is a sufficient evidence; who, espousing Phalaris for a true author, has endeavoured by that means to make a great innovation in the ancient chronology. To undervalue this dispute about Phalaris, because it does not suit to one's own studies, is to quarrel with a circle because it is not a square. If the question be not of vulgar use, it was writ, therefore, for a few: for even the greatest performances upon the most important subjects are no entertainment at all to the many of the world.
I will venture here before-hand, and to give this character of Mr B.'s performance upon Æsop, that though it is not wholly unworthy of its author, yet it seems a little below him. The style of it is something worse than that of the defence of Phalaris; and the learning of it, which he ought to take for a compliment, a great deal worse. If there be one thing which he's said right in his Phalaris, about προδίδωμι and διώκω, I'll pass my word, there will not be one good thing in his Æsop, when I call it to account. His observations there about Babrius's verses, will be found worse than those here about the anapæsts of Æschylus and Seneca; his accusing me there as a
