H. M.

THE

FIRST BOOK OF FRANCIS BACON;

OF THE PROFICIENCE AND

ADVANCEMENT OF LEARNING,

DIVINE AND HUMAN.

_To the King_.

THERE were under the law, excellent King, both daily sacrifices and

freewill offerings; the one proceeding upon ordinary observance, the

other upon a devout cheerfulness: in like manner there belongeth to kings

from their servants both tribute of duty and presents of affection. In

the former of these I hope I shall not live to be wanting, according to

my most humble duty and the good pleasure of your Majesty’s employments:

for the latter, I thought it more respective to make choice of some

oblation which might rather refer to the propriety and excellency of your

individual person, than to the business of your crown and state.

Wherefore, representing your Majesty many times unto my mind, and

beholding you not with the inquisitive eye of presumption, to discover

that which the Scripture telleth me is inscrutable, but with the

observant eye of duty and admiration, leaving aside the other parts of

your virtue and fortune, I have been touched—yea, and possessed—with an

extreme wonder at those your virtues and faculties, which the

philosophers call intellectual; the largeness of your capacity, the

faithfulness of your memory, the swiftness of your apprehension, the

penetration of your judgment, and the facility and order of your

elocution: and I have often thought that of all the persons living that I

have known, your Majesty were the best instance to make a man of Plato’s

opinion, that all knowledge is but remembrance, and that the mind of man

by Nature knoweth all things, and hath but her own native and original

notions (which by the strangeness and darkness of this tabernacle of the

body are sequestered) again revived and restored: such a light of Nature

I have observed in your Majesty, and such a readiness to take flame and

blaze from the least occasion presented, or the least spark of another’s

knowledge delivered. And as the Scripture saith of the wisest king,

“That his heart was as the sands of the sea;” which, though it be one of

the largest bodies, yet it consisteth of the smallest and finest

portions; so hath God given your Majesty a composition of understanding

admirable, being able to compass and comprehend the greatest matters, and

nevertheless to touch and apprehend the least; whereas it should seem an

impossibility in Nature for the same instrument to make itself fit for

great and small works. And for your gift of speech, I call to mind what

Cornelius Tacitus saith of Augustus Cæsar: _Augusto profluens_, _et quæ

principem deceret_, _eloquentia fuit_. For if we note it well, speech

that is uttered with labour and difficulty, or speech that savoureth of

the affectation of art and precepts, or speech that is framed after the

imitation of some pattern of eloquence, though never so excellent; all

this hath somewhat servile, and holding of the subject. But your

Majesty’s manner of speech is, indeed, prince-like, flowing as from a

fountain, and yet streaming and branching itself into Nature’s order,

full of facility and felicity, imitating none, and inimitable by any.

And as in your civil estate there appeareth to be an emulation and

contention of your Majesty’s virtue with your fortune; a virtuous

disposition with a fortunate regiment; a virtuous expectation (when time

was) of your greater fortune, with a prosperous possession thereof in the

due time; a virtuous observation of the laws of marriage, with most

blessed and happy fruit of marriage; a virtuous and most Christian desire

of peace, with a fortunate inclination in your neighbour princes

thereunto: so likewise in these intellectual matters there seemeth to be

no less contention between the excellency of your Majesty’s gifts of

Nature and the universality and perfection of your learning. For I am

well assured that this which I shall say is no amplification at all, but

a positive and measured truth; which is, that there hath not been since

Christ’s time any king or temporal monarch which hath been so learned in

all literature and erudition, divine and human. For let a man seriously

and diligently revolve and peruse the succession of the Emperors of Rome,

of which Cæsar the Dictator (who lived some years before Christ) and

Marcus Antoninus were the best learned, and so descend to the Emperors of

Græcia, or of the West, and then to the lines of France, Spain, England,

Scotland, and the rest, and he shall find this judgment is truly made.

For it seemeth much in a king if, by the compendious extractions of other

men’s wits and labours, he can take hold of any superficial ornaments and

shows of learning, or if he countenance and prefer learning and learned

men; but to drink, indeed, of the true fountains of learning—nay, to have

such a fountain of learning in himself, in a king, and in a king born—is

almost a miracle. And the more, because there is met in your Majesty a

rare conjunction, as well of divine and sacred literature as of profane

and human; so as your Majesty standeth invested of that triplicity, which

in great veneration was ascribed to the ancient Hermes: the power and

fortune of a king, the knowledge and illumination of a priest, and the

learning and universality of a philosopher. This propriety inherent and

individual attribute in your Majesty deserveth to be expressed not only

in the fame and admiration of the present time, nor in the history or

tradition of the ages succeeding, but also in some solid work, fixed

memorial, and immortal monument, bearing a character or signature both of

the power of a king and the difference and perfection of such a king.

Therefore I did conclude with myself that I could not make unto your

Majesty a better oblation than of some treatise tending to that end,

whereof the sum will consist of these two parts: the former concerning

the excellency of learning and knowledge, and the excellency of the merit

and true glory in the augmentation and propagation thereof; the latter,

what the particular acts and works are which have been embraced and

undertaken for the advancement of learning; and again, what defects and

undervalues I find in such particular acts: to the end that though I

cannot positively or affirmatively advise your Majesty, or propound unto

you framed particulars, yet I may excite your princely cogitations to

visit the excellent treasure of your own mind, and thence to extract

particulars for this purpose agreeable to your magnanimity and wisdom.

I. (1) In the entrance to the former of these—to clear the way and, as it

were, to make silence, to have the true testimonies concerning the

dignity of learning to be better heard, without the interruption of tacit

objections—I think good to deliver it from the discredits and disgraces

which it hath received, all from ignorance, but ignorance severally

disguised; appearing sometimes in the zeal and jealousy of divines,

sometimes in the severity and arrogancy of politics, and sometimes in the

errors and imperfections of learned men themselves.

