could not remedy, he had had this answer some months ago. In a small part of the last of those three years which he says were all laid out upon Phalaris, I wrote my notes on Callimachus; and Mr Graevius, perhaps, will thank Mr B. if in six years time he will send him the like upon any other author. But suppose his accusation true; I had rather have spent all that time in discovering truth, than have spent three days in maintaining an error.
But he says the whole thing is "a very inconsiderable point, which a wise man would grudge the throwing away a week's thought upon." And I doubt not but many others, whose designs and studies are remote from this kind of learning, will follow this censure. To such men as these I must answer that if the dispute be quite out of their way, they have liberty to let it alone; it was not designed for them, but for others, that know how to value it; who, if the principal point about Phalaris were quite dropped, will think the other heads, that are here occasionally handled, not unworthy of a scholar. But that the single point, whether Phalaris be genuine or no, is of no small importance to learning, the very learned Mr Dodwell
