Bacon's DictionaryAppendices

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56
57 58 59

The exhibits and miniatures of which are found in this section, are designed to assist the serious student and reader in following the path of the Authorship Controvesy that has been so laboriously persued by many authors and researchers during its commence.

These exhibits have been placed here as not to interrupt the flow of reading in the Baconian Dictionary sections, being a finding list of Bacon’s works, his history, his thoughts and his aims, which are a subject of study and discussion.

Elizabethan Merits

Cowley on Francis Bacon

From these and all long-errors of the way

In which our wandering predecessors went,

And like old Hebrews many years did stray

In deserts but of small extent,

Bacon like Moses led us forth at last;

The barren wilderness he passed;

Did on the very borders stand

Of the blest promised land;

And from the mountain-top of his exalted wit,

Saw it himself, and showed us it.

How dearly Bacon loved a brilliant phrase or an ingenious conceit, in spite of his protest against hunting after words, is seen by the care with which he gathered and stored in his Essays any flower of speech that incidentally came to him. (Minto). 1 Fischer, writing from Heidelburg on January 1856, tells us how the German people saw Bacon as a philosopher: 2 “Francis Bacon is still regarded by his countrymen as the greatest philosopher of England; and in this opinion they are perfectly right. He is the founder of that philosophy which is called the realistic, which exercised so powerful an influence upon even Leibnitz and Kant, to which Kant especially was indebted for the last impulses to his epoch-making works, and to which France paid homage in the eighteenth century. Now this very philosopher, of the first rank among the realists, is not only still without that acknowledgment in Germany, which is his due, but he has never even been treated of by any German in a thorough and satisfactory manner. In our histories and compendia of modern philosophy, Bacon plays either no part at all, or at best but a very insignificant and subordinate part, as one among others who made his appearance during the strange transition from mediaeval to modern philosophy. Some rank him with the natural philosophers of Italy, with whom Bacon, if we regard the principal point, has scarcely more in common than the expression “natural philosopher;” and from whom he is distinguished not only by his mode of thought, which is entirely different, but also by his relation to antiquity, which in this case offers a fitting standard. Others express his relation to modern philosophy by placing him by the side of the German mystic, Jacob Bohme, with whom he has nothing in common but the first letter of his name. In a word, most of the opinions respecting Bacon, which are uttered among the Germans, especially those most prominent, are as superficial as they are unsatisfactory and incorrect. If this had not been the case I should have had some reasons the less for writing this, in which I endeavour to do justice to the importance of Bacon.”

And to continue upon the same stream of Fischer, Gothe well stated that “A talent is cultivated in seclusion, a character in the stream of the world”; to which should be stated to the home of Baconian science that was the school, not of talent, but of character, that is to say, it was worldly life on a grand scale. William Camden’s comments on Bacon is that he was “Of person very corpulent, most quick wit, singular prudence, admirable eloquence, retentive memory, and another pillar to the Privy Council. This corpulency of body grew on him in his old age, to which the Queen alluding used to say, ‘Sir Nicholas’ Soul lodges well.’” The learned Bayle says: “Francis Bacon was one of the greatest geniuses of his age.” Mr. Voltaire styles him: “The father of experimental philosophy, and the greatest writers of our nation, as well as those of other countries, conspire in giving him the noblest character imaginable.” The Duke of Buckingham (Sheffield) in particular allures us: “That all his works are for expression as well as thought; the glory of our nation and of all latter ages.” Bowechier Wrey Savile: “Inasmuch as neither Bruno’s Spaccio, nor the fragments of Parmenides’ poem, On Nature, which have come down to us, were known in an English dress at the beginning of the seventeenth century (Toland’s translation of Bruno’s Spaccio did not appear until 1713), it would seem to show that the author of Hamlet must have been acquainted with both Greek and Italian, as was the case with the learned Francis Bacon.” Dr. Rawley, who was his chaplain, observes, that he “was eminent for the sharpness of his wit, his memory, judgment, and elocution, so that Sir Walter Raleigh once said before the doctor, that ‘the Earl of Salisbury was an excellent speaker, but no good pen-man; the Earl of Northampton, and the Lord Henry Howard, excellent pen-men, but no good speakers; but that Sir Francis Bacon was eminent in both.’ Bacon read much, and with great judgment, and after a moderate relaxation of his mind from study, returned to it with fresh vigour, and would not suffer any moment to escape him without improvement. His conversation was extremely delightful and instructive. When his office called him, as he was one of the King’s Council, to charge any offenders, he did it with the greatest lenity; and in civil affairs, as Counsellor of State; he never engaged his mailer in any severe or precipitate courses. Neither was he less in favour with the subject than with his Sovereign; for he was always acceptable to the House of Commons when he was a member thereof. He was religious, free from malice, which as he said himself, he never bred nor fed. No revenger of injuries. He never endeavoured to remove others from their places, or accused any man to his Prince.” In Bacon’s Will & Testament, he has this remarkable passage, “for my name and memory, I leave it to men’s charitable speeches and to foreign nations and the next ages.” 3

