<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text><body><div type="edition" n="urn:cts:engLit:sidney.defence.perseus-eng1" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="paragraph" xml:base="urn:cts:engLit:sidney.defence.perseus-eng1" n="29"><p resp="perseus">Now to that which commonly is attributed to the praise of Historie, in respect of the notable learning, is got by marking the successe, as though therein a man shuld see vertue exalted, &amp; vice punished: truly that commendation is peculier to Poetrie, and farre off from Historie ; for indeed Poetrie euer sets vertue so out in her best cullours, making fortune her well-wayting handmayd, that one must needs be enamoured of her. Well may you see <name rend="italic">Vlisses</name> in a storme and in other hard plights, but they are but exercises of patience &amp; magnanimitie, to make them shine the more in the neare following prosperitie. And of the contrary part, if euill men come to the stage, they euer goe out (as the Tragedie writer answered to one that misliked the shew of such persons) so manicled as they litle animate folkes to follow them. But the Historie beeing captiued to the trueth of a foolish world, is many times a terror from well-doing, and an encouragement to vnbrideled wickednes. For see we not valiant <name rend="italic">Milciades</name> rot in his fetters ? The iust <name rend="italic">Phocion</name> and the accomplished <name rend="italic">Socrates</name>, put to death like Traytors? The cruell <name rend="italic">Seuerus</name>, liue prosperously? The excellent <name rend="italic">Seuerus</name> miserably murthered? <name rend="italic">Sylla</name> and <name rend="italic">Marius</name> dying in their beds? <name rend="italic">Pompey</name> and <name rend="italic">Cicero</name> slain then when they wold haue thought exile happinesse? See we not vertuous <name rend="italic">Cato</name> driuen to kill himselfe, and Rebell <name rend="italic">Cæsar</name> so aduanced, that his name yet after 1600 yeares lasteth in the highest honor? And marke but euen <name rend="italic">Cæsars</name> owne words of the forenamed <name rend="italic">Sylla</name>, (who in that onely, did honestly to put downe his dishonest Tyrannie) <foreign xml:lang="lat">Litteras nesciuit: </foreign> as if want of learning caused him to doo well. He ment it not by Poetrie, which not content with earthly plagues, deuiseth new punishments in hell for Tyrants: nor yet by Philosophy, which teacheth <foreign xml:lang="lat">Occidentos esse, </foreign> but no doubt by skill in History, for that indeed can affoord you <name rend="italic">Cipselus</name>, <name rend="italic"> Periander</name>, <name rend="italic">Phalaris</name>, <name rend="italic">Dionisius</name>, and I know not how many more of the same kennell, that speed well inough in their abhominable iniustice of vsurpation. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="paragraph" xml:base="urn:cts:engLit:sidney.defence.perseus-eng1" n="30"><p resp="perseus">I conclude therfore that he excelleth historie, not onely in furnishing the minde with knowledge, but in setting it forward to that which deserues to be called and accounted good: which setting forward and mouing to well doing, indeed setteth the Lawrell Crowne vpon the <name rend="italic">Poets</name> as victorious, not onely of the <name rend="italic">Historian</name>, but ouer the <name rend="italic">Philosopher</name>, howsoeuer in teaching it may be questionable. For suppose it be granted, that which I suppose with great reason may be denied, that the <name rend="italic">Philosopher</name> in respect of his methodical proceeding, teach more perfectly then the <name rend="italic">Poet</name>, yet do I thinke, that no man is so much <foreign xml:lang="lat">philophilosothos, </foreign> as to compare the <name rend="italic">Philosopher</name> in moouing with the <name rend="italic">Poet. </name> And that moouing is of a higher degree then teaching, it may by this appeare, that it is well nigh both the cause and effect of teaching. For who will be taught, if hee be not mooued with desire to be taught? And what so much good doth that teaching bring foorth, (I speake still of morall doctrine) as that it mooueth one to do that which it doth teach. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="paragraph" xml:base="urn:cts:engLit:sidney.defence.perseus-eng1" n="31"><p resp="perseus">For as <name rend="italic">Aristotle</name> saith, it is not <foreign xml:lang="grc">γνώσις</foreign>, but <foreign xml:lang="grc">πράξις</foreign> must be the frute: and how <foreign xml:lang="grc">πράξις</foreign> can be without being moued to practise, it is no hard matter to consider. The <name rend="italic">Philosopher</name> sheweth you the way, hee enformeth you of the particularities, as well of the tediousnes of the way, as of the pleasaunt lodging you shall haue when your iourney is ended, as of the many by turnings that may diuert you from your way. But this is to no man but to him that will reade him, and reade him with attentiue studious painfulnesse, which constant desire, whosoeuer hath in him, hath alreadie past halfe the hardnesse of the way: and therefore is beholding to the <name rend="italic">Philosopher, </name> but for the other halfe. Nat truly learned men haue learnedly thought, that where once reason hath so much ouer-mastered passion, as that the minde hath a free desire to doo well, the inward light each minde hath in it selfe, is as good as a <name rend="italic">Philosophers</name> booke, since in Nature we know it is well, to doo well, and what is well, and what is euill, although not in the wordes of Art which <name rend="italic">Philosophers</name> bestow vppon vs: for out of naturall conceit the <name rend="italic">Philosophers</name> drew it ; but to be moued to doo that which wee know, or to be mooued with desire to know. <foreign xml:lang="lat">Hoc opus, hic labor est. </foreign> </p></div></div></body></text></TEI>