(2) I hear the former sort say that knowledge is of those things which

are to be accepted of with great limitation and caution; that the

aspiring to overmuch knowledge was the original temptation and sin

whereupon ensued the fall of man; that knowledge hath in it somewhat of

the serpent, and, therefore, where it entereth into a man it makes him

swell; _Scientia inflat_; that Solomon gives a censure, “That there is no

end of making books, and that much reading is weariness of the flesh;”

and again in another place, “That in spacious knowledge there is much

contristation, and that he that increaseth knowledge increaseth anxiety;”

that Saint Paul gives a caveat, “That we be not spoiled through vain

philosophy;” that experience demonstrates how learned men have been

arch-heretics, how learned times have been inclined to atheism, and how

the contemplation of second causes doth derogate from our dependence upon

God, who is the first cause.

(3) To discover, then, the ignorance and error of this opinion, and the

misunderstanding in the grounds thereof, it may well appear these men do

not observe or consider that it was not the pure knowledge of Nature and

universality, a knowledge by the light whereof man did give names unto

other creatures in Paradise as they were brought before him according

unto their proprieties, which gave the occasion to the fall; but it was

the proud knowledge of good and evil, with an intent in man to give law

unto himself, and to depend no more upon God’s commandments, which was

the form of the temptation. Neither is it any quantity of knowledge, how

great soever, that can make the mind of man to swell; for nothing can

fill, much less extend the soul of man, but God and the contemplation of

God; and, therefore, Solomon, speaking of the two principal senses of

inquisition, the eye and the ear, affirmeth that the eye is never

satisfied with seeing, nor the ear with hearing; and if there be no

fulness, then is the continent greater than the content: so of knowledge

itself and the mind of man, whereto the senses are but reporters, he

defineth likewise in these words, placed after that calendar or

ephemerides which he maketh of the diversities of times and seasons for

all actions and purposes, and concludeth thus: “God hath made all things

beautiful, or decent, in the true return of their seasons. Also He hath

placed the world in man’s heart, yet cannot man find out the work which

God worketh from the beginning to the end”—declaring not obscurely that

God hath framed the mind of man as a mirror or glass, capable of the

image of the universal world, and joyful to receive the impression

thereof, as the eye joyeth to receive light; and not only delighted in

beholding the variety of things and vicissitude of times, but raised also

to find out and discern the ordinances and decrees which throughout all

those changes are infallibly observed. And although he doth insinuate

that the supreme or summary law of Nature (which he calleth “the work

which God worketh from the beginning to the end”) is not possible to be

found out by man, yet that doth not derogate from the capacity of the

mind; but may be referred to the impediments, as of shortness of life,

ill conjunction of labours, ill tradition of knowledge over from hand to

hand, and many other inconveniences, whereunto the condition of man is

subject. For that nothing parcel of the world is denied to man’s inquiry

and invention, he doth in another place rule over, when he saith, “The

spirit of man is as the lamp of God, wherewith He searcheth the

inwardness of all secrets.” If, then, such be the capacity and receipt

of the mind of man, it is manifest that there is no danger at all in the

proportion or quantity of knowledge, how large soever, lest it should

make it swell or out-compass itself; no, but it is merely the quality of

knowledge, which, be it in quantity more or less, if it be taken without

the true corrective thereof, hath in it some nature of venom or

malignity, and some effects of that venom, which is ventosity or

swelling. This corrective spice, the mixture whereof maketh knowledge so

sovereign, is charity, which the Apostle immediately addeth to the former

clause; for so he saith, “Knowledge bloweth up, but charity buildeth up;”

not unlike unto that which he deilvereth in another place: “If I spake,”

saith he, “with the tongues of men and angels, and had not charity, it

were but as a tinkling cymbal.” Not but that it is an excellent thing to

speak with the tongues of men and angels, but because, if it be severed

from charity, and not referred to the good of men and mankind, it hath

rather a sounding and unworthy glory than a meriting and substantial

virtue. And as for that censure of Solomon concerning the excess of

writing and reading books, and the anxiety of spirit which redoundeth

from knowledge, and that admonition of St. Paul, “That we be not seduced

by vain philosophy,” let those places be rightly understood; and they do,

indeed, excellently set forth the true bounds and limitations whereby

human knowledge is confined and circumscribed, and yet without any such

contracting or coarctation, but that it may comprehend all the universal

nature of things; for these limitations are three: the first, “That we do

not so place our felicity in knowledge, as we forget our mortality;” the

second, “That we make application of our knowledge, to give ourselves

repose and contentment, and not distaste or repining;” the third, “That

we do not presume by the contemplation of Nature to attain to the

mysteries of God.” For as touching the first of these, Solomon doth

excellently expound himself in another place of the same book, where he

saith: “I saw well that knowledge recedeth as far from ignorance as light

doth from darkness; and that the wise man’s eyes keep watch in his head,

whereas this fool roundeth about in darkness: but withal I learned that

the same mortality involveth them both.” And for the second, certain it

is there is no vexation or anxiety of mind which resulteth from knowledge

otherwise than merely by accident; for all knowledge and wonder (which is

the seed of knowledge) is an impression of pleasure in itself; but when

men fall to framing conclusions out of their knowledge, applying it to

their particular, and ministering to themselves thereby weak fears or

vast desires, there groweth that carefulness and trouble of mind which is

spoken of; for then knowledge is no more _Lumen siccum_, whereof

Heraclitus the profound said, _Lumen siccum optima anima_; but it

becometh _Lumen madidum_, or _maceratum_, being steeped and infused in

the humours of the affections. And as for the third point, it deserveth

to be a little stood upon, and not to be lightly passed over; for if any

man shall think by view and inquiry into these sensible and material

things to attain that light, whereby he may reveal unto himself the

nature or will of God, then, indeed, is he spoiled by vain philosophy;

