AN ANSWER TO A Late PAMPHLET, CALLED An Essay concerning Critical and Curious Learning; In which are contained Some short Reflections on the Controversy  
Betwixt Sir William Temple, and Mr. Wotton.  
AND THAT  
Betwixt Dr. Bentley, and Mr. boil.  
London: Printed and Sold by E. Whitlock, near Stationers-Hall, 1698.   

AN ANSWER TO A Late PAMPHLET, CALLED, An Essay concerning Critical and Curious Learning, etc.  
SIR,  
I Thank you for the Pamphlet you sent me the other Day; and, because you was pleased to make it the Condition of your Gift, that I should return my Thoughts upon it, I have here sent them by the first Post, and I believe much sooner than you expected. You have them in the very Order they at first occurred to me, without any manner of Correction; for truly I did not think it worth my while to make any.  
First then, It is obvious to remark, that the Author, whoever he is, has given his Essay a wrong Title. If he had had a mind to deal honestly with his Reader, it should have run thus: An Essay, etc. in which are contained several False and Scandalous Reflections on Christ-Church in Oxon. But to turn over the Title Page. In his Preamble (where, I assure you, he pretends abundance of Modesty) he cannot forbear making open Proclamation, that he, and his Friend, to whom he addresses this Piece, have resolved to censure and damn all Books that shall be hereafter published; to which purpose they have established a Critical Correspondence between them. Woe be to all poor Writers for the Future! But he has given the World no reason to hope well of this grand Design. For in the present Case (which it seems is the first he has meddled in) he is far from being so fair and equitable a Moderator as he ought, or indeed as he himself would pretend to be. For he has every where shown that Dogmatical Humour and Arrogance he blames in others, and has taken a most intolerable Freedom where he ought not to have done it. I have but two Reasons to think that Dr. Bentley himself did not write this Treatise. One is, that the Matter is infinitely too polite, and the Style too smooth and flowing for him: The other, that I hardly believe his Self-Love and Pride would have suffered him to have dealt so freely and justly with his own and his Friend's Character, tho' it was the most likely way to do him a real Service at the bottom. For these Reasons I must acquit the Doctor, and tell you, that I rather believe the Author to be an Esquire, as he calls himself, and one of those mighty Wits amongst you in Town, that set up for the Overthrow of Religion; who, the better to gain their Ends, lay hold on all Occasions of traducing the Universities, and undermining the Dignity and Character of the Clergy. And tho' I have said this of him, yet it is no wonder that he is Dr. Bentley's Friend and Acquaintance.  
But I would gladly know what there is in this Piece, that should make it gain so mighty a Reputation, as you say it has; and, particularly, how it comes to deserve your Esteem, notwithstanding the Aversion you are pleased to say you have to the Satirical Stuff in it. It is indeed called (I should say miscalled) An Essay concerning Critical and Curious Learning; which, I must own, is a very promising Title, and one might reasonably expect something new and delicate upon so nice an Argument. It came to my Hands with an extraordinary Advantage, in that it had your Recommendation. I durst not, upon the first Reading, pass any Censure upon it. I suspended my Judgement, and read it over again and again; but I liked it worse every time I did so. I cannot indeed but acknowledge I had some Reason to be biased, when I found the Worthy and Reverend Dean of Christ-Church so undecently treated, and the Reputation of his whole Society arraigned in a most imperious and insolent manner.  
The serious part of this Piece is nothing but a Farrago of common Notions, put indeed into tolerable good Language. But the Author talks so very abruptly, and has so cramped himself upon every Head, that what he says of his Performance in Jest, may very well be applied to it in good earnest; viz. that by endeavouring to say a great deal in so narrow a compass, and short a time, he has scarce said any thing. But why did not our Essayer take a wider compass and a longer time for this mighty Undertaking of his? What Provocation had he to speak to any Subject, unless he would have done it to purpose? Was it a Task imposed upon him, which he was willing to get off his Hands as soon as he could; and was he at the same time obliged to print it? When he delivers his own Opinion, and gives the finishing Turn to any Argument, he does it in as positive, decisive a manner, as if Dr. Bentley himself had done it. He bears down all before him; and, when he is going to prove some ordinary known thing, puts himself into as great a Sweat and Tumult, as if he was about some of the knottiest Problems in all Mathematics, and was doing no less than squaring the Circle. To make a Show of much Learning (a Qualification not very common amongst the Wits) he runs through all the Sciences, but after a very odd manner. For when the Reader expects some handsome Account of them, he baulks him with lame and imperfect Definitions. He pretends to have pressed his Matter very close; but it is still so spongy, that it may be squeezed much closer, and fairly reduced into nothing. I have often heard honest Will P— talk as roundly over a Glass of Wine of all kinds of Learning and Languages, as our Author, without ever suspecting him to have any clear or full Notions of what he was about. There is a sort of Common-place, which any Man, that keeps good Company, may be easily furnished with, and yet at the same time be no more a Scholar, than the Pope's Parrot, that could repeat the Creed, by keeping much Company with his Holiness, was a Christian.  
