CHAP. VIII.

A further account of Glubbdubdrib. Ancient and modern hiftory corrected.

AVING a defire to see those ancients, who were

H most renowned for wit and learning, I fet apart

one day on purpose. I propofed that Homer and Aristotle

The noble author finishes his remarks on this seventh chapter, by obferving, that "Gulliver, after having taken a transient "view of numberless illuftrious perfons, whom he does not ་་ name, closes the chapter, and gives him an opportunity of "finishing his letter;" and then addresses his son thus: "Late, ་ very late, may you become a ghost! and when one, may you equal any of Swift's fextumvirate; and may his ghost (grown lefs cynical and better instructed) rejoice to admit you into the company, from which he has so arbitrarily ex "cluded all future generations."

Gulliver has not excluded all future generations from adding to this fextumvirate. For he speaks only of the time past. What Cato's may appear to blefs the world, and oppose the torrent of corruption, in after ages, God only knows. Swift.

* Gulliver, tired of heroes, changes the fcene in this 8th chapter, and becomes curious to know the fituation of poets and philofophers, who, in their turn, have as eagerly contended for fame, as Cæfar did for power, or Brutus for liberty. He defires, that Homer and Ariftotle may make their appearance at the head of their commentators. "Homer," fays our traveller, was the taller and comlier perfon of the two; walk"ed very erect for one of his age, and his eyes were the most "quick, and piercing I ever beheld +." It is certain, that Homer has rather gained, than loft vigour by his years. Twentyfix centuries have not unbraced his nerves, or given one wrinkle to his brow. And although Gulliver has bestowed upon him the

All that is meant by Gulliver is, that Homer had the most quick and piercing genius of all human race.

vol. 6. p...

Swift.

Sce

additional

Aristotle might appear at the head of all their commentators; but these were so numerous, that fome hundreds were forced to attend in the court and outward rooms of the

additional ornament of fine eyes, yet I am apt to think they made the figure of this divine old man less awful: at least I am glad that he wanted his eye fight while he lived; fince it is im poffible not to conclude from the productions of Homer and Milton, that the mind's eye becomes more intensely discerning, when it is not interrupted by external objects. It is an old obfervation, that Homer has nourished more persons than Sylla, Cæfar, and Auguftus; and while their pictures have decayed, not a letter of the Iliad has been loft. The Grecian poet not only preferves his original form, but breathes freely, and looks beautifully, in other languages; a happier metempsychofis than Pythagoras ever dreamed of. However, if Homer was abso lutely obliged to wear the different dreffes which have been given to him, he would fometimes, I believe, find the motion of his Timbs uneafy and confined; and would prefer his own fimple attire, even to the birth-day-fuit which "our English bard has given him. The commentators have done lefs honour to Ho mer, than the tranflators. Some of those learned pedants have entirelywafted their obfervations upon particles and words; others have run into a minute exa&ness,in comparing the propriety of his images; while others, again, have endeavoured to trace out from the Iliad and Odyssey, all the rudiments of arts and fciences. Some there are who dwell on fuch narrow circum ftances as were neglected by Homer, and can only be suitable to their own confined genius. They are not able to pursue him in his fublime flights, and attempt therefore to bring him up. on a level with themselves. Their low mechanical notions reTM mind me of an absurd problem, proposed by the famous Monf. Huet, whether the Iliad might not be written upon vellum in fo small a hand, that the whole might be contained within a nut-fhell? This important question is faid to have engaged the thoughts and attention of the French court, and gives us a true picture of a laborious, tastelefs critic, upon Homer. The Dauphin and his train, are for putting the Iliad into a nut-fhell, when Alexander and his courtiers chofe the richest and most curious cabinet of Darius, as the only proper repofitory for Homer's works.

Homer

the palace. I knew and could diftinguish those two he roes at firft fight, not only from the crowd, but from each other. Homer was the taller and comlier perfon of the two, walked very erect for one of his age, and his eyes were the moft quick and piercing I ever beheld. Ariftotle ftooped much, and made ufe of a ftaff. His vifage was meagre, his hair lank and thin, and his voice hollow*. I foon discovered that both of them were perfect

Homer and Ariftotle were as oppofite as poffible in their characters: but Dr. Swift has placed them together, chiefly with a view of fhewing their commentators in that just and ridiculous light in which thofe fcholiafts ought to appear. When an age is bleffed with the productions of an uncommon genius, fuch as resembles Homer, it must, in some measure, be punished by bad imitations and comments; in the fame manner that you may have observed the fun, by its heat and influence, raifing vapours, and animating insects, that infect, and perhaps corrupt the air, in which he fhines with fo much luftre. But when an original admired author, as Ariftotle, is really erroneous, and deceives with false specious principles, what a train of errors must arife from commentators on fuch subjects, who, while they endeavour to pursue and extend a pleafing inchanted profpe&, that has no real foundation, deviate into a dark, dif. agreeable road of briers and thorns? It is on this account that the Dean has introduced Ariftotle in company with Homer. Orrery.

