A14350:692
The Common Places
The common places of the most famous and renowned divine Doctor Peter Martyr divided into four principal parts: with a large addition of many theological and necessary discourses, some never extant before. Translated and partly gathered by Anthony Marten, one of the sewers of her Majesties most honourable chamber.The common places of the most famous and renowmed diuine Doctor Peter Martyr diuided into foure principall parts: with a large addition of manie theologicall and necessarie discourses, some neuer extant before. Translated and partlie gathered by Anthonie Marten, one of the sewers of hir Maiesties most honourable chamber.
Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rowe, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henry Denham, Thomas Chard, William Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583Imprinted at London : In Pater noster Rovve, by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton at the costs and charges of Henrie Denham, Thomas Chard, VVilliam Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583
No title page in the transcription: set from the catalogue record.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Aristotle indeed might have named the variable and inconstant state, as well of the body, as of the mind, but he set forth that manifold diversity of things, which is perpetually seen in outward things. And that the thing which he said might be the more plain, he showed an example very well known even unto children, which had hard the fables of the Poets, namely Priamus the most rich king of Asia, who had abundance of posterity, as he that was father of fifty children, whereof seventeen were borne to him of lawful wives, he had great store of friends, he was famous in warfare. But the more that fortune flattered him continually all his life long, 1the more did she at the end of his life, take all things most miserably from him. Wherefore justly and for good cause doth Aristotle demand, whether any man is to be counted happy while he liveth? And this may be called a question as touching the time; for he had before inquired of the causes of blessedness, and afterward he disputed of the matter, the subject, or persons which should be capable thereof; and now he searcheth out, at what time a man may be blessed, or so called. Whether (saith he) shall this be attributed unto him while he liveth, or after his death? The question hath two parts, and Aristotle treateth of either part. In the first place he dealeth with their opinion, which would have us to expect until the time of death, because that opinion is false, neither doth he follow the same; and he always placeth the false things before the true, that those being confuted, that which is true may be the better confirmed.
Aristotle indéed might haue named the variable and inconstant state, as well of the bodie, as of the mind, but he set foorth that manifold diuersitie of things, which is perpetuallie séene in outward things. And that the thing which he said might be the more plaine, he shewed an example verie well knowne euen vnto children, which had hard the fables of the Poets, namelie Priamus the most rich king of Asia, who had abundance of posteritie, as he that was father of fiftie children, whereof seuentéene were borne to him of lawfull wiues, he had great store of fréends, he was famous in warfare. But the more that fortune flattered him continuallie all his life long, 1the more did she at the end of his life, take all things most miserablie from him. Wherefore iustlie and for good cause doth Aristotle demand, whether anie man is to be counted happie while he liueth? And this may be called a question as touching the time; for he had before inquired of the causes of blessednes, and afterward he disputed of the matter, the subiect, or persons which should be capable thereof; and now he searcheth out, at what time a man may be blessed, or so called. Whether (saith he) shall this be attributed vnto him while he liueth, or after his death? The question hath two parts, and Aristotle treateth of either part. In the first place he dealeth with their opinion, which would haue vs to expect vntill the time of death, bicause that opinion is false, neither doth he followe the same; and he alwaies placeth the false things before the true, that those being confuted, that which is true may be the better confirmed.