for the contemplation of God’s creatures and works produceth (having

regard to the works and creatures themselves) knowledge, but having

regard to God no perfect knowledge, but wonder, which is broken

knowledge. And, therefore, it was most aptly said by one of Plato’s

school, “That the sense of man carrieth a resemblance with the sun, which

(as we see) openeth and revealeth all the terrestrial globe; but then,

again, it obscureth and concealeth the stars and celestial globe: so doth

the sense discover natural things, but it darkeneth and shutteth up

divine.” And hence it is true that it hath proceeded, that divers great

learned men have been heretical, whilst they have sought to fly up to the

secrets of the Deity by this waxen wings of the senses. And as for the

conceit that too much knowledge should incline a man to atheism, and that

the ignorance of second causes should make a more devout dependence upon

God, which is the first cause; first, it is good to ask the question

which Job asked of his friends: “Will you lie for God, as one man will

lie for another, to gratify him?” For certain it is that God worketh

nothing in Nature but by second causes; and if they would have it

otherwise believed, it is mere imposture, as it were in favour towards

God, and nothing else but to offer to the Author of truth the unclean

sacrifice of a lie. But further, it is an assured truth, and a

conclusion of experience, that a little or superficial knowledge of

philosophy may incline the mind of men to atheism, but a further

proceeding therein doth bring the mind back again to religion. For in

the entrance of philosophy, when the second causes, which are next unto

the senses, do offer themselves to the mind of man, if it dwell and stay

there it may induce some oblivion of the highest cause; but when a man

passeth on further and seeth the dependence of causes and the works of

Providence; then, according to the allegory of the poets, he will easily

believe that the highest link of Nature’s chain must needs he tied to the

foot of Jupiter’s chair. To conclude, therefore, let no man upon a weak

conceit of sobriety or an ill-applied moderation think or maintain that a

man can search too far, or be too well studied in the book of God’s word,

or in the book of God’s works, divinity or philosophy; but rather let men

endeavour an endless progress or proficience in both; only let men beware

that they apply both to charity, and not to swelling; to use, and not to

ostentation; and again, that they do not unwisely mingle or confound

these learnings together.

II. (1) And as for the disgraces which learning receiveth from politics,

they be of this nature: that learning doth soften men’s minds, and makes

them more unapt for the honour and exercise of arms; that it doth mar and

pervert men’s dispositions for matter of government and policy, in making

them too curious and irresolute by variety of reading, or too peremptory

or positive by strictness of rules and axioms, or too immoderate and

overweening by reason of the greatness of examples, or too incompatible

and differing from the times by reason of the dissimilitude of examples;

or at least, that it doth divert men’s travails from action and business,

and bringeth them to a love of leisure and privateness; and that it doth

bring into states a relaxation of discipline, whilst every man is more

ready to argue than to obey and execute. Out of this conceit Cato,

surnamed the Censor, one of the wisest men indeed that ever lived, when

Carneades the philosopher came in embassage to Rome, and that the young

men of Rome began to flock about him, being allured with the sweetness

and majesty of his eloquence and learning, gave counsel in open senate

that they should give him his despatch with all speed, lest he should

infect and enchant the minds and affections of the youth, and at unawares

bring in an alteration of the manners and customs of the state. Out of

the same conceit or humour did Virgil, turning his pen to the advantage

of his country and the disadvantage of his own profession, make a kind of

separation between policy and government, and between arts and sciences,

in the verses so much renowned, attributing and challenging the one to

the Romans, and leaving and yielding the other to the Grecians: _Tu

regere imperio popules_, _Romane_, _memento_, _Hæ tibi erunt artes_, &c.

So likewise we see that Anytus, the accuser of Socrates, laid it as an

article of charge and accusation against him, that he did, with the

variety and power of his discourses and disputatious, withdraw young men

from due reverence to the laws and customs of their country, and that he

did profess a dangerous and pernicious science, which was to make the

worse matter seem the better, and to suppress truth by force of eloquence

and speech.

(2) But these and the like imputations have rather a countenance of

gravity than any ground of justice: for experience doth warrant that,

both in persons and in times, there hath been a meeting and concurrence

in learning and arms, flourishing and excelling in the same men and the

same ages. For as ‘for men, there cannot be a better nor the hike

instance as of that pair, Alexander the Great and Julius Cæsar, the

Dictator; whereof the one was Aristotle’s scholar in philosophy, and the

other was Cicero’s rival in eloquence; or if any man had rather call for

scholars that were great generals, than generals that were great

scholars, let him take Epaminondas the Theban, or Xenophon the Athenian;

whereof the one was the first that abated the power of Sparta, and the

other was the first that made way to the overthrow of the monarchy of

Persia. And this concurrence is yet more visible in times than in

persons, by how much an age is greater object than a man. For both in

Egypt, Assyria, Persia, Græcia, and Rome, the same times that are most

renowned for arms are, likewise, most admired for learning, so that the

greatest authors and philosophers, and the greatest captains and

governors, have lived in the same ages. Neither can it otherwise he: for

as in man the ripeness of strength of the body and mind cometh much about

an age, save that the strength of the body cometh somewhat the more

early, so in states, arms and learning, whereof the one correspondeth to

the body, the other to the soul of man, have a concurrence or near

sequence in times.

(3) And for matter of policy and government, that learning, should rather

hurt, than enable thereunto, is a thing very improbable; we see it is

accounted an error to commit a natural body to empiric physicians, which

commonly have a few pleasing receipts whereupon they are confident and

adventurous, but know neither the causes of diseases, nor the complexions

of patients, nor peril of accidents, nor the true method of cures; we see

it is a like error to rely upon advocates or lawyers which are only men

of practice, and not grounded in their books, who are many times easily

surprised when matter falleth out besides their experience, to the

prejudice of the causes they handle: so by like reason it cannot be but a

matter of doubtful consequence if states be managed by empiric statesmen,

not well mingled with men grounded in learning. But contrariwise, it is

almost without instance contradictory that ever any government was

disastrous that was in the hands of learned governors. For howsoever it

hath been ordinary with politic men to extenuate and disable learned men

by the names of _pedantes_; yet in the records of time it appeareth in

many particulars that the governments of princes in minority

(notwithstanding the infinite disadvantage of that kind of state)—have

nevertheless excelled the government of princes of mature age, even for

that reason which they seek to traduce, which is that by that occasion

the state hath been in the hands of _pedantes_: for so was the state of

Rome for the first five years, which are so much magnified, during the

minority of Nero, in the hands of Seneca, a _pedenti_; so it was again,

for ten years’ space or more, during the minority of Gordianus the

younger, with great applause and contentation in the hands of Misitheus,

a _pedanti_: so was it before that, in the minority of Alexander Severus,

in like happiness, in hands not much unlike, by reason of the rule of the

women, who were aided by the teachers and preceptors. Nay, let a man

look into the government of the Bishops of Rome, as by name, into the

government of Pius Quintus and Sextus Quintus in our times, who were both

at their entrance esteemed but as pedantical friars, and he shall find

that such Popes do greater things, and proceed upon truer principles of

state, than those which have ascended to the papacy from an education and

breeding in affairs of state and courts of princes; for although men bred

in learning are perhaps to seek in points of convenience and

accommodating for the present, which the Italians call _ragioni di

stato_, whereof the same Pius Quintus could not hear spoken with

patience, terming them inventions against religion and the moral virtues;

