3 9 2 ObjeEHons to the immateriality

rner is led by it to point full at the fuper-ex-istence of the foul. He speaks of it withwonder, and introduces the prospect whichit opens, with an *£X ivonot, in those re-markable lines which he puts in the mouthof Achilles after the death of Patro-clus ;

S.1 'sroTroi r t (tot rtg Kj hv Atooto oopottrt

j ^ e’HuXov, drap (ftpeveg xx evt •wdp'riow'Jlctwv^l^ yd(> pot nxr^oxXrjoc SsiXoToTu%<) ei psi£~yKet, yooucrxre, pvffopevyje,Kxlpot exxs Itt&tzXXiv si'xjo (SlBt<rxeXc'JxuTM-

Iliad. if/, ver. ioZ-

There is no reading this without finding thesprings of nature touched in us: and the se-verest Philosopher must allow the observationas just in reason, as it is natural. But, whichis more to my purpose, the cold and scepti-cal Lucretius was more afraid of this appear-ance, that it would overturn his wholescheme, than of all the phænomena of na-ture beside. He foresaw the difficulty fromthe beginning, and was on his guard to pro-vide for it, In proposing the several headsof his work, in his entring on it, his man-ner