In regards to those persons who delved into Bacon’s biography, of the earliest accounts is certain to be Dr. William Rawley, his personal friend, who assisted him in literary work during the last five years of his life. We then have James Spedding who informs us, that Rawley was a kind of literary secretary to Bacon. This biography was written in 1657, thirty-one years after Bacon’s death, and was prefixed to the edition of the Resuscitatio. It is an interesting record of the writer’s personal impressions, derived from long intimacy and close companionship; and it is, according to Spedding, next to Bacon’s own writings, “the most important and authentic evidence concerning him that we possess.” The reader will find it reprinted in this edition. [See Chapter entitled The Life of the Right Honourable Francis Bacon.] Other biographies were prefixed to the editions of Bacon’s works published in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Malet’s is especially interesting, and contains valuable descriptions of Bacon as he appeared to those who met him in society. How much authority is to be assigned to this very precious information it is not easy to say. The completest account of Bacon’s life is undoubtedly that written by Spedding. This is really a supplement to the magnificent edition of Bacon’s Works in seven volumes, that later came out in a crown edition of fifteen volumes, edited by Spedding in conjunction with Ellis and Heath. In this splendid edition the editors have prefixed to each of Bacon’s works an explanatory introduction, giving an account of its history and purpose. These various prefaces are really parts of Bacon’s biography, almost as much as the seven subsequent volumes, which contain the record of his life in detail. For Spedding’s plan being to publish a preface to everything, he found that by editing all the minor writings he could collect speeches, pamphlets, State papers, dramatic devices and masques, letters and private notes or memoranda, and prefixing to these also their proper historic introductions, he could fuse together these minor writings, and the connecting thread of narrative becomes essentially a history of all that is known about Bacon himself. Nothing can be more masterly than the way in which this is done. Spedding’s work is a monument of patient industry and historic learning, and is, in fact, a very important contribution to the history of the times in which Bacon lived. It is, indeed, impossible to understand Bacon’s life without constant reference to the historical, political, and social framework in which it is set; and much of the damaging criticism which has been written about Bacon, when the entire story is coherently told, is easily traceable to imperfect knowledge or entire misunderstanding of the history of which Bacon’s life forms a part, and a mistaken idea of the share he was led to take in it. Those who find the seven or fifteen volume edition, containing Bacon’s life, with the incorporated opuscula, too costly or too cumbrous, may content themselves with an abridgement of the same work, prepared for the American public, and published in two 8vo volumes of about 700 pages each, and entitled: Francis Bacon, his Life and Times, extracted from the edition of his occasional writings, revised, corrected, and to some extent supplemented by Spedding himself. It is a curtailed edition of the larger work, made by omitting most of the letters and tracts, and giving all Spedding’s connecting narrative with such modifications as were required to form a continuous and unbroken history. [Also see Part II: Spedding; Ellis; Heath.]