yet on the other side, to recompense that, they are perfect in those same

plain grounds of religion, justice, honour, and moral virtue, which if

they be well and watchfully pursued, there will be seldom use of those

other, no more than of physic in a sound or well-dieted body. Neither

can the experience of one man’s life furnish examples and precedents for

the event of one man’s life. For as it happeneth sometimes that the

grandchild, or other descendant, resembleth the ancestor more than the

son; so many times occurrences of present times may sort better with

ancient examples than with those of the later or immediate times; and

lastly, the wit of one man can no more countervail learning than one

man’s means can hold way with a common purse.

(4) And as for those particular seducements or indispositions of the mind

for policy and government, which learning is pretended to insinuate; if

it be granted that any such thing be, it must be remembered withal that

learning ministereth in every of them greater strength of medicine or

remedy than it offereth cause of indisposition or infirmity. For if by a

secret operation it make men perplexed and irresolute, on the other side

by plain precept it teacheth them when and upon what ground to resolve;

yea, and how to carry things in suspense, without prejudice, till they

resolve. If it make men positive and regular, it teacheth them what

things are in their nature demonstrative, and what are conjectural, and

as well the use of distinctions and exceptions, as the latitude of

principles and rules. If it mislead by disproportion or dissimilitude of

examples, it teacheth men the force of circumstances, the errors of

comparisons, and all the cautions of application; so that in all these it

doth rectify more effectually than it can pervert. And these medicines

it conveyeth into men’s minds much more forcibly by the quickness and

penetration of examples. For let a man look into the errors of Clement

VII., so lively described by Guicciardini, who served under him, or into

the errors of Cicero, painted out by his own pencil in his Epistles to

Atticus, and he will fly apace from being irresolute. Let him look into

the errors of Phocion, and he will beware how he be obstinate or

inflexible. Let him but read the fable of Ixion, and it will hold him

from being vaporous or imaginative. Let him look into the errors of Cato

II., and he will never be one of the Antipodes, to tread opposite to the

present world.

(5) And for the conceit that learning should dispose men to leisure and

privateness, and make men slothful: it were a strange thing if that which

accustometh the mind to a perpetual motion and agitation should induce

slothfulness, whereas, contrariwise, it may be truly affirmed that no

kind of men love business for itself but those that are learned; for

other persons love it for profit, as a hireling that loves the work for

the wages; or for honour, as because it beareth them up in the eyes of

men, and refresheth their reputation, which otherwise would wear; or

because it putteth them in mind of their fortune, and giveth them

occasion to pleasure and displeasure; or because it exerciseth some

faculty wherein they take pride, and so entertaineth them in good-humour

and pleasing conceits towards themselves; or because it advanceth any

other their ends. So that as it is said of untrue valours, that some

men’s valours are in the eyes of them that look on, so such men’s

industries are in the eyes of others, or, at least, in regard of their

own designments; only learned men love business as an action according to

nature, as agreeable to health of mind as exercise is to health of body,

taking pleasure in the action itself, and not in the purchase, so that of

all men they are the most indefatigable, if it be towards any business

which can hold or detain their mind.

(6) And if any man be laborious in reading and study, and yet idle in

business and action, it groweth from some weakness of body or softness of

spirit, such as Seneca speaketh of: _Quidam tam sunt umbratiles_, _ut

putent in turbido esse quicquid in luce est_; and not of learning: well

may it be that such a point of a man’s nature may make him give himself

to learning, but it is not learning that breedeth any such point in his

nature.

(7) And that learning should take up too much time or leisure: I answer,

the most active or busy man that hath been or can be, hath (no question)

many vacant times of leisure while he expecteth the tides and returns of

business (except he be either tedious and of no despatch, or lightly and

unworthily ambitious to meddle in things that may be better done by

others), and then the question is but how those spaces and times of

leisure shall be filled and spent; whether in pleasure or in studies; as

was well answered by Demosthenes to his adversary Æschines, that was a

man given to pleasure, and told him “That his orations did smell of the

lamp.” “Indeed,” said Demosthenes, “there is a great difference between

the things that you and I do by lamp-light.” So as no man need doubt

that learning will expel business, but rather it will keep and defend the

possession of the mind against idleness and pleasure, which otherwise at

unawares may enter to the prejudice of both.

(8) Again, for that other conceit that learning should undermine the

reverence of laws and government, it is assuredly a mere depravation and

calumny, without all shadow of truth. For to say that a blind custom of

obedience should be a surer obligation than duty taught and understood,

it is to affirm that a blind man may tread surer by a guide than a seeing

man can by a light. And it is without all controversy that learning doth

make the minds of men gentle, generous, manageable, and pliant to

government; whereas ignorance makes them churlish, thwart, and mutinous:

and the evidence of time doth clear this assertion, considering that the

most barbarous, rude, and unlearned times have been most subject to

tumults, seditions, and changes.

