tius Carneades, qui docebat, posse Epicureos suam causam sine hac commenticia declinatione defendere. Nam cum doceret, esse posse quendam animi motum voluntarium, id fuit defendi melius, quam introducere declinationem, cujus præsertim causam reperire non possent. Quo defenso, facile Chrysippo possent resistere.

De ipsa atomo dici potest, cum per inane moveatur gravitate et pondere, sine causa moveri, quia nulla causa accedat extrinsecus. Rursus autem, ne omnes a physicis irrideamur, si dicamus, quidquam fieri sine causa, distinguendum est, et ita dicendum, ipsius individui hanc esse naturam, ut pondere et gravitate moveatur, eamque ipsam esse causam, cur ita feratur. Similiter ad animorum motus voluntarios, non est requirenda externa causa. Motus enim voluntarius eam naturam in se ipse continet, ut sit in nostra potestate, nobisque pareat: nec id sine causa. Ejus enim rei causa, ipsa natura est."— De Fato, cap. 11. This is ingenious: but it does not seem to exempt us from the fatality of the Stoics. These voluntary motions of the soul, though not dependent on external causes, are dependent on the nature of the soul, in the same manner as the motion of gravity depends on the nature of atoms. Nor do we escape from the difficulty on the Platonic system: for that proceeds on the supposition that matter had a soul, even before God framed the world. Plutarch discusses this question, De Animæ Procreatione, in Timæo Platonis. In the course of that treatise, he thus expresses himself, with respect to the doctrine of atoms:

Επικούρῳ μὲν γὰρ οὐδὲ ἀκαρὲς ἐγκλίναι τὴν ἄτομον συγχωρού

σιν, ὡς ἀναίτιον ἐπεισάγοντι κίνησιν ἐκ τοῦ μὴ ὄντος· αὐτοὶ δὲ κακίαν καὶ κακοδαιμονίαν τοσαύτην, ἑτέρας τε περὶ σῶμα μυρίας ἀτοπίας καὶ δυσχερείας, αἰτίαν ἐν ταῖς ἀρχαῖς οὐκ ἐχούσας, κατ ̓ ἐπακολούθησιν γεγονέναι λέγουσιν.

66

. Lactantius ascribes the popularity of the Epicurean doctrine, not to its merit, but to the alluring term of pleasure. Epicuri disciplina multo celebrior semper fuit, quam cæterorum, non quia veri aliquid afferat, sed quia multos populare nomen voluptatis invitat."-Divin. Instit. lib. iii. cap. 17.

After the revival of learning in the fifteenth century, Epicurus began to be spoken of in more favourable terms, at least in point of morals, than the undistinguishing character of barbarous ages and the prejudices of schoolmen and monks had previously allowed. Gassendi says, "Cum Epicurus infamis fuisset habitus tota illa pene sæculorum serie, qua literæ bonæ sepultæ jacuerunt; vix tamen libros humaniores, pulvere excusso, rediisse in manus ante duo fere sæcula, quam omnes pene eruditi symbolum pro eo contulerunt."-De Vita et Moribus Epicuri.

Among many others, some of whom held up Epicurus as the man, of all the ancient philosophers, who came nearest to the truth; some, on the other hand, were content with apologising for his errors; Gassendi mentions Arnaud of Provence. "Andreas Arnaudus Forcalqueriensis in hac Provincia Prosenescallus in libello, cui nomen Joci, Apologiam pro Epicuro inter cætera edidit, brevem illam quidem, et foliolis paucis; sed in quâ tamen ea delibantur ex Laërtio præsertim, atque Seneca, unde convincatur, quod vir ille pereruditus initio proponit, fuisse Epicurum injustius lacessitum, et laniatum ab obtrectatoribus."

There are several remarks scattered up and down both Cœlius Rhodiginus and Alexander ab Alexandro, on the doctrines of Epicurus, and the character of the Epicureans. Sir William Temple, in the second part of his Miscellanea, has an elegant and ingenious article on the subject of gardening, written in the year 1685, in which he descants upon the gardens of Epicurus, and defends their owner with considerable address. The essay is well worth perusal, both as to its matter, and as a specimen of the author's style.

I shall close the present subject with a curious passage from Pliny, from which it appears not only that Epicurus was worn on rings and engraved on cups, as a family omen of good luck, but that "Iidem palæstras athletarum imaginibus, et ceromata sua exornant, et vultus Epicuri per cubicula gestant, ac circumferunt secum."-Natur. Hist. lib. xxxv.

ON THE ARISTOTELIAN PHILOSOPHY.

MACROBIUS gives an account of an author who expresses himself thus: "Tum ille: Recte et hoc Aristoteles, ut cætera. Nec possum non assentiri viro, cujus inventis nec ipsa natura dissentit.”— Saturn. lib. vii. cap. 6.

The quantity of Latin and Greek in these pages is much to be regretted: because in consequence thereof the information will reach but few ladies, that the occasion on which this high compliment was paid to the infallible philosopher, whom Nature, the head of the sex, could not well venture to contradict, was most honourable to them. As philosophy was the topic of some of Cicero's dialogues, oratory of others, so the subject of the question in hand was wine: respecting which Aristotle, it seems, had laid down the following dogma; that women get drunk very seldom, but old men very often. The name of the gentleman who admitted the fact, in consideration of the authority, was Disarius but the very words above quoted intimate, that he was borne down, not convinced. Referring this point to the test of family experience, let us look at less hyperbolical testimonials to the character of a philosopher, who still exercises a considerable, though diminished influence over the opinions of the learned and the scientific. But as his works are extant to tell their own tale,

and as his opinions are before the world, operative in themselves, and the subjects of frequent criticism, not the mere objects of literary curiosity, my remarks on them will run into no considerable length.

"Cum omnis ratio diligens disserendi duas habeat partes; unam inveniendi, alteram judicandi : utriusque princeps, ut mihi quidem videtur, Aristoteles fuit."--Ciceron. Topic. cap. 2.

Casaubon thus expresses his opinion of Aristotle's superiority to the Stoics, in the knowledge of logic: Logicæ peritiam commendat: de qua multum se Stoïci jactabant: ego pueros puto fuisse, præ divino Aristotele: et eorum in hoc genere scripta úlλov xaì pλývapov, præ Aristotelis Organo: quo opere omnia mortalium ingenia (divina aut de rebus divinis semper excipio:) longe superavit." Persium, sat. v. lin. 86.

- In

Rapin has this passage in his Reflections on Logic: Il ne parût rien de réglé et d'étably sur la Logique, devant Aristote. Ce génie si plein de raison et d'intelligence, approfondit tellement l'abysme de l'esprit humain, qu'il en pénétra tous les ressors, par la distinction exacte, qu'il fit de ses opérations. On n'avoit point encore sondé ce vaste fond des pensées de l'homme, pour en connoistre la profondeur. Aristote fut le premier, qui découvrit cette nouvelle voye, pour parvenir à la science, par l'évidence de la démonstration, et pour aller géométriquement à la démonstration, par l'infaillibilité du syllogisme, l'ouvrage le plus accomply, et l'effort le plus grand de l'esprit humain. Voilà en abrégé l'art et la méthode de la Logique d'Aristote, qui est si seure, qu'on ne peut avoir de parfaite certitude dans le raisonnement que par