“In 1762 the Marquis d’Argens published Ocellus Lucanus, and afterwards Timæus Locrus, both writers, who according to Chalmers’ Biography had been neglected by universal consent. To show, however, the glaring absurdity and outrageous injustice of what Chalmers says of this Tract of Ocellus, it is necessary to observe, that independently of the approbation of this work by those two great luminaries of philosophy, Plato and Aristotle, an enumeration of the various editions of it will be sufficient. Ocellus was first printed in Greek at Paris 1539, and afterwards with a Latin version by Chretien 1541; by Bosch 1554 and 1556; by Nogarola, Ven. 1559; by Commelin 1596; at Heidelberg 1598; Bologna, 1646, and revised by Vizanius 1661; and lastly, by Gale, Cambridge, 1671. Here are ten editions, the last of which is only 49 years prior to the year 1700; so that the universal consent had not yet been given to neglect this work. Let us see when it could have taken place afterwards. D’Argens’ translation appeared in 1762. A new French translation by the Abbé Batteux was printed in 1768; and he made it without knowing of the other. D’Argens’ version was reprinted in 1794; and an amended Greek and Latin text by Rudolph was printed at Leipsic in 1801; so that there are in all fourteen known editions, of which Gale’s is the best. This book has certainly been read in Greek, Latin, and French, and it most certainly will be read in English, if any competent translator will favour us with a good version. “In addition to the testimonies of Plato and Aristotle in favour of this work, Philo, the platonizing Jew, says: ‘Some are of opinion, that it was not Aristotle, but certain Pythagoreans, who first maintained the eternity of the world; but I have seen a treatise of Ocellus, in which he says, the world was not generated, and is imperishable, and indeed he proves it by most exquisite reasoning. Censorinus also, De Die natali, cap. ii. says, ‘that the opinion that the human race is perpetual, has for its authors Pythagoras the Samian, Ocellus Lucanus, and Archytas of Tarentum.’ He is likewise mentioned by Jamblichus in his Life of Pythagoras; by Syrianus in Aristot. Metaphys.; by Proclus in his Commentary on the Timæus of Plato, who, as we have shown in the Notes on Ocellus, demonstrates that he was wrong in ascribing two powers only instead of three to each of the elements; and in the last place, this Tract is cited by Stobæus in Ecl. Phys. lib. i. c. 24: all which testimonies clearly prove that Chalmers is a man who cannot say with Socrates (in Plat. Gorg.) that he has bid farewell to the honours of the multitude, and has his eye solely directed to truth[6].”