Before Spedding’s edition appeared, Basil Montague’s was the most complete edition of Bacon’s writings, and to this, also, a biography is prefixed. Montague’s edition was unfortunately published when the public mind had been pre-occupied by Pope’s random lines about Bacon: “If parts allure thee, think how Bacon shined, the wisest, brightest, meanest of mankind.” This one couplet has done more injury to Bacon’s fame than any one single circumstance connected with him, not even excepting his fall, and his condemnation by the House of Lords in 1621. It was a poisoned dart, which, feathered by the smooth rhythm and epigrammatic charm of Pope’s style, readily took lodgement in the minds of whole generations, not merely of Pope’s readers, but of those who could only quote at second hand the bon mots, the winged words, and the proverbial sayings with which he enriched the English language. Pope’s distich is the fruitful germ out of which sprung Macaulay’s Essay, Lord Campbell’s Life, and the general consensus of denunciation still going on in all sorts of prints, reviews, magazines, histories, moral essays, pamphlets, and newspapers, most of which are merely echoes and reverberations of the sentiment launched forth by Pope with such fatal skill.

Gustavus Selenus, in his Complete System of Cryptography said that “As the spoken word is the image of the mind’s thoughts, so is writing the image of the word uttered or to be uttered by the mouth.” Therefore, whatever we write should have been spoken face to face or has already been spoken; but since the former form was not spoken and was only written, then we do not speak face to face, but through a channel; this channel being the pen and paper. This gives man the opportunity to delete, rewrite, and restructure his words on paper before or after forwarding them to the recipient and hence words on paper hold no boundaries. These boundaries weaken, should the writing be sealed. These seals may vary: from a drop of blood to a drop of hot wax; from a signature to a monogram; from a stamped seal to a postage stamp. The true conveyance of our meaning, can only be done when we betoken facts by gesture and make use of signs of the body; “such as the manner of holding and nodding the head; the expression of the face and the carriage and movement of the eyes, eyebrows, forehead, cheeks, front of the face, nose, and lips; the shrugging and stretching of the shoulders and neck; the movements of the hands; the hitting of the feet”. Who would not offer a day’s delight then, to travel back and listen to Bacon’s structure of words into the intercourse of phrases?

Ben Jonson says of Bacon: “Yet there happened in my time one noble speaker, who was full of gravity in his speaking. His language (where he could spare or pass a jest) was nobly censorious. No man ever spake more neatly, more pressly, more weightily, or suffered less emptiness, less idleness, in what he uttered. No member of his speech, but consisted of his own graces. His hearers could not cough, or look aside from him, without loss. He commanded where he spoke; and had his judges angry and pleased at his devotion. No man had their affections more in his power. The fear of every man that heard him was, lest he should make an end.” And, after referring to Lord Ellesmere, Jonson continues: “But his learned and able (though unfortunate) successor, (i.e., Bacon) is he who hath filled up all numbers, and performed that in our tongue, which may be compared or preferred either to insolent Greece, or haughty Rome. In short, within his view, and about his times, were all the wits born, that could honour a language, or help study. Now things daily fall, wits grow downward, and eloquence grows backward: so that he may be named, and stand as the mark and day of our language. My conceit of his person was never increased toward him by his place, or honours: but I have and do reverence him, for the greatness that was only proper to himself, in that he seemed to me ever, by his work, one of the greatest men, and most worthy of admiration, that had been in many ages. In his adversity I ever prayed God would give him strength; for greatness he could not want. Neither could I condole in a word or syllable for him, as knowing no accident could do harm to virtue, but rather help to make it manifest.”