(9) And as to the judgment of Cato the Censor, he was well punished for

his blasphemy against learning, in the same kind wherein he offended; for

when he was past threescore years old, he was taken with an extreme

desire to go to school again, and to learn the Greek tongue, to the end

to peruse the Greek authors; which doth well demonstrate that his former

censure of the Grecian learning was rather an affected gravity, than

according to the inward sense of his own opinion. And as for Virgil’s

verses, though it pleased him to brave the world in taking to the Romans

the art of empire, and leaving to others the arts of subjects, yet so

much is manifest—that the Romans never ascended to that height of empire

till the time they had ascended to the height of other arts. For in the

time of the two first Cæsars, which had the art of government in greatest

perfection, there lived the best poet, Virgilius Maro; the best

historiographer, Titus Livius; the best antiquary, Marcus Varro; and the

best or second orator, Marcus Cicero, that to the memory of man are

known. As for the accusation of Socrates, the time must be remembered

when it was prosecuted; which was under the Thirty Tyrants, the most

base, bloody, and envious persons that have governed; which revolution of

state was no sooner over but Socrates, whom they had made a person

criminal, was made a person heroical, and his memory accumulate with

honours divine and human; and those discourses of his which were then

termed corrupting of manners, were after acknowledged for sovereign

medicines of the mind and manners, and so have been received ever since

till this day. Let this, therefore, serve for answer to politiques,

which in their humorous severity, or in their feigned gravity, have

presumed to throw imputations upon learning; which redargution

nevertheless (save that we know not whether our labours may extend to

other ages) were not needful for the present, in regard of the love and

reverence towards learning which the example and countenance of two so

learned princes, Queen Elizabeth and your Majesty, being as Castor and

Pollux, _lucida sidera_, stars of excellent light and most benign

influence, hath wrought in all men of place and authority in our nation.

III. (1) Now therefore we come to that third sort of discredit or

diminution of credit that groweth unto learning from learned men

themselves, which commonly cleaveth fastest: it is either from their

fortune, or from their manners, or from the nature of their studies. For

the first, it is not in their power; and the second is accidental; the

third only is proper to be handled: but because we are not in hand with

true measure, but with popular estimation and conceit, it is not amiss to

speak somewhat of the two former. The derogations therefore which grow

to learning from the fortune or condition of learned men, are either in

respect of scarcity of means, or in respect of privateness of life and

meanness of employments.

(2) Concerning want, and that it is the case of learned men usually to

begin with little, and not to grow rich so fast as other men, by reason

they convert not their labours chiefly to lucre and increase, it were

good to leave the commonplace in commendation of povery to some friar to

handle, to whom much was attributed by Machiavel in this point when he

said, “That the kingdom of the clergy had been long before at an end, if

the reputation and reverence towards the poverty of friars had not borne

out the scandal of the superfluities and excesses of bishops and

prelates.” So a man might say that the felicity and delicacy of princes

and great persons had long since turned to rudeness and barbarism, if the

poverty of learning had not kept up civility and honour of life; but

without any such advantages, it is worthy the observation what a reverent

and honoured thing poverty of fortune was for some ages in the Roman

state, which nevertheless was a state without paradoxes. For we see what

Titus Livius saith in his introduction: _Cæterum aut me amor negotii

suscepti fallit aut nulla unquam respublica nec major_, _nec sanctior_,

_nec bonis exemplis ditior fuit_; _nec in quam tam sero avaritia

luxuriaque immigraverint_; _nec ubi tantus ac tam diu paupertati ac

parsimoniæ honos fuerit_. We see likewise, after that the state of Rome

was not itself, but did degenerate, how that person that took upon him to

be counsellor to Julius Cæsar after his victory where to begin his

restoration of the state, maketh it of all points the most summary to

take away the estimation of wealth: _Verum hæc et omnia mala pariter cum

honore pecuniæ desinent_; _si neque magistratus_, _neque alia vulgo

cupienda_, _venalia erunt_. To conclude this point: as it was truly said

that _Paupertas est virtutis fortuna_, though sometimes it come from

vice, so it may be fitly said that, though some times it may proceed from

misgovernment and accident. Surely Solomon hath pronounced it both in

censure, _Qui festinat ad divitias non erit insons_; and in precept, “Buy

the truth, and sell it not; and so of wisdom and knowledge;” judging that

means were to be spent upon learning, and not learning to be applied to

means. And as for the privateness or obscureness (as it may be in vulgar

estimation accounted) of life of contemplative men, it is a theme so

common to extol a private life, not taxed with sensuality and sloth, in

comparison and to the disadvantage of a civil life, for safety, liberty,

pleasure, and dignity, or at least freedom from indignity, as no man

handleth it but handleth it well; such a consonancy it hath to men’s

conceits in the expressing, and to men’s consents in the allowing. This

only I will add, that learned men forgotten in states and not living in

the eyes of men, are like the images of Cassius and Brutus in the funeral

of Junia, of which, not being represented as many others were, Tacitus

saith, _Eo ipso præfulgebant quod non visebantur_.

(3) And for meanness of employment, that which is most traduced to

contempt is that the government of youth is commonly allotted to them;

which age, because it is the age of least authority, it is transferred to

the disesteeming of those employments wherein youth is conversant, and

which are conversant about youth. But how unjust this traducement is (if

you will reduce things from popularity of opinion to measure of reason)

may appear in that we see men are more curious what they put into a new

vessel than into a vessel seasoned; and what mould they lay about a young

plant than about a plant corroborate; so as this weakest terms and times

of all things use to have the best applications and helps. And will you

hearken to the Hebrew rabbins? “Your young men shall see visions, and

your old men shall dream dreams:” say they, youth is the worthier age,

for that visions are nearer apparitions of God than dreams? And let it

be noted that howsoever the condition of life of _pedantes_ hath been

scorned upon theatres, as the ape of tyranny; and that the modern

looseness or negligence hath taken no due regard to the choice of

schoolmasters and tutors; yet the ancient wisdom of the best times did

always make a just complaint, that states were too busy with their laws

and too negligent in point of education: which excellent part of ancient

discipline hath been in some sort revived of late times by the colleges

of the Jesuits; of whom, although in regard of their superstition I may

say, _Quo meliores_, _eo deteriores_; yet in regard of this, and some

other points concerning human learning and moral matters, I may say, as

Agesilaus said to his enemy Pharnabazus, _Talis quum sis_, _utunam noster

esses_. And that much touching the discredits drawn from the fortunes of

learned men.

(4) As touching the manners of learned men, it is a thing personal and

individual: and no doubt there be amongst them, as in other professions,

of all temperatures: but yet so as it is not without truth which is said,

that _Abeunt studua in mores_, studies have an influence and operation

upon the manners of those that are conversant in them.

