Essays, or discourses, vol. 1 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the SpanishFeijoo, Benito Jerónimo
Philosophy
Essays, or discourses, vol. 1 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the Spanish
Feijoo, Benito Jerónimo
Spanish essays -- Translations into English
XLIX. But let us hear from Lucan, the reasons of convenience, on which
that depraved politician grounded his advice for perpetrating so horrid
and atrocious an act of treachery, in order, that by comparing them
with those of Machiavel, we may discern, whether the principles of
the Florentine master were well understood in those times. But it is
proper to observe, that Lucan makes the eunuch Photinus the author of
the advice, instead of Theodotus; whereas other writers do not make
Photinus the adviser, but assisted by the general Aquilas, the executor
of the wickedness; and some others again, attribute to this last, a
great part, if not the whole of the suggestion.
L. But whether Theodotus, Aquilas, or Photinus, was the first who
suggested the treacherous cruelty, is not material to the main
question. The arguments used with Ptolemy, to incite him to the
deed, were as follow: That great as his father’s obligations were to
Pompey, he ought to consider, that he owed more to himself than he
did to him; that Fortune had declared itself in favour of Cæsar, and
against Pompey, and that it would be the height of imprudence to take
part with that side, to whom Fortune was averse; that although it was
true, the affording Pompey an asylum had the appearance of an honest
action, still, princes ought not to attend to what was honest, but to
what was useful; that the monarch, who is desirous of confining his
operations within the limits of justice, is more a slave of the laws,
than a master of his dominions; that the supreme power is paramount to
all law, nor can it acknowledge any subjection; that it was beyond a
doubt, the affording Pompey protection in his kingdom, would soon bring
on him, the invincible arms of Cæsar, and the power of the whole Roman
empire; against which attack, he would be unable to make the slightest
resistance; that he already, as far as his ability went, had complied
with his obligations to Pompey, by wishing that he might be victorious;
but now that Cæsar had won the day, he ought to attach himself to
die conqueror, and endeavour to court his favour, by taking away the
life of Pompey; that pursuing the medium, of neither receiving nor
destroying him, would be the worst resolution they could take, for that
by such a determination, they would lose the useful, without attaining
the honest; that Cæsar would always look upon him as an enemy, who
having had it in his power, should neglect to destroy his rival,
although all the rest of the world should regard him as ungrateful,
for refusing to protect his benefactor. It was also suggested, that
it would not be difficult to assign a religious motive for destroying
Pompey, and to cover the cruelty of the action under that pretence; for
it might be alledged, that he was sacrificed to the goddess of Fortune,
who had already declared herself adverse to the unhappy hero; that this
sacrifice seemed not only to be dictated by religion, but justice also;
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account