In short, he is sometimes a proud supercilious Critic, sometimes a dry and starched Common-placer, and always impertinent to his Reader, and inconsistent with himself. If it was worth while, I would undertake to refute every thing material out of the Essay itself. One Sentence contradicts another. He is not of the same Opinion two Leaves together. Here you have him crying up experimental Philosophy, but with abundance of Limitation, as the most pleasant Study in the World, and which a Man ought to spend all his Time in.— Presently he forgets this, and talks as loudly for all the other Sciences one after another; only Mathematics and Metaphysics have the hard hap not to be of the number of his Favourites, when he comes to talk of his beloved Argument, of Critical Learning in the Modern Acception, as it is taken for a thorough understanding of Classic Authors, and an exact knowledge of all those Rules, by which Men judge and determine nicely of all the finer Parts and Branches of Humane Literature; he displays all his Force, and is most wonderfully instructive. He informs his Reader, that Aristotle was the first that drew up these Rules into compass, made Criticism an Art; That Horace, Longinus, and all the Critics, both Ancient and Modern, drained most of their Knowledge from him. This is just as much, and no more, than has been said an hundred times in Dedications and Prefaces to Plays. Not only Mr. Congreve, Dennis, etc. but even Settle and D'urfey have often said it before him; and most of them in their present Controversy with Mr. Collier, make nothing of talking of Aristotle, as familiarly as this Gentleman, without ever having read one Word of him. But he goes on victoriously, and says Criticism is without all doubt a very good thing, notwithstanding what some People say of it: And hath a pretty Similitude about Alexander and Caesar nothing to the purpose, from whence however he infers, as fast as Hops, the great Advantage of Critical Knowledge. Such Deductions are of the same Stamp with his Friend's Dr. Bentley's. But I am sure I argue more logically, when I say that because Dr. Bentley writes false Latin and false English, that therefore, by way of contrary he is in the right of it; for a good Cause may be, and often is, ill defended. After having mustered up all this, he leaves his Argument for a while, and makes a digression upon the Use of Frequent Compositions. Here he crowds his fine Notions very thick upon us; and, to single out one from amongst many, he tells us, that all the Faculties of the Mind, whether Active or Passive, are mightily heightened and improved by Exercise. This Proposition is certainly true; and so it will hold, if I should affirm it of the Faculties of the Body, and illustrate my Position with the Famous Story of Milo, who first tried his Strength in carrying a Calf, and by constant Application was at last able to do as much for an Ox. But who could I hope to inform by it? Is any body, that had Common Sense or Learning before, made ever a-whit the wiser for this? If I say, critically speaking, that Virgil is a better Poet than Martial, and Heroic Poetry nobler than Anagram, I talk upon safe Grounds, and no Body can contradict me without palpably contradicting the Truth; but what then? When a Man will needs be an Author, especially of Essays, it is expected he should produce arden's aliquid, something new and entertaining: Montaign and St. Euremont are remarkable for it. There is yet another notable Piece of Criticism; and it is, That Tully was a better Poet than an Orator: This is true too, and I have nothing to say in answer to it. But to return with him from this digression: The next thing he presents us with, is a terrible Description of the Modern Critics; viz. That they are biased by Partiality, and, in spite of all their specious Pretences, a strong Tincture of ill Nature and Virulence unhappily appears in every Line. They tell us indeed in their Prefaces, that they have dealt very handsomely and candidly with the Authors they comment upon. But when we come to the Remarks themselves, we are entertained with nothing but continual Snarling and Insolence. This will prove as true as the rest of his Axioms and wise Say, if rightly applied, that is, to himself.  
I have now run through the Essay, and should next in order examine his Reflections on Mr. Wotton and Dr. Bentley; but I doubt he plays Booty with them, especially with the latter; or, perhaps, I may be mistaken, and this invisible Hero, Almanzor-like, kills all before him; spares neither Friend nor Foe. Let the Case be how it will, I have nothing to say to him upon their score. What I have else to add, shall only be a Word or two in Answer to his Compliments and Civilities to Christ-Church. And truly one would be apt to fancy he was never of any University himself, by his being so great a Stranger to the Respect that is due to the Learned Societies in them. His ill Breeding would make one suspect too he had never been any where else neither, nor had had the Education which young Squires usually have.  
