His purpose in writing the Don Quixote has sometimes been enlarged by the ingenuity of a refined criticism, until it has been made to embrace the whole of the endless contrast between the poetical and the prosaic in our natures,--between heroism and generosity on one side, as if they were mere illusions, and a cold selfishness on the other, as if it were the truth and reality of life.[167] But this is a metaphysical conclusion drawn from views of the work at once imperfect and exaggerated; a conclusion contrary to the spirit of the age, which was not given to a satire so philosophical and generalizing, and contrary to the character of Cervantes himself, as we follow it from the time when he first became a soldier, through all his trials in Algiers, and down to the moment when his warm and trusting heart dictated the Dedication of “Persiles and Sigismunda” to the Count de Lemos. His whole spirit, indeed, seems rather to have been filled with a cheerful confidence in human virtue, and his whole bearing in life seems to have been a contradiction to that discouraging and saddening scorn for whatever is elevated and generous, which such an interpretation of the Don Quixote necessarily implies.[168] [167] This idea is found partly developed by Bouterwek, (Geschichte der Poesie und Beredsamkeit, Göttingen, 1803, 8vo, Tom. III. pp. 335-337), and fully set forth and defended by Sismondi, with his accustomed eloquence. Littérature du Midi de l’Europe, Paris, 1813, 8vo, Tom. III. pp. 339-343. [168] Many other interpretations have been given to the Don Quixote. One of the most absurd is that of Daniel De Foe, who declares it to be “an emblematic history of, and a just satire upon, the Duke de Medina Sidonia, a person very remarkable at that time in Spain.” (Wilson’s Life of De Foe, London, 1830, 8vo, Vol. III. p. 437, note.) The “Buscapié”--if there ever was such a publication--pretended that it set forth “some of the undertakings and gallantries of the Emperor Charles V.” See Appendix (D).