(5) But upon an attentive and indifferent review, I for my part cannot

find any disgrace to learning can proceed from the manners of learned

men; not inherent to them as they are learned; except it be a fault

(which was the supposed fault of Demosthenes, Cicero, Cato II., Seneca,

and many more) that because the times they read of are commonly better

than the times they live in, and the duties taught better than the duties

practised, they contend sometimes too far to bring things to perfection,

and to reduce the corruption of manners to honesty of precepts or

examples of too great height. And yet hereof they have caveats enough in

their own walks. For Solon, when he was asked whether he had given his

citizens the best laws, answered wisely, “Yea, of such as they would

receive:” and Plato, finding that his own heart could not agree with the

corrupt manners of his country, refused to bear place or office, saying,

“That a man’s country was to be used as his parents were, that is, with

humble persuasions, and not with contestations.” And Cæsar’s counsellor

put in the same caveat, _Non ad vetera instituta revocans quæ jampridem

corruptis moribus ludibrio sunt_; and Cicero noteth this error directly

in Cato II. when he writes to his friend Atticus, _Cato optime sentit_,

_sed nocet interdum reipublicæ_; _loquitur enim tanquam in republicâ

Platonis_, _non tanquam in fæce Romuli_. And the same Cicero doth excuse

and expound the philosophers for going too far and being too exact in

their prescripts when he saith, _Isti ipse præceptores virtutis et

magistri videntur fines officiorum paulo longius quam natura vellet

protulisse_, _ut cum ad ultimum animo contendissemus_, _ibi tamen_, _ubi

oportet_, _consisteremus_: and yet himself might have said, _Monitis sum

minor ipse meis_; for it was his own fault, though not in so extreme a

degree.

(6) Another fault likewise much of this kind hath been incident to

learned men, which is, that they have esteemed the preservation, good,

and honour of their countries or masters before their own fortunes or

safeties. For so saith Demosthenes unto the Athenians: “If it please you

to note it, my counsels unto you are not such whereby I should grow great

amongst you, and you become little amongst the Grecians; but they be of

that nature as they are sometimes not good for me to give, but are always

good for you to follow.” And so Seneca, after he had consecrated that

_Quinquennium Neronis_ to the eternal glory of learned governors, held on

his honest and loyal course of good and free counsel after his master

grew extremely corrupt in his government. Neither can this point

otherwise be, for learning endueth men’s minds with a true sense of the

frailty of their persons, the casualty of their fortunes, and the dignity

of their soul and vocation, so that it is impossible for them to esteem

that any greatness of their own fortune can be a true or worthy end of

their being and ordainment, and therefore are desirous to give their

account to God, and so likewise to their masters under God (as kings and

the states that they serve) in those words, _Ecce tibi lucrefeci_, and

not _Ecce mihi lucrefeci_; whereas the corrupter sort of mere politiques,

that have not their thoughts established by learning in the love and

apprehension of duty, nor never look abroad into universality, do refer

all things to themselves, and thrust themselves into the centre of the

world, as if all lines should meet in them and their fortunes, never

caring in all tempests what becomes of the ship of state, so they may

save themselves in the cockboat of their own fortune; whereas men that

feel the weight of duty and know the limits of self-love use to make good

their places and duties, though with peril; and if they stand in

seditious and violent alterations, it is rather the reverence which many

times both adverse parts do give to honesty, than any versatile advantage

of their own carriage. But for this point of tender sense and fast

obligation of duty which learning doth endue the mind withal, howsoever

fortune may tax it, and many in the depth of their corrupt principles may

despise it, yet it will receive an open allowance, and therefore needs

the less disproof or excuse.

(7) Another fault incident commonly to learned men, which may be more

properly defended than truly denied, is that they fail sometimes in

applying themselves to particular persons, which want of exact

application ariseth from two causes—the one, because the largeness of

their mind can hardly confine itself to dwell in the exquisite

observation or examination of the nature and customs of one person, for

it is a speech for a lover, and not for a wise man, _Satis magnum alter

alteri theatrum sumus_. Nevertheless I shall yield that he that cannot

contract the sight of his mind as well as disperse and dilate it, wanteth

a great faculty. But there is a second cause, which is no inability, but

a rejection upon choice and judgment. For the honest and just bounds of

observation by one person upon another extend no further but to

understand him sufficiently, whereby not to give him offence, or whereby

to be able to give him faithful counsel, or whereby to stand upon

reasonable guard and caution in respect of a man’s self. But to be

speculative into another man to the end to know how to work him, or wind

him, or govern him, proceedeth from a heart that is double and cloven,

and not entire and ingenuous; which as in friendship it is want of

integrity, so towards princes or superiors is want of duty. For the

custom of the Levant, which is that subjects do forbear to gaze or fix

their eyes upon princes, is in the outward ceremony barbarous, but the

moral is good; for men ought not, by cunning and bent observations, to

pierce and penetrate into the hearts of kings, which the Scripture hath

declared to be inscrutable.

(8) There is yet another fault (with which I will conclude this part)

which is often noted in learned men, that they do many times fail to

observe decency and discretion in their behaviour and carriage, and

commit errors in small and ordinary points of action, so as the vulgar

sort of capacities do make a judgment of them in greater matters by that

which they find wanting in them in smaller. But this consequence doth

oft deceive men, for which I do refer them over to that which was said by

Themistocles, arrogantly and uncivilly being applied to himself out of

his own mouth, but, being applied to the general state of this question,

pertinently and justly, when, being invited to touch a lute, he said, “He

could not fiddle, but he could make a small town a great state.” So no

doubt many may be well seen in the passages of government and policy

which are to seek in little and punctual occasions. I refer them also to

that which Plato said of his master Socrates, whom he compared to the

gallipots of apothecaries, which on the outside had apes and owls and

antiques, but contained within sovereign and precious liquors and

confections; acknowledging that, to an external report, he was not

without superficial levities and deformities, but was inwardly

replenished with excellent virtues and powers. And so much touching the

point of manners of learned men.

