Whether Epicurus would not

ferred his

the child.

ren descended

from his

Joins.

effect of that natural inclination which calls to our remembrance, in this extremity, those things which we held most dear in our life-time?

Can we suppose, that Epicurus, who, when racked almost to death, as he says, with extreme pains of have pre- the cholic, comforted himself, however, that he had writings to left such fine doctrine to mankind, would have entertained so much satisfaction in a number of chil dren never so well born and bred, had he had any, as he did in the production of his inestimable writings? And that if it had been put to his choice to have left an ill-favoured untoward child behind him, or a silly ridiculous book, he would not have rather chose, as any other man of his abilities would have done, to have incurred the first misfortune rather than the last. It would, perhaps, have been impiety in St. Augustine, for example, after it had been proposed to him, on the one hand, to bury his writings, from which our religion has received so great benefit, or to bury his children, in case he had any, if he had not rather chose to have buried his children.

Of the af

fection which

For my own part, I know not whether I should not much rather have begot one perfectly formed by Montaigne my converse with the muses, than by that with my book. wife. To this, such as it is, what I give, I give ab

had for his

solutely and irrevocably, as men do to the fruit of
their bodies. That little good which I have done
for it, is no more at my own disposal.
It may
know many things that I no longer know, and hold
of me that which I have not retained; and if I
stood in need, I must borrow from thence, as much
as a stranger. If I am wiser than my book, it is
richer than me. There are few men addicted to
poetry, who would not have been better pleased to
be the fathers of the Eneid, than of the finest
youth in Rome; and who would not have borne the
loss of the latter more calmly than that of the
former: for, according to Aristotle, the poet especi

ally, of all workmen, is the fondest of his own performances.

ness of

two famous victories.

dias for his

It is scarce to be believed, that Epaminondas, who The fondboasted, that he had left to posterity two daughters, Epaminonthat would, one day, do honour to their father, viz. das for his the two noble victories which he had gained over the Lacedæmonians, would have given his free consent to exchange them for the most shining beauties of all Greece; nor that Alexander and Cæsar ever wished to be deprived of the grandeur of their glorious exploits in war, for the advantage of having children and heirs, how perfect and accomplished soever. Nay, I make a great question, whether And of PhiPhidias, or any other eminent statuary, would have finest stabeen so solicitous for the preservation and con- tues. tinuance of his natural children, as of an excellent statue, which he had finished, according to art, with long labour and study. And as to those vicious and furious passions of love, that have sometimes flamed in the breasts of fathers to their daughters, or of mothers to their sons, the like is also found in this other sort of parentage; witness the story of Pygmalion, who having made the statue of a woman of singular beauty, fell so passionately in love with this workmanship of his, that the gods, for the sake of indulging his passion, were fain to put life into it: Tentatum mollescit ebur, positoque rigore Subsidit digitis.*

Hard though it was, beginning to relent,
The iv'ry breast beneath his fingers bent.

* Qvid. Metam, lib. x. fab, 8, ver. 41, 42

The ill cus

being arm

CHAPTER LXVI.

Of the Armour of the Parthians.

It is a vicious and a very effeminate custom of the tom of not gentry of our time, not to take arms but in a case of ed till the extreme necessity, and to lay them down again upon enemy is at ever so little appearance that the danger is over. the gates. From hence arise many disorders; for, every one

crying out and running to his arms just when he should take the field, some have their armour still to buckle on when their companions are already routed. Our ancestors were wont to give their head-piece, lance, and gantlet to be carried, and did not quit the rest of their equipage as long as there was any work to be done. Our troops are, at this time, all in disorder, and make but a bad appearance, by the confusion of the baggage and servants, who cannot be far from their masters, because they carry their arms. Titus Livius, speaking of our countrymen, Intolerantissima laboris corpora vix arma humeris gerebant :† i. e. " Being most impatient of "labour, they had much ado to carry their arms on "their shoulders.' Several nations at this day retain the ancient custom of going to war without any manner of covering, or such, at least, as affords little or no defence:

says,"

Tegmina queis capitum raptus de subere cortex.‡

For helmets they their temples only bind

With a light scull-cap made of cork-tree rind.

Alexander, the most adventurous commander that ever was, very seldom wore armour and such, among us, as slight it, fare never the worse for it.

