THE common Opinion concerning the Nymphs, • whom the Ancients called Hamadryads, is more to the Honour of Trees than any thing yet mentioned. It was thought the Fate of these Nymphs had fo near a Dependance on fome Trees, more efpecially Oaks, that they lived and died together. For this Reason, they were extreamly grateful to fuch Perfons who preferved thofe Trees with which their Being fubfifted. Apollonius tells us a very remarkable Story to this Purpose, with which I fhall conclude my Letter.

A ceitain Man, called Rhecus, obferving an old • Oak ready to fall, and being moved with a fort of Compaffion towards the Tree, ordered his Servants to pour in frefh Earth at the Roots of it, and fet it upright. The Hamadryad or Nymph who muft neceflarily have perished with the Tree, appeared to him the next Day, and after having returned him her Thanks, told him, fhe was ready to grant whatever he thould ask. As fhe was extreamly Beau•tiful, Rhacus defired he might be entertained as her Lover. The Hamadryad, not much displeased with the Request, promised to give him a Meeting, ⚫ but commanded him for fome Days to abstain from 'the Embraces of all other Women, adding, that she 'would fend a Bee to him, to let him know when he was to be happy. Rhacus was, it feems, too much addicted to Gaming, and happened to be in a Run of ill Luck when the faithful Bee came buszirg about him; fo that inftead of minding his kind Invitation, he had like to have killed him for his Pains. The Hamaryad was fo provoked at her own Disappointment, and the ill Ulage of her Meffenger, that fe deprived Rhacus of the Ufe of his Limbs. However, fays the Story, he was not fo much a Cripple, but he made a Shift to cut down the Tree, and confequently to fell his Mistress.

Monday

N° 590. Monday, September 6.

-Affiduo labuntur tempora motu

Non fecus ac flumen. Neque enim confiftere flumen,
Nec levis hora poteft: fed ut unda impellitur unda,
Urgeturque prior venienti, urgetque priorem,
Tempora fic fugiunt pariter, pariterque fequuntur ;
Et nova funt femper. Nam quod fuit ante relictum eft;
Fitque quod haud fuerat: momentaque cuncta novantur.

Ov. Met.

The following Difcourfe comes from the fame Hand with the Effays upon Infinitude.

7E confider infinite Space as an Expansion without a Circumference: We confider Eter

W

nity, or infinite Duration, as a Line that has neither a Beginning nor an End. In our Speculations of infinite Space, we confider that particular Place in which we exift, as a kind of Center to the whole Expanfion. In our Speculations of Eternity, we confider the Time which is prefent to us as the Middle, which divides the whole Line into two equal Parts. For this Reafon, many witty Authors compare the prefent Time to an Iithmus or narrow Neck of Land, that rifes in the midft of an Ocean, immeafurably diffused on either Side of it.

PHILOSOPHY, and indeed common Senfe, natually throws Eternity under two Divifions; which we may call in English, that Eternity which is paft, and that Eternity which is to come. The learned Terms of, Eternitas a Parte ante, and Eternitas a Parte poft, may be more amuling to the Reader, but can have no other Idea affixed to them than what is conveyed to us by thofe Words, an Eternity that is paft, and an Eternity that is to come. Each of these VOL. VIII.

G

Eternities

Eternities is bounded at the one Extream; or, in other Words, the former has an End, and the latter a Beginning.

LET us first of all confider that Eternity which is paft, referving that which is to come for the Subject of another Paper. The Nature of this Eternity is utterly inconceivable by the Mind of Man: Our Reason demonftrates to us that it has been, but at the fame Time can frame no Idea of it, but what is big with Abfurdity and Contradiction. We can have no other Conception of any Duration which is paft, than that all of it was once prefent; and whatever was once prefent, is at some certain Distance from us; and whatever is at any certain Distance from us, be the Distance never fo remote, cannot be Eternity. The very Notion of any Duration's being paft, implies that it was once prefent; for the Idea of being once prefent, is actually included in the Idea of its being past. This therefore is a Depth not to be founded by human Understanding. We are fure that there has been an Eternity, and yet contradict our felves when we mea fure this Eternity by any Notion which we can frame

of it.

