Sect. 50. Pag. 71.
[Or conceive a flame that can either prey upon, or purifie the substance of a soul.]] Upon this ground Psellus lib 1. de Energia Dæmonum, c. 7 holds, That Angels have bodies, (though he grants them to be as pure, or more pure than Air is) otherwise he could not apprehend how they should be tormented in Hell; and it may be upon this ground it was, that the Author fell into the error of the Arabians, mentioned by him, Sect. 7.
Sect. 51. Pag. 73.
[There are as many Hells as Anaxagoras conceited worlds.]] I assure my self that this is false printed, and that instead of Anaxagoras it should be Anaxarchus; for Anaxagoras is reckon'd amongst those Philosophers that maintain'd a Unity of the world, but Anaxarchus (according to the opinion of Epicurus) held there were infinite Worlds. That is he that caus'd Alexander to weep by telling him that there were infinite worlds, whereby Alexander it seems was brought out of opinion of his Geography, who before that time thought there remained nothing, or not much beyond his Conquests.
Sect. 54. Pag. 75.
[It is hard to place those souls in Hell.]] Lactantius is alike charitably disposed towards those. Non sum equidem tam iniquus ut eos putem divinare debuisse, ut veritatem per seipsos invenirent (quod fieri ego non posse confiteor) sed hoc ab eis exigo, quod ratione ipse præstare potuerunt. Lactant. de orig. error. c. 3. which is the very same with Sir K. Digbie's expression in his Observations on this place. I make no doubt at all (saith he) but if any follow'd in the whole tenour of their lives, the dictamens of right reason, but that their journey was secure to Heaven.
Sect. 55. Pag. 77.
[Aristotle transgress'd the rule of his own Ethicks.]] And so they did all, as Lactantius hath observed at large. Aristot. is said to have been guilty of great vanity in his Clothes, of Incontinency, of Unfaithfulness to his Master Alexander, etc. But 'tis no wonder in him, if our great Seneca be also guilty, whom truely notwithstanding St. Jerome would have him inserted in the Catalogue of Saints, yet I think he as little deserv'd it, as many of the Heathens who did not say so well as he did, for I do not think any of them liv'd worse: to trace him a little. In the time of the Emperour Claudius we find he was banish'd for suspition of incontinency with Julia the daughter of Germanicus. If it be said that this proceeded meerly from the spight of Messalina, (and that Lipsius did not complement with him in that kind Apostrophe, Non expetit in te hæc culpa, O Romani nominis et Sapientiæ magne. Sol. Not. in Tacit.) why then did she not cause him to be put to death, as well as she did the other, who was her Husbands Niece? This for certain, whatever his life were, he had paginam lascivam, as may appear by what he hath written, de Speculorum usu, l. 1. Nat. Qu. cap. 16. Which (admitting it may in a Poet, yet) how it should be excus'd in a Philosopher I know not. To look upon him in his exile, we find that then he wrote his Epistle De Consolat. to Polybius, Claudius his creature (as honest a man as Pallas or Narcissus) and therein he extols him and the Emperour to the Skies; in which he did grosly prevaricate, and lost much of his reputation, by seeking a discharge of his exile by so sordid a means. Upon Claudius his marriage with Agrippina, he was recall'd from Banishment by her means, and made Prætor, then he forgets the Emperour, having no need of him, labours all he can to depress him and the hopeful Brittanicus, and procured his Pupil Nero to be adopted and design'd Successor, and the Emperours own Son to be disinherited; and against the Emperour whom he so much praised when he had need of him, after his death he writes a scurrilous Libel. In Nero's Court, how ungratefully doth he behave himself towards Agrippina! who although she were a wicked woman, yet she deserv'd well of him, and of her Son too, who yet never was at rest till he had taken away her life, and upon suspition cast in against her by this man. Afterwards not to mention that he made great haste to grow rich, which should not be the business of a Philosopher, towards Nero himself, how well did it become his Philosophy to play the Traitor against him, and to become a complice in the conspiracy of Piso? And then as good a Tragedian as he was, me thinks he doth in extremo actu deficere, when he must needs perswade Paulina, that excellent Lady his wife, to die with him: what should move him to desire it? it could in his opinion be no advantage to her, for he believ'd nothing of the immortality of the soul; I am not satisfied with the reason of Tacitus, Ne sibi unice dilectam ad injurius relinqueret, because he discredits it himself, in almost the next words, where he saith, Nero bore her no ill will at all, (and would not suffer her to die) it must surely be then, because he thought he had not liv'd long enough (being not above 114 years old, so much he was) and had not the fortitude to die, unless he might receive some confirmation in it by her example. Now let any man judge what a precious Legacy it is that he bequeaths by his nuncupative will to his friends in Tacitus. Conversus ad amicos (saith he) quando meritis eorum referre gratiam prohiberetur, quod unum jam tamen et pulcherrimum habebat, imaginem vitæ suæ relinquere testatur. It cannot be denyed of him, that he hath said very well; but yet it must as well be affirmed, that his Practice hath run counter to his Theory, to use the Author's phrase.
[The Scepticks that affirmed they knew nothing.]] The ancient Philosophers are divided into three sorts, Dogmatici, Academici, Sceptici; the first were those that delivered their opinions positively; the second left a liberty of disputing pro et contra; the third declared that there was no knowledge of any thing, no not of this very proposition, that there is no knowledge, according to that,
——Nihil sciri siquis putat, id quoq; nescit