<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="50"><p resp="perseus">For I will not denie, but that mans wit may make <name rend="italic">Poesie, </name> which should be <foreign xml:lang="grc">εἰκαστική</foreign> which some learned haue defined figuring foorth good things to be <foreign xml:lang="grc">θαναστική</foreign> which doth contrariwise infect the fancie with vnwoorthie obiects, as the Painter should giue to the eye either some excellent perspectiue, or some fine Picture fit for building or fortification, or containing in it some notable example, as <name rend="italic">Abraham</name> sacrificing his sonne <name rend="italic">Isaack, Iudith</name> killing <name rend="italic">Holofernes, Dauid</name> fighting with <name rend="italic">Golias, </name>may leaue those, and please an ill pleased eye with wanton shewes of better hidden matters. But what, shal the abuse of a thing, make the right vse odious? Nay truly though I yeeld, that <name rend="italic">Poesie</name> may not onely be abused, but that being abused by the reason of his sweete charming force, it can do more hurt then anie other armie of words: yet shall it be so farre from concluding, that the abuse should giue reproach to the abused, that contrariwise, it is a good reason, that whatsoeuer being abused, doth most harme, being rightly vsed (and vpon the right vse, ech thing receiues his title) doth most good. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="paragraph" xml:base="urn:cts:engLit:sidney.defence.perseus-eng1" n="51"><p resp="perseus">Do we not see skill of Phisicke the best ramper to our often assaulted bodies, being abused, teach poyson the most violent destroyer ? Doth not knowledge of Law, whose end is, to euen &amp; right all things, being abused, grow the crooked fosterer of horrible iniuries? Doth not (to go to the highest) Gods word abused, breede heresie, and his name abused, become blasphemie? Truly a Needle cannot do much hurt, and as truly (with leaue of Ladies be it spoken) it cannot do much good. With a swoord thou maist kill thy Father, and with a swoord thou maist defende thy Prince and Countrey: so that, as in their calling <name rend="italic">Poets, </name>fathers of lies, they said nothing, so in this their argument of abuse, they prooue the commendation. They alledge herewith, that before <name rend="italic">Poets</name> began to be in price, our Nation had set their hearts delight vppon action, and not imagination, rather doing things worthie to be written, then writing things fit to be done. What that before time was, I think scarcely <name rend="italic">Spinx</name> can tell: since no memerie is so ancient, that hath not the precedens of <name rend="italic">Poetrie. </name> And certain it is, that in our plainest homelines, yet neuer was the <name rend="italic">Albion</name> Nation without <name rend="italic">Poetrie. </name> Marry this Argument, thou it be leuiled against <name rend="italic">Poetrie</name>, yet is it indeed a chain-shot against all learning or bookishnes, as they commonly terme it. Of such mind were certaine <name rend="italic">Gothes, </name> of whom it is written, that hauing in the spoile of a famous Cittie, taken a faire Librarie, one hangman belike fit to execute the frutes of their wits, who had murthered a great number of bodies, would haue set fire in it. No said an other verie grauely, take heed what you do, for while they are busie about those toyes, wee shall with more leisure conquere their Countries. This indeed is the ordinarie doctrine of ignorance, and many words sometimes I haue heard spent in it: but bicause this reason is generally against al learning, as wel as <name rend="italic">Poetrie</name>, or rather all learning but <name rend="italic">Poetrie</name>, because it were too large a digression to handle it, or at least too superfluous, since it is manifest that all gouernment of action is to be gotten by knowledge, and knowledge best, by gathering manie knowledges, which is reading; I onely with <name rend="italic">Horace</name>, to him that is of that opinion, <foreign xml:lang="lat">Iubio stultum esse libenter</foreign>: for as for <name rend="italic">Poetrie</name> it selfe, it is the freest from this obiection, for <name rend="italic">Poetrie</name> is the Companion of Camps. I dare vndertake, <name rend="italic">Orlando Furioso</name>, or honest king <name rend="italic">Arthure</name>, will neuer displease a souldier: but the quidditie of <foreign xml:lang="lat">Ens et Prima materia, </foreign> will hardly agree with a Corcelet. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="paragraph" xml:base="urn:cts:engLit:sidney.defence.perseus-eng1" n="52"><p resp="perseus">And therefore as I said in the beginning, euen <name rend="italic">Turkes</name> and <name rend="italic">Tartars</name>, are delighted with <name rend="italic">Poets. </name> <name rend="italic">Homer</name> a <name rend="italic">Greeke</name>, flourished, before <name rend="italic">Greece</name> flourished: and if to a slight coniecture, a coniecture may bee apposed, truly it may seem, that as by him their learned men tooke almost their first light of knowledge, so their actiue men, receiued their first motions of courage. Onely <name rend="italic">Alexanders</name> example may serue, who by <name rend="italic">Plutarche</name> is accounted of such vertue, that fortune was not his guide, but his footestoole, whose Acts speake for him, though <name rend="italic">Plutarche</name> did not: indeede the <name rend="italic">Phoenix</name> of warlike Princes. This <name rend="italic">Alexander</name>, left his Schoolemaister liuing <name rend="italic">Aristotle</name> behinde him, but tooke dead <name rend="italic">Homer</name> with him. Hee put the Philosopher <name rend="italic">Callisthenes</name> to death, for his seeming Philosophicall, indeed mutinous stubbornnesse, but the chiefe thing hee was euer heard to wish for, was, that <name rend="italic">Homer</name> had bene aliue. Hee well founde hee receiued more brauerie of minde by paterne of <name rend="italic">Achilles</name>, then by hearing the definition of fortitude. And therefore if <name rend="italic">Cato</name> misliked <name rend="italic">Fuluius</name> for carrying <name rend="italic">Ennius</name> with him to the field, It may be answered, that if <name rend="italic">Cato</name> misliked it, the Noble <name rend="italic">Fuluius</name> liked it, or else he had not done it ; for it was not the excellent <name rend="italic">Cato Vticencis</name>, whose authoritie I would much more haue reuerenced: But it was the former, in truth a bitter punisher of faultes, but else a man that had neuer sacrificed to the <name rend="italic">Graces</name>. Hee misliked and cried out against all Greeke learning, and yet being foure score yeares olde beganne to learne it, belike fearing that <name rend="italic">Pluto</name> vnderstood not Latine. Indeed the <name rend="italic">Romane</name> lawes allowed no person to bee carried to the warres, but hee that was in the souldiers Role. And therefore though <name rend="italic">Cato</name> misliked his vnmustred person, he misliked not his worke. And if hee had, <name rend="italic">Scipio Nasica</name> (iudged by common consent the best <name rend="italic">Romane)</name> loued him: both the other <name rend="italic">Scipio</name> brothers, who had by their vertues no lesse surnames then of <name rend="italic">Asia</name> and <name rend="italic">Affricke</name>, so loued him, that they caused his bodie to be buried in their Sepulture. So as <name rend="italic">Catoes</name> authoritie beeing but against his person, and that answered with so farre greater then himselfe, is herein of no validitie. </p></div></div></body></text></TEI>