Thomas Bushell, his servant, in a letter to Mr. John Eliot, printed in 1628, in a volume called The First Part of Youth’s Errors, says: “Yet lest the calumnious tongues of men might extenuate the good opinion you had of his worth and merit, I must ingenuously confess that myself and others of his servants were the occasion of exhaling his virtues into a dark eclipse; which God knows would have long endured both for the honour of his King and the good of the Commonalty; had not we whom his bounty nursed, laid on his guiltless shoulders our base and execrable deeds to be scanned and censured by the whole senate of a state, where no sooner sentence was given, but most of us forsook him, which makes us bear the badge of Jews to this day. Yet I am confident there were some Godly Daniels amongst us. As for myself, with shame I must acquit the title, and plead guilty; which grieves my very soul that so matchless a Peer should be lost by such insinuating caterpillars, who in his own nature scorned the least thought of any base, unworthy, or ignoble act, though subject to infirmities as ordained to the wisest.” In Fuller’s Worthies it is written: “He was a rich Cabinet filled with Judgment, Wit, Fancy and Memory, and had the golden Key, Elocution, to open it. He was singular in singulis, in every Science and Art, and being In-at-all came off with Credit. He was too Bountiful to his Servants, and either too confident of their Honesty, or too conniving at their Falsehood. ‘Tis said he had two Servants, one in all Causes Patron to the Plaintiff, the other to the Defendant, but taking bribes of both, with this Condition, to restore the Money received, if the Cause went against them. Such practices, though unknown to their Master, cost him the loss of his Office.”

In The Lives of Statesmen and Favourites of Elizabeth’s Reign it is said: “His religion was rational and sober, his spirit public, his love to relations tender, to Friends faithful, to the hopeful liberal, to men universal, to his very Enemies civil. He left the best pattern of Government in his actions under one King and the best principles of it in the Life of the other.” The following is a translation from the discourse on the life of Mr. Francis Bacon which is prefixed to the Histoire Naturelle, by Pierre Amboise, published in Paris in 1631:

Among so many virtues that made this great man commendable, prudence, as the first of all the moral virtues, and that most necessary to those of his profession, was that which shone in him the most brightly. His profound wisdom can be most readily seen in his books, and his matchless fidelity in the signal services that he continuously rendered to his Prince.

Never was there man who so loved equity, or so enthusiastically worked for the public good as he; so that I may ever that he would have been much better suited to a Republic than to a Monarchy, where frequently the convenience of the Prince is more thought of than that of his people. And I do not doubt that had he lived in a Republic he would have acquired as much glory from the citizens as formerly did Aristides and Cato, the one in Athens, the other in Rome. Innocence oppressed found always in his protection a sure refuge, and the position of the great gave them no vantage ground before the Chancellor when suing for justice. Vanity, avarice, and ambition, vices that too often attach themselves to great honours, were to him quite unknown, and if he did a good action it was not from the desire of fame, but simply because he could not do otherwise.

His good qualities were entirely pure, without being clouded by the admixture of any imperfections, and the passions that form usually the defects in great men in him only served to bring out his virtues; if he felt hatred and rage it was only against evil-doers, to show his detestation of their crimes, and success or failure in the affairs of his country brought to him the greater part of his joys or his sorrows. He was as truly a good man as he was an upright judge, and by the example of his life corrected vice and bad living as much as by pains and penalties. And, in a word, it seemed that Nature had exempted from the ordinary frailties of men him whom she had marked out to deal with their crimes. All these good qualities made him the darling of the people and prized by the great ones of the State.

But when it seemed that nothing could destroy his position, Fortune made clear that she did not yet wish to abandon her character for instability, and that Bacon had too much worth to remain so long prosperous. It thus came about that amongst the great number of officials such as a man of his position must have in his house, there was one who was accused before Parliament of exaction, and of having sold the influence that he might have with his master. And though the probity of Mr. Bacon was entirely exempt from censure, nevertheless he was declared guilty of the crime of his servant and was deprived of the power that he had so long exercised with so much honour and glory. In this I see the working of monstrous ingratitude and unparalleled cruelty to say that a man who could mark the years of his life rather by the signal services that he had rendered to the State than by times or seasons, should have received such hard usage for the punishment of a crime which he never committed; England, indeed, teaches us by this that the sea that surrounds her shores imparts to her inhabitants somewhat of its restless inconstancy.

