When therefore we contemplate the various relations already hinted, and mark in how friendly a manner they bring the most distant beings together, we may be tempted to say with the philosopher, that "all things are full of friendly principles.' But we must not suffer this sentiment to carry us too far, Things are not only full of friendly principles, but of hostile likewise. ס יי The fangs of the lion are as much the work of nature as the tendrils of the vine, or the nurturing teats of the ewe. To what then have these formidable weapons relation; for nature, we are assured, makes nothing in vain?P If to offence, then is the lion himself a source of hostile relation; if to defence, then is he the object of injury from some other; so that hostility in either case is necessarily implied. Were it possible to doubt as to the offensive here, we could never doubt as to the structure of the spider's web; a structure clearly taught her by nature for offence alone. These and the like preparations, such as the boar's tusk, Where, then, were these ends, when the things themselves first appeared? In external and visible nature? This from the hypothesis is impossible, for the hypothesis makes them subsequent. No other place then remains, but either the Sovereign Mind, or a mind subordinate, according as the work itself is a work of nature or of art." See before, p. 281, 282. I have taken the preceding extract from a manuscript of that able scholar and philosopher George Gemistus, otherwise called Pletho, who flourished in the fifteenth century, both before and after the taking of Constantinople. If it apply not immediately to the subject, it has at least the merit of being something rare and ingenious. It is a morsel of that controversy among the learned Greeks of this period, whether the preference in philosophy was due to Plato or to Aristotle. Scholarius, among others, was for Aristotle; Pletho for Plato; from whose work on this subject (which was an answer to Scholarius) this extract is taken. There is another small work of Pletho's upon the same subject, entitled, Περὶ ὧν ̓Αριστοτέλης πρὸς Πλάτωνα διαpépera, printed at Paris, 1541; and Bessario (a learned Greek of that age, who went over to the Latin church, and became a cardinal) wrote a large tract to defend the Platonic doctrine, entitled, Contra Calumniatorem Platonis. The printed edition is in Latin, but the whole work is extant in Greek among the manuscripts of St. Marc's library at Venice, to which library Bessario bequeathed his own. There is, too, a fine letter remaining of the same Bessario, addressed to Michael Apostolius; who, though he took Bessario's side, and defended Plato, yet appears to have done it, according to Bessario's letter, with a zeal and bitterness not becoming him; a zeal and bitterness too frequent in controversy, and (unfortunately for the cause of letters) nowhere more than among learned men, and those in particular whom we call professors of humanity. The epistle above mentioned may be found in Greek and Latin, published by the learned Boivinus, in the second tome of l'Histoire de l'Academie Royale des Inscriptions, &c. p. 455; and it is well worth perusal, for its temper and elegance. See also Cicero de Senectute, c. 15. Vitis quidem, &c. • Πάντα δὲ φίλων μεστά. Arrian. Εpict. 1. iii. c. 24. p. 486. edit. Upt. P This was an axiom inculcated everywhere by Aristotle; and more especially when he is speaking of final causes, which, though now they make a small part of philosophy, were never omitted by the Stagirite, as often as they could be introduced. His own words deserve attention: 'H púσis οὐθὲν ποιεῖ μάτην, ἀλλ ̓ ἀεὶ ἐκ τῶν ἐνδεχο μένων τῇ οὐσίᾳ περὶ ἕκαστον γένος ζώου Tò piorov: "Nature makes nothing in vain; but with respect to each animal genus, out of the several ways practicable, she always makes that which is best." De Animal. Ingressu, p. 28. edit. Sylb. And again, in the same tract: 'H pois over deployeî μάτην, ὥσπερ εἴρηται πρότερον, ἀλλὰ πάντα πρὸς τὸ βέλτιον ἐκ τῶν ἐνδεχομένων : "Nature creates nothing in vain, but (as has been said already) all things for the best, out of the several ways that are practicable." Ibid. p. 141. edit. Sylb. the eagle's talons, the viper's venom, &c. are all founded on such wants as can never be satisfied amicably. The wants, therefore, of this character naturally rouse up similar instincts, and thus the world becomes filled as well with