Letters on England [39]
the constellations at the time of that famous
expedition, and fixed the vernal equinox to the middle of the Ram;
the autumnal equinox to the middle of Libra; our summer solstice to
the middle of Cancer, and our winter solstice to the middle of
Capricorn.
A long time after the expedition of the Argonauts, and a year before
the Peloponnesian war, Methon observed that the point of the summer
solstice passed through the eighth degree of Cancer.
Now every sign of the zodiac contains thirty degrees. In Chiron's
time, the solstice was arrived at the middle of the sign, that is to
say to the fifteenth degree. A year before the Peloponnesian war it
was at the eighth, and therefore it had retarded seven degrees. A
degree is equivalent to seventy-two years; consequently, from the
beginning of the Peloponnesian war to the expedition of the
Argonauts, there is no more than an interval of seven times seventy-
two years, which make five hundred and four years, and not seven
hundred years as the Greeks computed. Thus in comparing the
position of the heavens at this time with their position in that
age, we find that the expedition of the Argonauts ought to be placed
about nine hundred years before Christ, and not about fourteen
hundred; and consequently that the world is not so old by five
hundred years as it was generally supposed to be. By this
calculation all the eras are drawn nearer, and the several events
are found to have happened later than is computed. I do not know
whether this ingenious system will be favourably received; and
whether these notions will prevail so far with the learned, as to
prompt them to reform the chronology of the world. Perhaps these
gentlemen would think it too great a condescension to allow one and
the same man the glory of having improved natural philosophy,
geometry, and history. This would be a kind of universal monarchy,
with which the principle of self-love that is in man will scarce
suffer him to indulge his fellow-creature; and, indeed, at the same
time that some very great philosophers attacked Sir Isaac Newton's
attractive principle, others fell upon his chronological system.
Time that should discover to which of these the victory is due, may
perhaps only leave the dispute still more undetermined.
LETTER XVIII.--ON TRAGEDY
The English as well as the Spaniards were possessed of theatres at a
time when the French had no more than moving, itinerant stages.
Shakspeare, who was considered as the Corneille of the first-
mentioned nation, was pretty nearly contemporary with Lopez de Vega,
and he created, as it were, the English theatre. Shakspeare boasted
a strong fruitful genius. He was natural and sublime, but had not
so much as a single spark of good taste, or knew one rule of the
drama. I will now hazard a random, but, at the same time, true
reflection, which is, that the great merit of this dramatic poet has
been the ruin of the English stage. There are such beautiful, such
noble, such dreadful scenes in this writer's monstrous farces, to
which the name of tragedy is given, that they have always been
exhibited with great success. Time, which alone gives reputation to
writers, at last makes their very faults venerable. Most of the
whimsical gigantic images of this poet, have, through length of time
(it being a hundred and fifty years since they were first drawn)
acquired a right of passing for sublime. Most of the modern
dramatic writers have copied him; but the touches and descriptions
which are applauded in Shakspeare, are hissed at in these writers;
and you will easily believe that the veneration in which this author
is held, increases in proportion to the contempt which is shown to
the moderns. Dramatic writers don't consider that they should not
imitate him; and the ill-success of Shakspeare's imitators produces
no other effect, than to make him be considered as inimitable.
expedition, and fixed the vernal equinox to the middle of the Ram;
the autumnal equinox to the middle of Libra; our summer solstice to
the middle of Cancer, and our winter solstice to the middle of
Capricorn.
A long time after the expedition of the Argonauts, and a year before
the Peloponnesian war, Methon observed that the point of the summer
solstice passed through the eighth degree of Cancer.
Now every sign of the zodiac contains thirty degrees. In Chiron's
time, the solstice was arrived at the middle of the sign, that is to
say to the fifteenth degree. A year before the Peloponnesian war it
was at the eighth, and therefore it had retarded seven degrees. A
degree is equivalent to seventy-two years; consequently, from the
beginning of the Peloponnesian war to the expedition of the
Argonauts, there is no more than an interval of seven times seventy-
two years, which make five hundred and four years, and not seven
hundred years as the Greeks computed. Thus in comparing the
position of the heavens at this time with their position in that
age, we find that the expedition of the Argonauts ought to be placed
about nine hundred years before Christ, and not about fourteen
hundred; and consequently that the world is not so old by five
hundred years as it was generally supposed to be. By this
calculation all the eras are drawn nearer, and the several events
are found to have happened later than is computed. I do not know
whether this ingenious system will be favourably received; and
whether these notions will prevail so far with the learned, as to
prompt them to reform the chronology of the world. Perhaps these
gentlemen would think it too great a condescension to allow one and
the same man the glory of having improved natural philosophy,
geometry, and history. This would be a kind of universal monarchy,
with which the principle of self-love that is in man will scarce
suffer him to indulge his fellow-creature; and, indeed, at the same
time that some very great philosophers attacked Sir Isaac Newton's
attractive principle, others fell upon his chronological system.
Time that should discover to which of these the victory is due, may
perhaps only leave the dispute still more undetermined.
LETTER XVIII.--ON TRAGEDY
The English as well as the Spaniards were possessed of theatres at a
time when the French had no more than moving, itinerant stages.
Shakspeare, who was considered as the Corneille of the first-
mentioned nation, was pretty nearly contemporary with Lopez de Vega,
and he created, as it were, the English theatre. Shakspeare boasted
a strong fruitful genius. He was natural and sublime, but had not
so much as a single spark of good taste, or knew one rule of the
drama. I will now hazard a random, but, at the same time, true
reflection, which is, that the great merit of this dramatic poet has
been the ruin of the English stage. There are such beautiful, such
noble, such dreadful scenes in this writer's monstrous farces, to
which the name of tragedy is given, that they have always been
exhibited with great success. Time, which alone gives reputation to
writers, at last makes their very faults venerable. Most of the
whimsical gigantic images of this poet, have, through length of time
(it being a hundred and fifty years since they were first drawn)
acquired a right of passing for sublime. Most of the modern
dramatic writers have copied him; but the touches and descriptions
which are applauded in Shakspeare, are hissed at in these writers;
and you will easily believe that the veneration in which this author
is held, increases in proportion to the contempt which is shown to
the moderns. Dramatic writers don't consider that they should not
imitate him; and the ill-success of Shakspeare's imitators produces
no other effect, than to make him be considered as inimitable.