Tllnber a Dogwoot) witb /©ontafgne 



ludicrous figure, his own image in the 

 flood ; for he was always sincere and 

 always just. 



Emerson has dissected Montaigne's 

 skepticism with keen precision ; but he 

 failed to comprehend how the needs of the 

 essayist interfered with the philosopher's 

 investigations. " 'T is of no importance 

 what bats and oxen think," he observes; 

 but Montaigne was of a different opinion. 

 To him one thing was about as important 

 as another. The religion of Christ served 

 him no better for a chatty essay than liars, 

 or smells, or pedantry, or names, or the 

 vanities of speech. Whatever happened 

 to challenge his spirit of inquiry suggested 

 an essay as a main object, and he rum- 

 maged his memory and experience and 

 foraged in books for wherewithal to build 

 it. In very large part his materials were 

 literary — that is, they were selected with 

 a view to literary art, and not for investi- 

 gation's sake alone. Much of his skepti- 

 cism comes out incidentally while he is 

 chinking up the crevices of his work. 



Finally, we may say that Montaigne's 

 299 