* This description of Aristotle is fine, and in a few words, represents the true nature of his works. By not having the immortal spirit of Homer, he was unable to keep his body ere&t; and his staff, which feebly supported him, like his commentators, made this defect more confpicuous. He wanted not some useful qualities; but these real ornaments, like his hair, were thin and ungracefult. His ftyle was harsh, and, like his voice, had neither force nor harmony. He was without doubt a man of great genius and penetration; but he did infinitely more prejudice than fervice to real literature. He ftudied words more than

In this the noble commentator feems to be mistaken; for it cannot be believed, that Ariftotle's real ornaments, however few, avere ungraceful. Hawkef

Part III. fect ftrangers to the reft of the company, and had never feen or heard of them before. And I had a whisper from a ghost, who shall be nameless, that these commentators always

facts; and delivered his philofophy perplexed with such intricate logical terms, as have laid a foundation for the endless fcholaftic difputations which have corrupted and retarded the progrefs of learning. He waged war with all his predeceffors. He never quotes an author but with a view to refute his opinion. Like the Ottoman Emperor, he could not reign in fafety, till he had first deftroyed his brethren. He was as ambitious in fcience, as his pupil Alexander was in arms. He aimed to be a defpotic original; and not only to be the prince, but the ty rant of philofophy. What then can be expected from the com. mentators of his works, who were devoid of his ingenuity, and poffeffed all his intricate follies? Ramus with his covert igno rance, and Scotus and Aquinas, with their fubdivifions and imaginary nothings, must make a contemptible figure in the Elyfian fields, which are the fuppofed manfions of chearfulness, truth, and candour, and confequently must be a very improper situation for that tribe of philofophers. Orrery.

In Gulliver's portrait of Homer, we obferve all the marks and delineations of quickness, genius, and fire, accompanied with an exquifite power and felicity, in the communication of his ideas, with clearness and force, unto the fouls of his auditors. Swift's portrait of Ariftotle is equally strong and mafterly. He ftooped much, faith he, and made use of a staff; that is, he thought, he confidered, he ruminated, he pondered deeply, on the most intricate and abftrufe points relating to the sciences; and, by the force of reafoning, which is meant by his staff, he cleared his way through briers and thorne, until he ftruck into the road which leads to fcience and philofophy.remaining part of Ariftotle's portrait, is only the representation of an abstracted fcholar, worn away and decayed with years, hard ftudy, no&urnal lucubrations, and the want of bodily exercise.

The

Some would make Swift treat Aristotle with very little refpect. But, on the contrary, Swift admired Ariftotle beyond all the philofophers which had appeared in the world, from the days of Alexander the Great to the moment he was then writing; I had almost said, even to the contempt of all others, not except.

་་

always kept in the most diftant quarters from their principals in the lower world, through a confcioufnefs of fhame and guilt, because they had fo horribly mifreprefented the meaning of thofe authors to pofterity. I introduced Didymus and Euftathius to Homer, and prevailed on him to treat them better than perhaps they deferved, for he foon found they wanted a genius to enter into the fpirit of a poet. But Aristotle was out of all patience with the account I gave him of Scotus and Ramus, as I prefented them to him, and he asked them whether the rest of the tribe were as great dunces as themselves.

I then defired the governor to call up Defcartes and Gaffendi, with whom I prevailed to explain their systems to Ariftotle. This great philofopher freely acknowledged his own mistakes in natural philofophy, because he proceeded in many things upon conjecture, as all men must do; and he found that Gaffendi, who had made the doctrine of Epicurus as palatable as he could, and the vortices of Defcartes, were equally to be exploded *. He

pre

ing Descartes, Gaffendi, and the famous Sir Ifaac NewtonFrom a little book of instructions which Dr. Swift was pleased to draw up for the use of a lady, I fhall, in his own words, give his real opinion of Aristotle. "Ariftotle, the difciple of "Plato, and tutor to Alexander the Great. His followers "were called Peripatetics, from a Greek word which fignifies to walk; because he taught his difciples walking. We have not all his works; and some of thole which are imputed to him, are fuppofed not genuine. He writ upon logic, or the art of reasoning; upon moral and natural philofophy; upon oratory, poetry, etc. and feems to be a perfon of the most comprehensive genius that ever lived." Swift.

"

* I believe you will find, that Aristotle is still to be preferred to Epicurus. The former made fome useful experiments and discoveries, and was engaged in a real pursuit of knowledge, although his manner is much perplexed. The latter was full of vanity and ambition. He was an impoftor, and only aimed at deceiving. He feemed not to believe the principles which he has afferted. He committed the government of all things to chance. His natural philofophy is abfurd. His moral philofophy wants its proper bafis, the fear of God. M. Bayle, VOL. IV.

R

One