I suspect that Fielding would, if all were known, be ranked among the unlucky railers at supposed paradox. In his _Miscellanies_ (1742, 8vo) he wrote a satire on the Chrysippus or Guinea, an animal which multiplies itself by division, like the polypus. This he supposes to have been drawn up by Petrus Gualterus, meaning the famous usurer, Peter Walter. He calls it a paper "proper to be read before the R----l Society": and next year, 1743, a quarto reprint was made to resemble a paper in the _Philosophical Transactions_. So far as I can make out, one object is ridicule of what the zoologists said about the polypus: a reprint in the form of the _Transactions_ was certainly satire on the Society, not on Peter Walter and his knack of multiplying guineas.
Old poets have recognized the quadrature of the circle as a well-known difficulty. Dante compares himself, when bewildered, to a geometer who cannot find the principle on which the circle is to be measured:
"Quale è 'l geometra che tutto s' affige Per misurar lo cerchio, e non ritruova, Pensando qual principio ond' egli indige."[439]
{ 277} And Quarles[440] speaks as follows of the _summum bonum_:
"Or is't a tart idea, to procure An edge, and keep the practic soul in ure, Like that dear chymic dust, or puzzling quadrature?"
The poetic notion of the quadrature must not be forgotten. Aristophanes, in the _Birds_, introduces a geometer who announces his intention to _make a square circle_. Pope, in the _Dunciad_, delivers himself as follows, with a Greek pronunciation rather strange in a translator of Homer. Probably Pope recognized, as a general rule, the very common practice of throwing back the accent in defiance of quantity, seen in o´rator, au´ditor, se´nator, ca´tenary, etc.
"Mad _Mathesis_ alone was unconfined, Too mad for mere material chains to bind,-- Now to pure space lifts her ecstatic stare, Now, running round the circle, finds it square."
The author's note explains that this "regards the wild and fruitless attempts of squaring the circle." The poetic idea seems to be that the geometers try to make a square circle. Disraeli quotes it as "finds _its_ square," but the originals do not support this reading.
I have come in the way of a work, entitled _The Grave of Human Philosophies_ (1827), translated from the French of R. de Bécourt[441] by A. Dalmas. It supports, but I suspect not very accurately, the views of the old Hindu books. { 278} That the sun is only 450 miles from us, and only 40 miles in diameter, may be passed over; my affair is with the state of mind into which persons of M. Bécourt's temperament are brought by a fancy. He fully grants, as certain, four millions of years as the duration of the Hindu race, and 1956 as that of the universe. It must be admitted he is not wholly wrong in saying that our errors about the universe proceed from our ignorance of its origin, antiquity, organization, laws, and final destination. Living in an age of light, he "avails himself of that opportunity" to remove this veil of darkness, etc. The system of the Brahmins is the only true one: he adds that it has never before been attempted, as it could not be obtained except by him. The author requests us first, to lay aside prejudice; next, to read all he says in the order in which he says it: we may then pronounce judgment upon a work which begins by taking the Brahmins for granted. All the paradoxers make the same requests. They do not see that compliance would bring thousands of systems before the world every year: we have scores as it is. How is a poor candid inquirer to choose. Fortunately, the mind has its grand jury as well as its little one: and it will not put a book upon its trial without a _prima facie_ case in its favor. And with most of those who really search for themselves, that case is never made out without evidence of knowledge, standing out clear and strong, in the book to be examined.