Essays, or discourses, vol. 3 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the SpanishFeijoo, Benito Jerónimo
History
Essays, or discourses, vol. 3 (of 4) : $b Selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the Spanish
Feijoo, Benito Jerónimo
Spanish essays -- Translations into English
physics, their morals, and their policy, than to their history. Read the
treatise of the famous Bacon _de sapientia veterum_, who, by pursuing
this idea, has been very happy in his explanation of not a few of those
fables.
L. Thus we perceive, this is a matter capable of affording innumerable
conjectures; but not a basis, solid enough to build any general system
upon; which is the point we have chiefly endeavoured to demonstrate in
this discourse; and particularly, with respect to the union or connexion
of fable with history; and more especially with sacred history; which
differs as much, and is as widely distant from the errors of paganism, as
the greatest truth is from the greatest lie.
THE ORIGIN OF FABLE IN HISTORY.
In a Letter from FEYJOE, to a Correspondent, in Answer to one censuring
the foregoing Discourse.
DEAR SIR,
I. My esteem for your person, induces me to respect your letter; but if I
was not restrained by the first of these considerations, I don’t know how
I might be disposed to treat the epistle; because the charge you alledge
against me in it, is destitute of all foundation. You first of all
point-blank accuse me, with having in my essay on the _Divorce of History
from Fable_, advanced, there is no fiction whatever of paganism, which
is derived from sacred history; and then treat the maxim as savouring
of impiety. But if broaching this maxim was criminal and a sin, alas!
what must become of the honour and piety, of the most learned, and most
religious abbot Branchini? for he was the man who first advanced, and
afterwards with all his might, endeavoured to enforce and establish this
system, and asserted, that all the fables of the pagans, were founded
on, and derived from profane history. But why does this sentiment savour
of impiety? You answer this, and say, because it takes away a species of
support from the truth of holy writ. This can hardly be esteemed a very
substantial species of support. Whoever would be inclined to doubt or
disbelieve the scripture truths, notwithstanding the firm foundation on
which they rest, would not be disposed to credit them, on account of the
weak auxiliary confirmation they derive from such a support? That the
origin of the fables of the Gentiles, were derived from those truths,
is at best but a doubtful, and a speculative opinion; and how can a
doubtful proof confirm any man in the belief of a matter, which rests, or
is founded in that sort of proof? But if a fair proof of this could be
adduced, it would answer no purpose, for it would be very easy for him
who was guilty of the impiety, in order to elude any consequences from
the detection, to pretend he derived the hint from another fable, and
that these tales are the children of one another, and that those of the
latest date, are introduced to ornament and give lustre to those which
preceded them.
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