MISCELLANEOUS, ESSAYS. 



389 



But the exercise of maturer judge- 

 ment readily separates sueli unions> 

 .and detects the apparent parallel- 

 ism of objects, which, sufficiently 

 pursued, will be found in time in- 

 finitely to diverge. This judge- 

 ment, however, is in many cases 

 never exercised at all, 



A premature perusal of the clas- 

 sics often prevents a subsequent 

 cool revisal of their beauties and 

 their merits, impels the man to 

 consider the subjects of the studies 

 of the boy as trifling- and disgust- 

 ing, and indolently to acquiesce in 

 first iniprt;ssions, rather than retrace 

 steps which appeared unpleasant, 

 because involuntary But he who, 

 at maturer years, is led, by taste or 

 jnchnation, to examine and com- 

 pare the lights of antiquity, will be 

 astonished at their numerous detec- 

 tions of his errors first imbibed, 

 and corrections of the implicit faith 

 wliich he has put in some of its 

 oracles; and perhaps no where 

 will he find less reason for confi- 

 dence than in the secretary of A- 

 drian (for such was Suetonius), 

 however high his post, or good his 

 means of information. 



The title of tliis essay, indicates 

 my intention to confine niy obser- 



vations to the comparative fidelity 

 in narration, of tlie celebrated wri- 

 ters therein-mentioned, without 

 touching on their other relative 

 perfections or imperfections. The 

 instance which I have selected to 

 illustrate thii' point (for abundance 

 of them might be found*:) may to 

 some appear trifling ; and it may 

 be asked, who, in the eighteenth 

 century, c;in be interested in the 

 question, whether at Rome, in the 

 first, was burnt by the hand of her 

 natural protector, or of what uti- 

 lity is the discussion u-hich tends to 

 wash away one spot from the bloody 

 garb of Nero ? The objection should 

 not come from the theoretic lover 

 of truth, never despising enquiry 

 and discrimination ; nor will the 

 expulsion of falsehood from history 

 ever appear trifling to its practical 

 admirers. Tiie question too, is not 

 totally unconnected with the well- 

 known controversy in morals, on 

 the existence of gratuitous malevo- 

 lence, as any alleged motives for 

 tliis supposed conduct of the tyrant, 

 are utterly unsatisfactory to the ra- 

 tional mind : f But its chief im- 

 portance rests on the grounds I have 

 premised. If we detect an histo- 

 rian in any one instance, in a pe- 



• Such as Suetonius's assertion, that Tiberius abolished the privilege of sanctuary, 

 when the contrar)', which is asserted by Tacitus, is proved beyond a doubt , by coin 

 subsequent to his reign ; his making Germanicus conquer a king of Armenia, when 

 Armenia had no king, and was not at war with Rome ; h;s representation of the cha- 

 racter of Nero, in many respects dilfering from the traits given by Tacitus and others ; 

 his mentioning the loss of an army in Asia, when from Tacitus it appears, it was only 

 the rumour of sMCh a loss. Surely, these variances would not have a])peared trifling 

 tO'Lipsius, who took such pains to reconcile these authors, when ditferini; in the 

 point, whether Agrippa Posthumus was killed by a centurion or a tribune of the sol- 

 diers. Josephus observes, chat no man's character has been more misrepresented, 

 Irom adulation on the one side, and prejudice on the other, than Nero's. 



f The desire of seeing the resemblance of Troy in flames, is too childish to be im- 

 puted even to the fantastical mind of Xero, and the design of burning a great city, in 

 order to improve and rebuild it, if indeed necessary, in thi£ plenitude of his power, 

 for such oliject 'while under our moilerate government similar improvement is With- 

 out difficulty attained on valuing the houses pulled down) does not seem to be con- 

 fitmcd by his subscquciu actiiins, 



C c 3 remptory 



