find out a proper expedient in the business himself. And it is worthy of observation, that an expedient, which a man who is to negotiate a business hits upon himself, although in general it may be inferior to one that might be acquired by study, still it may do better for that particular occasion, than the one of superior quality, which was the offspring of another understanding. There is no man whatever, who does not with more dexterity, carry into execution his own ideas, than those of other people; for these are plants which thrive but ill, when they are transplanted from their own native soil. Every one comprehends the force, the use, and the opportuneness of a maxim, which springs from the source of his own mind; and on account of the correspondence and agreement there is, between the reasoning and the operative faculties in one and the same person, a man’s head, accommodates itself well to the execution of the means, which his own understanding invented.

XXVI. But, abstracted from this consideration, it is certain, that all men have their distinct mode of acting; and the mode of operation, is of the utmost importance for the attaining of ends. Of what use would my having read the device, with which another man extricated himself from a difficulty, if when I had occasion to put the same scheme in practice, I found myself not possessed of the dexterity, the agility, the air and manner, with which the other gave life and efficacy to his contrivance? a deficiency in point of valour only, would spoil the whole; it being an established truth, that a tremulous hand cannot draw a steady line.

SECT. VI.

XXVII. We may add to this, that the inserting the great number of maxims and cautions which we read in histories, arose principally from the negligence, sloth, or ignorance of those, with whom the communicators of them have had to do in negotiations. If I can’t suppose in the business that presents itself to me, some of those specifical defects in the people with whom I am to treat; the imitation of the maxims, will not only stand me in no stead, but may be hurtful to me. The same motion of the arm, which in fencing may kill an unwary enemy, may give an opening to another who is watchful and attentive, to demolish the person who made the motion.

SECT. VII.

XXVIII. Finally: Experience is the arbitrator in these matters, as it is in most others. There have in all times, been eminent politicians, without the assistance of books; and very lame ones, who have read and studied them. It is certain, that in Tacitus, we see exposed, the errors by which some princes lost their crowns, and the artifices by which others acquired or preserved them. Charles the First of England, was a great admirer of Tacitus, whose works he always carried about with him, and for which he had so great a respect, that he adopted them as the oracles of his government. Notwithstanding this, they did not teach him to avoid the errors of those who had lost their crowns; nor to imitate the arts of those, who had acquired or preserved them; and with all the assistance of this great guide Tacitus, he scarce advanced a step, that did not approach him to the precipice; and by pursuing, or misunderstanding the maxims of that politician, he caused himself to descend from the throne, in order to mount the scaffold.

XXIX. By way of contrast to Charles the First of England, we may instance Charles the First of Spain, and the Fifth of Germany, who, without the assistance of literature, but left solely to the benefit of his own genius, was one of the most profound politicians of the age in which he lived.

XXX. The Romans, conquered the world without the help of books, and lost it after they knew the use of them. It was in the reign of Augustus, that the first schools of politics were opened in Rome; I mean, that then the Romans began to read the Grecian histories, in which are represented the industry and arduous application exerted by that most sagacious people, in the management of public business. Of what use was all this instruction to the Romans? Of the same it had been before to the Greeks themselves; who, when they had present and before their eyes, inserted in written histories, the conduct of their greatest politicians, were obliged to submit to the superior ability of the Romans, who had not the least benefit of those instructions; and the Romans, after that cultivation was introduced among them, proceeded by little and little, to lose all they had gained before.

XXXI. The two Roman historians, Livius and Sallust, who both wrote in the reign of Augustus, were in no wise inferior to the best Greek ones; and the Romans, in case they had not well understood the foreign ones, had then masters of their own. We may add to this, that they had for their instruction, the great example of Augustus himself; who, not from the help of reading or study, but by the dint of his own excellent genius, was without doubt a most signal politician. But all this was useless, and perhaps hurtful. Rome, which had gone on continually prospering, while she was a stranger to these lessons, was, soon after she began to listen to them, advancing fast to her destruction. Or let us express it in another way; the Romans were great politicians when they did not conceit themselves such; and ceased to be so, when by studying foreign maxims, they fancied they had improved themselves much in political knowledge.

