in having, as it appears, so suitably explained Sallust’s meaning, and you on your so careful perusal of that most wise author with so much benefit from the same.  Respecting him I would venture to make the same assertion to you as Quintilian made respecting Cicero,—­that a man may know himself no mean proficient in the business of History who enjoys his Sallust.  As for that precept of Aristotle’s in the Third Book of his Rhetoric [Chap.  XVII] which you would like explained—­’Use is to be made of maxims both in the narrative of a case and in the pleading, for it has a moral effect’—­I see not what it has in it that much needs explanation:  only that the narration and the pleading (which last is usually also called the proof) are here understood to be such as the Orator uses, not the Historian; for the parts of the Orator and the Historian are different whether they narrate or prove, just as the Arts themselves are different.  What is suitable for the Historian you will have learnt more correctly from the ancient authors, Polybius, the Halicarnassian, Diodorus, Cicero, Lucian, and many others, who have handed down certain stray precepts concerning that subject.  For me, I wish you heartily all happiness in your studies and travels, and success worthy of the spirit and diligence which I see you employ on everything of high excellence.  Farewell.

  “Westminster:  December 16, 1657.”

  “To the highly accomplished PETER HEIMBACH.

“I have received your letter dated the Hague.  Dec. 18 [foreign reckoning:  the English would be Dec. 8], which, as I see it concerns your interests, I have thought I ought to answer on the very day it has reached me.  After thanking me for I know not what favours of mine,—­which, as one who desires everything good for you, I would were really of any consideration at all,—­you ask me to recommend you, through Lord Lawrence, to our Minister appointed for Holland [DOWNING, whose credential letters Milton had drawn up only a day or two before].  I really regret that this is not in my power, both because of my very few intimacies with the men of influence, almost shut up at home as I am, and as I prefer to be (propter paucissimas familiaritates meas cum gratiosis, qui domi fere, idque libenter, me contineo), and also because I believe the gentleman is now embarking and on his way, and has with him in his company the person he wishes to be his Secretary—­the very office about him you seek.  But the post is this instant going, Farewell.

  “Westminster:  December 18, 1657.”