hostile relations, as friendly. Torva leæna lupum sequitur, lupus ipse capellam. Virg. Ecl. ii. It appears to have been these relations of hostility that first gave rise to the phenomena of natural and moral evil. Now whether real evil exist at all, or whether we should confine it, with the Stoics, to evil purely moral, are questions beyond the scope of this treatise to examine. It will be sufficient to say, that much evil is imaginary, and founded merely on false opinion that of the evils more real, there are many which have their end, and so may be said to partake, ultimately, the nature of good. Many of the difficulties and distresses which befall the human species, conduce to save it from sloth, and to rouse it up to action; to action which is, in fact, the very life of the universe. Pater ipse colendi Haud facilem esse viam voluit, primusque per artem Virg. Georg. i. If there were no dangers, then could there be no fortitude; if no temptations, then no temperance; if no adverse accidents, nor loss of what we love, then no submissive resignation, no pious acquiescence. Οὐκ ἂν γενοῖτο χωρὶς ἐσθλὰ καὶ κακά ̓Αλλ ̓ ἔστι τις σύγκρασις, ὥστ ̓ ἔχειν καλῶς. Again, the jaws of the lion, the poison of the rattle-snake, the sword of the conqueror, and every instrument of destruction, may be said incidentally to prepare the way for generation; and that not only by making room for new comers, but by furnishing fresh materials towards their respective production. For though the theatre of the world so far resembles other theatres, that it is perpetually filled with successions of new spectators; yet has it this in peculiar, that the spectators which succeed here, are made out of those that went before. Every particular birth, or 9 The fine distich here translated is from Euripides, quoted by Plutarch, De Isid. et Osirid. p. 369. edit. Xyland. As to the speculations here offered, and the solutions suggested, we may well apply to them that just reflection of the Stagirite, though used by him on a different occasion. Ισως δὲ χαλεπὸν καὶ περὶ τῶν τοιούτων σφοδρῶς ἀποφαίνεσθαι, μὴ πολλάκις έπεσκεμμένον· τὸ μέντοι διηπορηκέναι περὶ ἑκάστου αὐτῶν, οὐκ ἄχρηστόν ἐστι: 66 Perhaps it is difficult to prove any thing clearly upon subjects such as these, without having often considered and examined them. And yet to have thrown out doubts concerning them, is a thing not altogether without its use.' ." Aristot. Præd. p. 40. edit. Sylb. The subject-matter is the same in many succeeding beings ; as the river is the same, which, as it fows along, refeets many dif ferent objects. It is in this sense we are to natural production, appears an act, if not of hostility, at least of separation; a secession from the general mass; a kind of revolt from the greater bulk in favour of a smaller; which smaller would detach itself, and, were it able, be independent. In a word, as friendship, by cementing multitude, produces union; so strife, by dissolving union, produces multitude; and it is by multitude that the world becomes diversified and replenished. And hence we may perceive the meaning of what Heraclitus says in Plutarch, where he calls "war, the father and king and lord of all things;" and asserts," that when Homer prayed, That strife be banished both from gods and men, he was not aware that he was cursing the generation of all things; as, in fact, they deduce their rise out of contest and antipathy." The same philosopher adds immediately, "that the sun could not pass his appointed bounds: that otherwise, if he could, Tongues he would find to patronise the cause:" meaning, by this mythological way of talking, that the sun could not desert his course, because so much depended on it; or otherwise, if he could, that being himself one of the primary authors of generation upon this earth, and well knowing how much strife cooperated in the same work, he would surely look out for an advocate (were such any where existing) to defend the cause of strife against the calumnies of Homer." understand the following assertion, and not with the least view to equivocal production. Οὐκοῦν διὰ τὸ τὴν τοῦδε φθορὰν ἄλλου εἶναι γένεσιν, καὶ τὴν τοῦδε γένεσιν ἄλλου εἶναι φθορὰν, ἅπαυστον ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι τὴν METABOλhy: "Wherefore, from the dissolution of one thing being the generation of another, and the generation of one thing being the dissolution of another, it necessarily follows that the change must be perpetual, and never cease." Arist. de Gen. et Corr. 1. i. c. 3. p. 10. edit. Sylb. The change here alluded to is the common course of nature in the production of beings, which, were it not for the process above mentioned, would either soon be at a stand, or would require a perpetual miracle for the supply of new materials. 