This storm did not at all surprise him, and he received the news of his disgrace with a countenance so undisturbed that it was easy to see that he thought but little of the sweets of life since the loss of them caused him discomfort so slight. Thus ended this great man whom England could place alone as the equal of the best of all the previous centuries.

Peter Boener, who was private apothecary to Bacon for a time, wrote in 1647 a Life, of portions of which the following are translations: “But how runneth man’s future. He who seemed to occupy the highest rank is alas! by envious tongues near King and Parliament deposed from all his offices and chancellorship, little considering what treasure was being cast in the mire, as afterwards the issue and result thereof have shown in that country. But he always comforted himself with the words of Scripture nihil est novi; [there is nothing new;] Because so is Cicero by Octavianus; Calisthenes by Alexander; Seneca (all his former teachers) by Nero; yea, Ovid, Lucanus, Statius (together with many others), for a small cause very unthankfully the one banished, the other killed, the third thrown to the lions. But even as for such men banishment is freedom death their life, so is for this author his deposition a memory to greater honour and fame, and to such a sage no harm can come, whilst his fortunes were so changed, I never saw him either in mien, word or acts changed or disturbed towards whomsoever; he was ever one and the same, both in sorrow and in joy, as becometh a philosopher; always with a benevolent allocution. A noteworthy example and pattern for everyone of all virtue, gentleness, peacefulness, and patience.” Francis Osborn, in his Advice to a Son, writes: “And my memory neither doth nor (I believe possible ever) can direct me towards an example more splendid in this kind, than the Lord Bacon, Earl of St. Albans, who in all companies did appear a good Proficient, if not a Master in those Arts entertained for the Subject of every ones discourse. So as I dare maintain, without the least affectation of Flattery or Hyperbole, that his most casual talk deserveth to be written, as I have been told his first or foulest Copies required no great Labour to render them competent for the nicest judgments. A high perfection, attainable only by use, and treating with every man in his respective profession, and what he was most versed in. So as I have heard him entertain a Country Lord in the proper terms relating to Hawks and Dogs. And at another time out, cant a London Chirurgeon. Thus he did not only learn himself, but gratify such as taught him; who looked upon their callings as honoured through his notice; nor did an easy falling into arguments (not unjustly taken for a blemish in the most) appear less than an ornament in him: the ears of the hearers receiving more gratification, than trouble; and (so) no less sorry when he came to conclude, than displeased with any did interrupt him. Now this general Knowledge he had in all things, husbanded by his wit, and dignified by so Majestical a carriage he was known to own, struck such an awful reverence in those he questioned, that they durst not conceal the most intrinsic part of their Mysteries from him, for fear of appearing ignorant, or saucy. All which rendered him no less necessary, than admirable at the Council Table, where in reference to impositions, monopolies, the meanest manufacturers were an usual argument: and, as I have heard, did in this baffle, the Earl of Middlesex, that was born and bred a citizen. Yet without any great (if at all) interrupting his other studies, as is not hard to be imagined of a quick apprehension, in which he was admirable.”