In his first Attack upon the College, he takes Dr. Bentley's Method, and says peremptorily Mr. boil's Name is falsely set to the late Answer to the Dissertation against Phalaris 's Epistle, etc. and that he is sure he had no hand at all in it. This he does out of pure Complaisance to Mr. Boil as a Gentleman, that there may be no Quarrel between them two; for he is resolved to cut and slash the Book to Pieces, and without any more to do, says it is full of nothing but little Witticisms and Schoolboys Jests. He begs leave of his Reader (being a very Civil Person) to suggest his own Opinion. And truly his Opinion is, that it was made (as most Compositions in thta College are) by a Select Club: Every Man seems to have thrown in a Repartee, or so, in his Turn; and the most ingenenious Dr. Aldrich, no doubt, was at the Head of them, and smoked, and punned plentifully on this Occasion. A pretty Conceit this! What a Dutch Image of Wit and Composition is here! There is just as much Wit and Sense, as Probability and good Manners in it. For when a Gentleman has affixed his Name to a Book, and owned it, shall any one that dares do neither, give him the Lie, and pretend Civility at the same time? It was a Clownish bold Piece of Freedom at first in Dr. Bentley, and is now the same in this Ambuscado-Writer. Such rude Treatment would have been abominable to any one of Mr. boil's Quality, had he been a Man of no Note, had he never given any Proofs of his extraordinary Genius and great Learning to the World; and as the Case is quite otherwise, you and the Author must pardon me, if I say it is downright impudent. But this is only a Sample of some more Behaviour of the same kind. He has plenty of such Civilities in store for the Dean and Students of Christ-Church, who he takes to be the true Authors of the Book. But he does not troulbe himself to answer them in any thing material; but, without the least Provocation, takes their manners most severely to Task, puts a mark upon them, and assures his Friend, that they distinguish themselves from the rest of the University, not by their extraordinary Learning, but their abominable Arrogance. He wonders how they can have the Confidence to condemn Pride in another, when they have so great a Share of it themselves. He would very fain know, why it is not as excusable in Dr. Bentley, who is a scholar, as in some young Men, who cannot reasonably be supposed to be so. He is very angry with the Dean, and admonishes him for encouraging this haughty proud Temper of theirs by his own Example; and as a strong Conviction that he does so, he calls a small Compendium of Logic to witness, in which the Dean weas so unfortunate as to censure the Author of the Art of Thinking. I know not what Civilities T. R. Esq; thinks are due to Foreigners; he is not very courtly, I am sure, to his own Countrymen. But farther; he ventures to affirm, that the Compendium of Logic is one of the worst that he ever read. The reason is, because it is written in good Latin. A most unpardonable Fault indeed! Well, but this is not all: He has something more to quarrel with them about, and that is for calling Dr. Bentley Pedant, when he can prove them to be as rank Pedants themselves. For (says he) I take it to be as errand a Sign of Pedantry to publish bad Editions of old Authors, and to be highly solicitous about the various Readins of them, which former Editions have only neglected, because they were insignificant as to lard English Writings with Greek and Latin. He is very much in the Right of it; but what is this to Christ-Church? Yes; it is directly leveled at it. For (he continues) Dr. Aldrich is pretty notorious at present for employing his young unexperienced Students this way. I know not what he means by employing his young unexperienced Students: But I know, and, under his Favour, it may be said without any Partiality at all, that those Books which have been put forth by this College, both in the late learned Dr. Fell's time, and the present Dean's too, have a very good Reputation, not only here at home, but are likewise much approved by Foreigners abroad; which, I hope, will recommend them to Dr. Bentley's Esteem, whatever it may do to this Gentleman's. As for the late Edition of Aesop's Fables; it will be time enough to defend it, when it is accused. Here the Preface is only concerned, for calling Dr. Bentley plain quidam. He would, I suppose, have had his Name ushered in with half a dozen Epithets of respect; not considering how scurvily he is using Dr. Bentley's Betters all this while. But the next Charge bears hard upon them: For it is about no less than two Epigrams and one Verse, in a Poem, entitled, Articuli Pacis, which he has found in a Book lately published, called, Examen Poeticum duplex, etc. He is very solicitous (it being a Matter of vast Consequence) to discover the Author of them; and at last ventures to affirm, that either the Dean himself, or some body else made them. The Conjecture is not much unlike that of the Dutch Commentators about Horace's Mother, who, after all their Enquiry, could not be positive who she was, but they unanimously agreed that he certainly had one. This being sagely premised; he proceeds to give Dr. Bentley some Comfort, and to infuse a Balm into the Wound, the Sting and Venom in the Tale of these wicked Epigrams might possibly have made in his Mind, assuring him en Critic, that these are by no means the best Copies in that Collection. As to this; if there was any need of an Apology (which I do not apprehend there is) it might be alleged as a good one, that that Collection was made privately by some Gentlemen, that did not think fit to own themselves, and the Poems spoken of were inserted without the Author's Leave or Knowledge; and therefore they are not strictly obliged to account for them. But this is not very much to the Point in hand, and I shall wave it.  
Here our Critic had just ended his Reflections, but that something came into his Head, that was once said by one Joannes in Nudibus, which he could not let go unanswered. The Words are; If the Doctor had had either good Sense or good Manners, he would not have fallen so hastily upon a learned Body, that was so very able to justify itself, and to confound him. It was the most likely way to make a Shipwreck of the little Reputation he had got. But even as he has mangled and qualified this Objection, he has not taken it off so clearly as he imagines he has done. He would not have had the Doctor begun this Dispute, because the College was below so great a Man's Resentments. And he now advises him not to answer any Part of Mr. boil's Book, because, that which is abusive is so blunt and ungenteel, that it cannot affect his Reputation at all; and the Authorities in the other are so falsely cited and misapplied, that they answer themselves. For many Reasons of the same Nature, I would not have given you so much trouble about this Pamphlet, had not you obliged me to it; and if you find my Style rugged and unpleasant (as I doubt you will) you must blame you self, and excuse,  
Oxon, Aug. 6th 1698. SIR, Yours, etc.  
FINIS.