'HрákλEITOS μèv yàp &νTIKρus ñóλeμov ὀνομάζει πατέρα καὶ βασιλέα καὶ κύριον πάντων· καὶ τὸν μὲν Ομηρον, εὐχόμενον, Εκ τε θεῶν ἔριν, ἔκ τ ̓ ἀνθρώπων ἀπολέσθαι, λανθάνειν φησὶ τῇ πάντων γενέσει καταρώμενον, ἐκ μάχης καὶ ἀντιπαθείας τὴν γένεσιν ἐχόντων· ἥλιον δὲ μὴ ὑπερβήσεσθαι τοὺς προσήκοντας ὅρους· εἰ δὲ μὴ, Γλώττας μιν δίκης ἐπικούρους ἐξευρήσειν. Plutarch. de Isid. et Osir. p. 370. edit. Xyland. fol. Dr. Squire, the late bishop of St. David's, has given a fair edition of this tract in the original, to which he has subjoined an English translation ; but (according to a practice too frequent with the best critics) he has, in the passage above quoted, attempted to mend, where no emendation was wanting. Chalcidius plainly alludes to the same sentiment of Heraclitus in the following extract from his commentary on Plato's Timæus Proptereaque Numenius laudat Heraclium (lege Heraclitum) reprehendentem Homerum, qui optaverit interitum et vastitatem malis vitæ, quod non intelligeret mundum sibi deleri placere: si quidem sylva, quæ malorum fons est, exterminaretur. Chal. p. 396. edit. Meurs. 1617. In the Greek quotation Homer is supposed to wish inadvertently against the generation of all things; in the Latin, he wishes, in the same inadvertent manner, against the existence of sylva, that is, of " matter.” The difference is easily reconciled, if we suppose matter to be the basis of generation, and to be essentially requisite to the existence of things generable and pe Y From all these speculations one thing at least appears, (whatever else may be doubtful,) that relations of hostility, as well as friendship, have their use in the universe. Both also equally arise from want on one side, and from the power of removing it on the other. The difference is, that in friendly relations the help is communicated either with pleasure, as when the mother suckles her child; or at least without pain, as when we shew a traveller his way, In hostile relations, the help, without regard to the communicator, is either taken by force, as when the wolf devours the lamb; or obtained by stratagem, as when the spider ensnares the fly. And thus by the reciprocal relations of want and help, (both of which under a variety of forms exist in every individual,) is there a kind of general concatenation extended throughout the universe; while each being communicates what help it can afford, and obtains, in its turn, that help which it requires. To all these relations must be added that chief, though mentioned last, that of the whole universe, and every being in it, to the first, supreme, and intelligent Cause, through which relation they are called his offspring, and he their Father. Here, indeed, the relations are not blended as before; they are all purely referable to want on one side, and all purely arise from spontaneous help on the other; the correspondence existing, as far as perfect has respect to imperfect, independent to dependent, the object desired to the beings which desire," the maker to his works, the parent to his children.* And now to conclude with a remark, which regards relation in general. "As to every continuous being the genus of quality gives distinctions, which help to mitigate its sameness, and render it, as it were, discrete; so to beings discrete, however remote, the genus of relation gives a connection, which serves to mitigate their diversity, and to render them, as it were, continuous. Thus is the world maintained as well in its union, as in its variety, while both species of quantity run through the whole, and through every part." And so much for the arrangement or genus of relation, its nature, its properties, its utility, and extent." rishable, out of which this lower and visible relation between the object of desire, and world is wholly composed. How far the want of good leads to arts and action, may be seen in p. 14, and in notes subjoined. We here perceive it to extend, not only to the whole animal world, but even to the vegetable. More will be found on this subject in the treatise upon Motion, a part of the