XXXII. But where is the necessity of making a repetition of examples? All those who were the first founders of monarchies and republics, were endued with supreme political abilities; for without possessing those talents, how could they have trained a roving and savage multitude, to submit to the yoke, and live sociably and quietly under one prince, or a determined set of magistrates? What books could they study, at a time when such things were hardly known? And what examples could they copy after, who were the first that adopted that kind of management? Those who succeeded them, had the benefit of their examples for their guidance; but with all this advantage, the greatest part of them could do no more, than just preserve the dominion that fell to them by inheritance, very few improved it, and some of them lost it. So that we may apply to both one and the other of them respectively, what Cæsar in his oration for Catiline, said in the Roman senate, _Profecto virtus, atque sapientia major in illis fuit, qui ex parvis opibus magnum imperium facere, quam in nobis, qui ea bene parta vix retinemus_. (_Apud Sallustium_)

SECT. VIII.

XXXIII. What we have said in this discourse, is equally adaptable to high and low policy, both the one and the other of which, are derived from the bottom of the soul. The first requires a noble innate disposition, a clear understanding, and firm virtue; the second, cunning, dissimulation, and hypocrisy. Activity and resolution, are qualities precisely necessary in both of them; and he who possesses these requisites, whenever there is occasion to exert his talents, and apply them to practice, will be found a good politician, although he has never looked into a political book.

XXXIV. I won’t however deny, that historical instances may not afford some sort of aid, but I assert, that they don’t do it in the way that is commonly supposed. The study of history, will make no man a politician who is not such by nature and genius; but he who has the natural necessary talents for becoming one, may derive some advantage from it; because it furnishes him with a general knowledge of the various dispositions and arts of men, and because the reading of many uncommon events, may prevent his being surprized or alarmed when such occur to him; and because also, the reverses of fortune which present themselves at every turn in history, may put him on his guard, and teach him not to have too much confidence in his own security.

XXXV. It is true, that all these benefits, are attended with their inconveniences, which are a sort of counterpoise to them; in the first place, a multiplicity of instances may perplex; and in the second, the apprehensions of the misfortunes he has seen happen so frequently, may intimidate a man. The memory being crouded with a great number of species, occasions, when it is necessary to separate and examine any one particularly, a prolix discussion, which is much exposed to perplexities and mistakes. The consideration of the many reverses of fortune people are liable to, and the strange accidents that frequently befall them, which no human precaution can guard against, is apt to beget in the mind a great diffidence, which when a man is obliged to act, often renders his operations remiss and languid.

XXXVI. But with respect to the various expedients, which present themselves in history, and by which politicians of former times accomplished the ends they had in view, I apprehend that they embarras more than they assist. Even though we could meet with here and there one adaptable to the matter in question, the selecting it from among such a multitude of others, and the finding out perfectly its proportions, requires more pains and study, than it would cost a man to invent a fresh expedient, which he might derive from the fund of his own understanding.

XXXVII. The books which are wrote expressly upon politics, and which proceed by cases, conclusions and aphorisms, only teach general rules; which would occur to, and be taken in or comprehended by, every man of good understanding, without the assistance of a book; and besides this, they require so much consideration and attention, and are liable to so many exceptions, and demand so many limitations and restrictions in particular instances, that considered in the latitudinary manner in which they are propounded, they become absolutely useless.

AN APOLOGY FOR, OR VINDICATION OF, THE CHARACTERS Of some Persons who have been famous IN HISTORY.

I. Not only the people, whose defence we undertake in this discourse, lived in different times, and were of different ranks, sexes, and professions, but the subject-matters also, to which the apologies apply, were of different kinds. This diversity of itself, seems as if it would require a distinct discourse to apologize for each person separately; and in truth, some authors have written whole volumes, upon subjects that were not of any more importance. But as the variety of different matters which I have proposed to comprehend under this head, obliges me to be as concise as possible; I conjecture, that for the sake of the convenience that will result from my doing so, I may be allowed to range them under one common title. By pursuing this method, I shall prefer the benefit of the reader to my own; for if I had divided into many discourses, what might be comprehended under one general head, he would have paid me for writing a great deal, which was not of more value than so much blank paper; as in large letters, the titles of so many discourses would have occupied a considerable space; and I, with little trouble to myself, should have been paid the same price for the book, as if it had been all filled with useful matter.

EMPEDOCLES.

SECT. I.