(9) But in the meantime I have no purpose to give allowance to some

conditions and courses base and unworthy, wherein divers professors of

learning have wronged themselves and gone too far; such as were those

trencher philosophers which in the later age of the Roman state were

usually in the houses of great persons, being little better than solemn

parasites, of which kind, Lucian maketh a merry description of the

philosopher that the great lady took to ride with her in her coach, and

would needs have him carry her little dog, which he doing officiously and

yet uncomely, the page scoffed and said, “That he doubted the philosopher

of a Stoic would turn to be a Cynic.” But, above all the rest, this

gross and palpable flattery whereunto many not unlearned have abased and

abused their wits and pens, turning (as Du Bartas saith) Hecuba into

Helena, and Faustina into Lucretia, hath most diminished the price and

estimation of learning. Neither is the modern dedication of books and

writings, as to patrons, to be commended, for that books (such as are

worthy the name of books) ought to have no patrons but truth and reason.

And the ancient custom was to dedicate them only to private and equal

friends, or to entitle the books with their names; or if to kings and

great persons, it was to some such as the argument of the book was fit

and proper for; but these and the like courses may deserve rather

reprehension than defence.

(10) Not that I can tax or condemn the morigeration or application of

learned men to men in fortune. For the answer was good that Diogenes

made to one that asked him in mockery, “How it came to pass that

philosophers were the followers of rich men, and not rich men of

philosophers?” He answered soberly, and yet sharply, “Because the one

sort knew what they had need of, and the other did not.” And of the like

nature was the answer which Aristippus made, when having a petition to

Dionysius, and no ear given to him, he fell down at his feet, whereupon

Dionysius stayed and gave him the hearing, and granted it; and afterwards

some person, tender on the behalf of philosophy, reproved Aristippus that

he would offer the profession of philosophy such an indignity as for a

private suit to fall at a tyrant’s feet; but he answered, “It was not his

fault, but it was the fault of Dionysius, that had his ears in his feet.”

Neither was it accounted weakness, but discretion, in him that would not

dispute his best with Adrianus Cæsar, excusing himself, “That it was

reason to yield to him that commanded thirty legions.” These and the

like, applications, and stooping to points of necessity and convenience,

cannot be disallowed; for though they may have some outward baseness, yet

in a judgment truly made they are to be accounted submissions to the

occasion and not to the person.

IV. (1) Now I proceed to those errors and vanities which have intervened

amongst the studies themselves of the learned, which is that which is

principal and proper to the present argument; wherein my purpose is not

to make a justification of the errors, but by a censure and separation of

the errors to make a justification of that which is good and sound, and

to deliver that from the aspersion of the other. For we see that it is

the manner of men to scandalise and deprave that which retaineth the

state and virtue, by taking advantage upon that which is corrupt and

degenerate, as the heathens in the primitive Church used to blemish and

taint the Christians with the faults and corruptions of heretics. But

nevertheless I have no meaning at this time to make any exact

animadversion of the errors and impediments in matters of learning, which

are more secret and remote from vulgar opinion, but only to speak unto

such as do fall under or near unto a popular observation.

(2) There be therefore chiefly three vanities in studies, whereby

learning hath been most traduced. For those things we do esteem vain

which are either false or frivolous, those which either have no truth or

no use; and those persons we esteem vain which are either credulous or

curious; and curiosity is either in matter or words: so that in reason as

well as in experience there fall out to be these three distempers (as I

may term them) of learning—the first, fantastical learning; the second,

contentious learning; and the last, delicate learning; vain imaginations,

vain altercations, and vain affectations; and with the last I will begin.

Martin Luther, conducted, no doubt, by a higher Providence, but in

discourse of reason, finding what a province he had undertaken against

the Bishop of Rome and the degenerate traditions of the Church, and

finding his own solitude, being in nowise aided by the opinions of his

own time, was enforced to awake all antiquity, and to call former times

to his succours to make a party against the present time. So that the

ancient authors, both in divinity and in humanity, which had long time

slept in libraries, began generally to be read and revolved. This, by

consequence, did draw on a necessity of a more exquisite travail in the

languages original, wherein those authors did write, for the better

understanding of those authors, and the better advantage of pressing and

applying their words. And thereof grew, again, a delight in their manner

of style and phrase, and an admiration of that kind of writing, which was

much furthered and precipitated by the enmity and opposition that the

propounders of those primitive but seeming new opinions had against the

schoolmen, who were generally of the contrary part, and whose writings

were altogether in a differing style and form; taking liberty to coin and

frame new terms of art to express their own sense, and to avoid circuit

of speech, without regard to the pureness, pleasantness, and (as I may

call it) lawfulness of the phrase or word. And again, because the great

labour then was with the people (of whom the Pharisees were wont to say,

_Execrabilis ista turba_, _quæ non novit legem_), for the winning and

persuading of them, there grew of necessity in chief price and request

eloquence and variety of discourse, as the fittest and forciblest access

into the capacity of the vulgar sort; so that these four causes

concurring—the admiration of ancient authors, the hate of the schoolmen,

the exact study of languages, and the efficacy of preaching—did bring in

an affectionate study of eloquence and copy of speech, which then began

to flourish. This grew speedily to an excess; for men began to hunt more

after words than matter—more after the choiceness of the phrase, and the

round and clean composition of the sentence, and the sweet falling of the

clauses, and the varying and illustration of their works with tropes and

figures, than after the weight of matter, worth of subject, soundness of

argument, life of invention, or depth of judgment. Then grew the flowing

and watery vein of Osorius, the Portugal bishop, to be in price. Then

did Sturmius spend such infinite and curious pains upon Cicero the Orator

and Hermogenes the Rhetorician, besides his own books of Periods and

Imitation, and the like. Then did Car of Cambridge and Ascham with their

lectures and writings almost deify Cicero and Demosthenes, and allure all

young men that were studious unto that delicate and polished kind of

learning. Then did Erasmus take occasion to make the scoffing echo,

_Decem annos consuumpsi in legendo Cicerone_; and the echo answered in

Greek, _One_, _Asine_. Then grew the learning of the schoolmen to be

utterly despised as barbarous. In sum, the whole inclination and bent of

those times was rather towards copy than weight.