present work. " Πῶς δὲ καὶ ἐφετὸν πᾶσιν ὁ θεὸς λέγεται, εἰ μηδεμία σχέσις ἐστὶ πρὸς τὸ ἐφετὸν Tŷ ¿qieμévo; “How is God called an object desirable to all beings, if there be no the being which desires ?" Simplic. in Pradic. p. 43. B. edit. Basil, 1551. See before, note c, p. 314. * St. Paul has given his sanction to that verse of Aratus, Toû yàp kal yévos ẻoμév: "For we are his offspring." Arat. Phon. v. 5. Acts xvii. 28. y Before we quit this arrangement, we shall subjoin the following note. The old logicians held, that things intelligible, and intellection, were relatives; so also things sensible, and sensation. But CHAPTER XI. CONCERNING ACTION AND PASSION. ACTION, ITS FIVE SPECIES-THOSE OF PASSION RECIPROCATE-MIND DIVINE, HUMAN-LATTER, HOW ACTED UPON-POLITICS, ECONOMICS, ETHICS. PASSIVITY IN BODIES ANIMATE AND INANIMATE. ACTION AND RE-ACTION, WHERE THEY EXIST, WHERE NOT. SELF-MOTION, WHAT, AND WHERE. POWER, WHENCE AND WHAT-REQUISITE BOTH IN ACTION AND IN PASSION. POWER, THOugh like nONENTITY, Yet widely different. DOUBLE IN THE REASONING FACULTY. POWER, NOT FIRST IN EXISTENCE, BUT ENERGY, WHICH NEVER HAS CEASED, OR WILL CEASE, OR CAN CEASE. IN treating of relatives, we have considered principally those which possess the relative character in a degree above every then they started an objection-If relatives coexist, and always reciprocate in their existence, what would become of Euclid's theorems, supposing there were no geometricians? What would become of sensible objects, supposing there were no beings sensitive? One solution of this objection is derived from the percipient: the first original and supreme percipient is everywhere, and always in the full energy of universal perception. Another solution is from the objects perceived, be they sensible or intelligible. Every such object has a double nature; an absolute nature, and a relative one. The sound A is an octave to the sound B. B ceases, and A continues. A is no longer an octave, but still it is a sound: and even though we should call it no sound, if there were to be no hearers; it would still be an undulation of air, capable of producing sound, if there were an ear capable of perceiving it, that is, an organ adequate to the sensation. The instance given on this occasion by the philosophers Porphyry and Simplicius, is curious, because it is taken from that difficult system of music, the enharmonic. The following are the words of Simplicius: Κὰν γὰρ διὰ ῥαθυμίαν ἀποβάλωμεν ποτὲ τὴν τῶν ὄντων γνῶσιν, οὐδὲν ἧττον μένει τὰ ὄντα, ὅπερ ἐστὶ τὰ ἐπιστητά· καὶ γὰρ ἐν τῇ μουσικῇ πρότερον μὲν κατηκούομεν διέσεως, νῦν δὲ ἀνεπαίσθητοι τούτου τοῦ diaσthμatos éσμév: "For if ever, through any sloth or indolence, we reject knowledge, those things, which are intelligible, remain nevertheless. It is thus that in music we used in former days to hear the quarter-tone, but now we are unable to distinguish this interval." Simplic. in Præd. p. 48. B. edit. Basil. 1551. Porphyry having told us, that though there were no geometry, considered as a science, there would still be objects geometrical, subjoins—ἐπεὶ καὶ ἐν τῇ μουσικῇ τὸ μὲν πάλαι τοῦ διεσιαίου διαστήματος ἤκουον oἱ μουσικοί, ὕστερον δὲ ἀμεληθείσης τῆς ἐναρμονίου μελωδίας, καθ ̓ ἣν τὸ διεσιαῖον διάστημα ἐμελῳδεῖτο, οὐκέτι τοῦ τοιούτου αἴσθησις ἔσται (lege ἐστὶ διαστήματος· καὶ δῆλον ὅτι ἐν τῇ φύσει ἐστὶ τὸ αἰσθητὸν τοῦτο διάστημα, εἰ καὶ ἡ αἴσθησις ἐκλέλοιTEV: "For thus, too, in music, musicians used formerly to hear (and distinguish) the interval of the quarter-tone; but in latter days, the enharmonic melody having been neglected, by which this interval used to be modulated, there is no longer now any sensation of such an interval: and yet it is evident that this sensible interval has an existence in nature, although for the present the sensation of it be lost." Porphyr. in Prædic. p. 40. ed. Paris. 1543. Porphyry flourished in the third century; Simplicius in the sixth. We may remark, by the way, from the above quotations, how fast the arts of elegance were sinking, even in the more early of those two periods. As for the state of philosophy in the latter period, we may form a judgment of it by what we learn from Simplicius in the same treatise, with regard to the Stoics. Having, in his Commentary on the Predicaments of Action and Passion, given many quotations from the Stoic logic, he concludes the chapter with the following words: Πολλὴ δὲ ἡ τῶν τοιούτων ἐξερ |