Alfred Dodd: “Francis Bacon is the greatest genius and one of the most lovable men that the world has ever seen. Pope said: “Lord Bacon is the greatest genius that either England or perhaps any other country ever produced.” Lord Macaulay admitted that “he had the most exquisitely constructed intellect that has ever been bestowed on any of the children of men.” Ben Jonson declared “he stands as the mark and acme of our language. It is HE that hath filled up all NUMBERS,” all forms of versification. “He was retiring, nervous, sensitive, unconventional and very modest” (Spedding); “a man most sweet in his conversation and way” (Tobie Matthews, his friend); “all who were great and good loved him; a poet but concealed” (John Aubrey, a contemporary writer); “he was deeply religious for he was conversant with God and able to render a reason for the hope which was in him” (Dr. Rawley, his chaplain). Francis Bacon was a great lawyer; the Great Code Napoleon is based on his digest of law; a great states-man; he prevented the depopulation of England; a Founder of new States, the Virginias and the Carolinas; thus making the New World English instead of Spanish; a great philosopher, for he acted as bell-ringer to all the Sciences and taught men to experiment for the good of humanity. To comparatively few is it known that he is also the greatest dramatist and poet of all time; that he is the Immortal Bard Shakespeare; and that he used the word as a pen-name, taking it from the Goddess Pallas Athena, the Shaker of the Spear of Knowledge at the Serpent of Ignorance. No one has been more maligned and abused than Francis Bacon. The lie against his name has sunk deep into the souls of men. Macaulay is largely responsible with his brilliantly shallow Essay for the criminal slander, which alleges him to be a corrupt judge and a cold-hearted hypocrite. It is repeated in elementary School Readers. We were taught to believe the lie in our childhood. Few are aware that biographers like Montague, Spedding and Dixon; irrespective of the testimony of contemporary writers like Ben Jonson, Aubrey and Bushell; long ago refuted this infamous fiction. Writing as one who would not wantonly mislead anyone, as one who has closely examined all available documents, as one familiar with the various biographies pro and con, as a juror who actually entered the box severely prejudiced against him, I unhesitatingly declare that Francis Bacon not only leaves the dock without a stain on his character, but that his public actions give him rank with those immortal souls who preferred to suffer martyrdom rather than be false to the ideals they espoused. His character and life place him with martyrs like Socrates. He committed hara-kiri, socially and politically, at the bidding of his master King James, to save him and his Favourite Buckingham from a possible constitutional conflict with the Commons. He was the victim of a plot as diabolical as ever stained the pages of history. There is not, in fact, a single act, for which he has been condemned by purists who have suppressed vital evidence and distorted details to fit their preconceived prejudices, that even requires apology. This is the opinion of one who, misled by academic teachers, had never any time for Francis Bacon.

“From my youth upwards, I felt that “genius” was no excuse for corrupt double-dealing. An examination of the bed-rock documents has convinced me, however, that Francis Bacon’s greatest “crime” was his VIRTUE in a corrupt era, not his alleged sins. Forget, then, the harsh things that have been written against him. There is a complete reply to every charge. Suspend your judgment, at least, until you have become acquainted with the other side. Do not believe the truth about such myriad-minded personality is accurately mirrored in the pages of Campbell, Church, Abbott, Macaulay. The actual documents, letters, and knowledge of the times in which he lived are sufficient to clear his name. There is, moreover, a greater mystery in Francis Bacon’s life than such biographers ever dreamed; a hidden life; the life of a man who was building great bases for Eternity to the glory of God and the good of humanity. In one of his lectures, Ruskin says in effect, “In my early days I trusted the Authorities. I thought they would tell me the truth of things. I now discover I have been deceived.” I am, therefore, in good company when I say that pendants, with jaundiced eyes, are not safe guides. The “Authorities” are suspect, not only on Francis Bacon’s character, but also the entire Shakespearean Problem, except, perhaps, purely textual matters. I have been driven to regard the orthodox mind, with it a priori judgments, as I would a “slippery customer.” There are, I find, twisters in the Literary World as there are in the Marts of Commerce. When Academic Scholarship libels the character of a man who cannot defend himself, when it robs a genius of his “good name which makes him poor indeed,” when it disseminates misleading views, whether ignorantly or wilfully respecting the truth of matters regarding our National Poet, it is little short of criminal. The nation has a right to demand from the custodians of our Literary and Historic Heritage, the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth. The wilful manipulation of facts by men like Sir Sidney Lee in his Life of Shaksper, in order to bolster up a tradition, and by Lord Macaulay in his Life of Francis Bacon, to perpetuate and largely originate a wanton lie merely to display rhetorical flourishes, is not only dishonest, it is CORRUPT. It poisons the fountain of knowledge at the wellhead.” 4

“It is necessary sometimes to correct the knowledge we receive” said D’Israeli in his Miscellanies of Literature (1840) but in honour of Francis Bacon’s name are to be found (only a few inserted here) in these following works worth giving: