,

You ought likewise to give your self a little concern about the bringing Pythagoras & Cyrus together. Dionysius Halicarnasseus tells us 13 that the former went into Italy, about the 50 Olympiad, that is about the 577 year before Christ. He makes use of the word xarà (about), which shews that this date need not be strictly taken. And indeed, Diogenes Laertius shews us, that he flourished about the 60 Olympiad, that is, about 40 years after; which if we understand of the time of his death, which was at the age of 80, he will then have been 50 years old when he went into Italy; & he will appear to have been born about the 520 year before Christ. If Pythagoras the Philosopher be the same with him who offered to fight

at the Olympie Games, among the children, and upon being rejected, desired to be received among the men, & gained the prize, in the 48 Olympiad; he was 16 or 17, in the year 585 before Christ, & was scarce older than Cyrus. This is the opinion of Dr. Bentley, & may be defended against all the objections which have been made against it. But, without entering into this dispute, it is sufficient

for

your vindication, that Pythagoras was returned from his travels, & capable of conferring with Cyrus, when this Prince went into Greece in the year 565 before Christ, which cannot be denied, in any of the different systems, which the learned have formed, concerning the time of Pythagoras.

You have likewise good reason for bringing him into a dispute with

vó el premio la 48 Olimpiada: él tenia 16 6 17 años en el 585, y no era de mucha mas edad que Ciro. Este es el sentido de Mr. Bentley, que puede defenderse á pesar de las objeciones que le han hecho; pero sin entrar en esta disputa, á Vm. le basta que Pitágoras estuviese de vuelta de sus viages y en estado de conferir con Ciro quando este Príncipe pasó á Grecia en 565. Luego esto es lo que no se sabria negar á Vm. en ninguno de los sistemas que dividen los sabios sobre el tiempo de Pitágoras.

Tambien Vm. va fundado en ponerlo en disputa con Anaximandro.

Este Filósofo debió ver á Pitágoras, aunque fuese de mas edad que él, teniendo 64 años en el segundo de la 48 Olimpiada, segun el testimonio de Apolodoro en Diógenes Laercio; esto es, el año 585. Y tambien es una hermosura en su obra de Vm. ver al jóven Pitágoras triunfar de los sofismas del Materialista. No puede dudarse que el Filósofo Milesiano no haya sido el primer autor de la doctrina de los Atomistas, segun el testimonio de Aristóteles 14, de Ciceron 15, de Plutarco 16 y de Simplicio 17. La de Anaximandro era una materia infinita. Su doctrina es la misma que la de Espi

nosa.

Vm. ve, Señor mio, que la complacencia no ha tenido parte alguna en la

14 Phys. lib. 1. cap. 4. 15 De Nat. Deor. lib. 1. 15 Placit. Phil. lib. 1. c. 3. 17 Comment. in Epict.

Anaximander. This Philosopher must have seen Pythagoras, though he was older thang he, being, according to Apollodorus in Diogenes Laertius, 64 years of age, in the 2a year of 48 the Olympiad, that is in the year 585 before Christ. And it is likewise a beauty in your work to see the young Pythagoras triumphing over the sophistry of the Materialist. It is not to be doubted, but the Milesian Philosopher was the first inventor of the doctrine of the Atomists. According to Aristotle 14, Cicero 15, Plutarco 16 & Simplicius 17 the τὸ ἄπειρον οι Anaximander, was an infinite matter. His doctrine is the same with that of Spinoza.

Thus you see, Sir, that complaisance has no part in my approbation

14 Phys. b. 1. cap. 4. 15 De Nat. Deor. b. 1. 16 Placit. Phil. b. 1. cap. 3. 17 Comment. in Epict.