* Tit. Liv. lib. x. cap. 28.

Though Livy says nothing of the pains which the Gauls took to carry the armour, yet this follows very naturally. Perhaps he has said it elsewhere expressly, and that here Montaigne has joined the two passages in one, as he very often does.

Eneid. lib. vii. ver. 742.

French too

weight, to

for defence.

Where one man is killed for want of armour, The aranother falls by the embarrassment and weight of our of the it, or by being crushed to pieces by some violent cumberconcussion, or rude encounter with another: for in some by its truth, to consider the weight and thickness of what be proper we wear, it seems as if self-defence was our only aim, and that it is rather a load upon us than a protection: we have enough to do to support the weight of it, being so fettered and manacled as if we had nothing to contend with but our armour, and as if we had not the same obligation to defend that, as that has to shield us. Tacitus* gives a ludicrous description of the soldiers among the ancient Gauls, who were thus armed for their own defence only, without the possibility of hurting or being hurt, nor of rising again when they were once thrown down.

and uneasy

armour of

Lucullus, perceiving certain soldiers of the Medes, The heavy that formed the front of Tigranes' army, who were shut up in weighty armour, as if in cages of iron, the Medes. imagined, from thence, that he should easily defeat them, and accordingly on them he began his attack. Now that our musketeers are come into credit, 1 fancy something will be invented to immure us, for our safety, from them, and to draw us to the war shut up in little castles, like those which the ancients put upon the backs of elephants. This humour

*Tacit. Annal. lib. iii.

Montaigne was wrong in his conjecture, for now the soldiers apparel themselves for an attack, almost in the same manner as if they were going to a ball. The fashion, which regulates every thing in France, has introduced this custom there; the fantasticalness of which did not escape the criticism of the judicious censor of this age, the celebrated la Bruyere: "How came men," says he, "to think, "heretofore, that the end of going to war was either to attack or "defend? And who advised them to the use of arms both offensive "and defensive? What is it obliges them now to lay these aside, "and, whilst they put on boots to go to a ball, to support, without &6 armour, and in a doublet, the pioneers who are exposed to all the "fire from a counterscarp? Were our fathers, who did not think "such conduct of service to the prince and the country, wise or "foolish? And what heroes do we ourselves celebrate in our his"tory? A Guesclin, a Clisson, a Foix, a Boucicaut, who all wore 66 armour, and buckled on the cuirass?"

The armour

man in

fantry.

is far different from that of young Scipio, who
severely chid his soldiers for placing chevaux de frize
under water, in that part of the ditch where it was
expected that the garrison of a town, which he had
besieged, would sally out upon him, saying, "That
"they who besieged a town should think of attack-
ing it, rather than of securing themselves;" and
he suspected, with just reason, that this stratagem
would make his soldiers not so vigilant against a
surprise. He also said to a young fellow, who
showed him a target that he was very proud of,
"It is really a fine target, my boy, but a Roman
"soldier ought to trust more to his right hand than
"to his left." Now, it is only the not being used
to wear it, that makes us think the weight of our
armour insupportable:

L'husbergo in dosso haveamo: et l'elmo in testa,
Duc di quelli guerier dei quali io canto,
Ne notte è di, doppo ch' entraro in questa
Stanza, gl' haveano mai mesi da canto,
Che facile a portar come la vesta.
Era lor, percha in uso l'havean tanto.t

Two of these heroes, whom I sing, had on
Each his bright helm, and strong habergeon;
And night nor day, nor one poor minute's space,
Once laid them by whilst they were in this place?
So long accustomed this weight to bear,
Their clothes to them not lighter did appear.

The emperor Caracalla used to march, on foot, of the Ro-through the country, at the head of his forces, and armed cap-a-pee. The Roman infantry not only carried the helmet, sword, and shield (for as to armour, says Cicero, they were so accustomed to have it on, that it was no more troublesome to them than their limbs, Arma enim, membra militis essė

* Valer. Max. lib. iii. in Romanis, sect. 2. If Montaigne took this from that author, he mistook him grossly: for this author does not say that they put chevaux de frize under the water, &c. but only that some advised Scipio to do it.

↑ Ariosto, cant. xii. stanz. 30.

Orlando and Sacrapante.