IF we go to the Bottom of this Matter, we fhall find, that the Difficulties we meet with in our Conceptions of Eternity proceed from this fingle Reafon, That we can have no other Idea of any kind of Duration, than that by which we our felves and all other created Beings, do exift; which is, a fucceffive Duration, made up of paft, prefent, and to come. There is nothing which exifts after this Manner, all the Parts of whofe Existence were not once actual.y prefent, and confequently may be reached by a certain Number of Years applied to it. We may afcend as high as we pleafe, and employ our Being to that Eternity which is to come, in adding Millions of Years to Millions of Years, and we can never come up to any Fountain-head of Duration, to any Beginning in Eternity But at the fame time we are fure, that whatever was once present does lye within the Reach

of

We

of Numbers, tho' perhaps we can never be able to put enough of 'em together for that Purpose. may as well fay, that any thing may be actually prefent in any Part of infinite Space, which does not lye at a certain Distance from us, as that any Part of infinite Duration was once actually prefent, and does not alfo lye at fome determined Distance from us. The Distance in both Cafes may be immenfurable and indefinite as to our Faculties, but our Reafon tells us that it cannot be fo in it felf. Here therefore is that Difficulty which humane Understanding is not capable of furmounting. We are fure that fomething must have existed from Eternity, and are at the fame Time unable to conceive, that any thing which exifts, according to our Notion of Exiftence, can have exifted from Eternity.

IT is hard for a Reader, who has not rolled this Thought in his own Mind, to follow in fuch an abftracted Speculation; but I have been the longer on it, because I think it is a demonftrative Argument of the Being and Eternity of a God: And tho' there are many other Demonftrations which lead us to this great Truth, I do not think we ought to lay afide any Proofs in this Matter which the Light of Reafon has fuggefted to us, especially when it is fuch a one as has been urged by Men famous for their Penetration and Force of Understanding, and which appears altogether conclufive to those who will be at the Pains to examine it.

HAVING thus confidered that Eternity which is paft, according to the best Idea we can frame of it, I hall now draw up thofe feveral Articles on this Subject which are dictated to us by the Light of Reason, and which may be looked upon as the Creed of a Philofo pher in this great Point.

FIRST, It is certain that no Being could have made it felf; for if fo, it must have acted before it was, which is a Contradiction.

SECONDLY, That therefore fome Being muft haye exifted from all Eternity.

G&

THIRDLY,

THIRDLY, That whatever exifts after the manner of created Beings, or according to any Notions which we have of Exiftence, could not have exifted from Eternity.

FOURTHLY, That this eternal Being must therefore be the great Author of Nature, the Ancient of Days, who, being at infinite Distance in his Perfections from all finite and created Beings, exifts in a quite different manner from them, and in a manner of which they can have no Idea.

I know that feveral of the School-men, who would not be thought ignorant of any thing, have pretended to explain the Manner of God's Existence, by telling us, That he comprehends infinite Duration in every Moment; That Eternity is with him a Punctum ftans, a fixed Point; or, which is as good Sense, an Infinite Inftant; That nothing with Reference to his Existence is either paft or to come: To which the ingenious Mr. Cowley alludes in his Defcription of Heaven,

Nothing is there to come, and nothing past,
But an Eternal NOW does always laft.

thefe Propofi

FOR my own Part, I look upon tions as Words that have no Ideas annexed to them; and think Men had better own their Ignorance, than advance Doctrines by which they mean nothing, and which indeed are felf-contradictory. We cannot be too modeft in our Difquifitions, when we meditate on him who is environed with so much Glory and Perfection, which is the Source of Being, the Fountain of all that Existence which we and his whole Creation derive from him. Let us therefore with the utmost Humility acknowledge, that as fome Being muft neceffarily have exifted from Eternity, fo this Being does exift after an incomprehenfible manner, fince it is impoffible for a Being to have exifted from Eternity after our Manner or Notions of Existence. Revelation confirms thefe natural Dictates of Reafon in the Accounts which it gives us of the Divine Existence, where