(3) Here therefore [is] the first distemper of learning, when men study

words and not matter; whereof, though I have represented an example of

late times, yet it hath been and will be _secundum majus et minus_ in all

time. And how is it possible but this should have an operation to

discredit learning, even with vulgar capacities, when they see learned

men’s works like the first letter of a patent or limited book, which

though it hath large flourishes, yet it is but a letter? It seems to me

that Pygmalion’s frenzy is a good emblem or portraiture of this vanity;

for words are but the images of matter, and except they have life of

reason and invention, to fall in love with them is all one as to fall in

love with a picture.

(4) But yet notwithstanding it is a thing not hastily to be condemned, to

clothe and adorn the obscurity even of philosophy itself with sensible

and plausible elocution. For hereof we have great examples in Xenophon,

Cicero, Seneca, Plutarch, and of Plato also in some degree; and hereof

likewise there is great use, for surely, to the severe inquisition of

truth and the deep progress into philosophy, it is some hindrance because

it is too early satisfactory to the mind of man, and quencheth the desire

of further search before we come to a just period. But then if a man be

to have any use of such knowledge in civil occasions, of conference,

counsel, persuasion, discourse, or the like, then shall he find it

prepared to his hands in those authors which write in that manner. But

the excess of this is so justly contemptible, that as Hercules, when he

saw the image of Adonis, Venus’ minion, in a temple, said in disdain,

_Nil sacri es_; so there is none of Hercules’ followers in learning—that

is, the more severe and laborious sort of inquirers into truth—but will

despise those delicacies and affectations, as indeed capable of no

divineness. And thus much of the first disease or distemper of learning.

(5) The second which followeth is in nature worse than the former: for as

substance of matter is better than beauty of words, so contrariwise vain

matter is worse than vain words: wherein it seemeth the reprehension of

St. Paul was not only proper for those times, but prophetical for the

times following; and not only respective to divinity, but extensive to

all knowledge: _Devita profanas vocum novitates_, _et oppositiones falsi

nominis scientiæ_. For he assigneth two marks and badges of suspected

and falsified science: the one, the novelty and strangeness of terms; the

other, the strictness of positions, which of necessity doth induce

oppositions, and so questions and altercations. Surely, like as many

substances in nature which are solid do putrefy and corrupt into

worms;—so it is the property of good and sound knowledge to putrefy and

dissolve into a number of subtle, idle, unwholesome, and (as I may term

them) vermiculate questions, which have indeed a kind of quickness and

life of spirit, but no soundness of matter or goodness of quality. This

kind of degenerate learning did chiefly reign amongst the schoolmen, who

having sharp and strong wits, and abundance of leisure, and small variety

of reading, but their wits being shut up in the cells of a few authors

(chiefly Aristotle their dictator) as their persons were shut up in the

cells of monasteries and colleges, and knowing little history, either of

nature or time, did out of no great quantity of matter and infinite

agitation of wit spin out unto us those laborious webs of learning which

are extant in their books. For the wit and mind of man, if it work upon

matter, which is the contemplation of the creatures of God, worketh

according to the stuff and is limited thereby; but if it work upon

itself, as the spider worketh his web, then it is endless, and brings

forth indeed cobwebs of learning, admirable for the fineness of thread

and work, but of no substance or profit.

(6) This same unprofitable subtility or curiosity is of two sorts: either

in the subject itself that they handle, when it is a fruitless

speculation or controversy (whereof there are no small number both in

divinity and philosophy), or in the manner or method of handling of a

knowledge, which amongst them was this—upon every particular position or

assertion to frame objections, and to those objections, solutions; which

solutions were for the most part not confutations, but distinctions:

whereas indeed the strength of all sciences is, as the strength of the

old man’s faggot, in the bond. For the harmony of a science, supporting

each part the other, is and ought to be the true and brief confutation

and suppression of all the smaller sort of objections. But, on the other

side, if you take out every axiom, as the sticks of the faggot, one by

one, you may quarrel with them and bend them and break them at your

pleasure: so that, as was said of Seneca, _Verborum minutiis rerum

frangit pondera_, so a man may truly say of the schoolmen, _Quæstionum

minutiis scientiarum frangunt soliditatem_. For were it not better for a

man in fair room to set up one great light, or branching candlestick of

lights, than to go about with a small watch-candle into every corner?

And such is their method, that rests not so much upon evidence of truth

proved by arguments, authorities, similitudes, examples, as upon

particular confutations and solutions of every scruple, cavillation, and

objection; breeding for the most part one question as fast as it solveth

another; even as in the former resemblance, when you carry the light into

one corner, you darken the rest; so that the fable and fiction of Scylla

seemeth to be a lively image of this kind of philosophy or knowledge;

which was transformed into a comely virgin for the upper parts; but then

_Candida succinctam latrantibus inguina monstris_: so the generalities of

the schoolmen are for a while good and proportionable; but then when you

descend into their distinctions and decisions, instead of a fruitful womb

for the use and benefit of man’s life, they end in monstrous altercations

and barking questions. So as it is not possible but this quality of

knowledge must fall under popular contempt, the people being apt to

contemn truths upon occasion of controversies and altercations, and to

think they are all out of their way which never meet; and when they see

such digladiation about subtleties, and matters of no use or moment, they

easily fall upon that judgment of Dionysius of Syracusa, _Verba ista sunt

senum otiosorum_.

(7) Notwithstanding, certain it is that if those schoolmen to their great

thirst of truth and unwearied travail of wit had joined variety and

universality of reading and contemplation, they had proved excellent

lights, to the great advancement of all learning and knowledge; but as

they are, they are great undertakers indeed, and fierce with dark

keeping. But as in the inquiry of the divine truth, their pride inclined

to leave the oracle of God’s word, and to vanish in the mixture of their

own inventions; so in the inquisition of nature, they ever left the

oracle of God’s works, and adored the deceiving and deformed images which

the unequal mirror of their own minds, or a few received authors or

principles, did represent unto them. And thus much for the second

disease of learning.

(8) For the third vice or disease of learning, which concerneth deceit or

untruth, it is of all the rest the foulest; as that which doth destroy

the essential form of knowledge, which is nothing but a representation of

truth: for the truth of being and the truth of knowing are one, differing

no more than the direct beam and the beam reflected. This vice therefore

brancheth itself into two sorts; delight in deceiving and aptness to be

deceived; imposture and credulity; which, although they appear to be of a

diverse nature, the one seeming to proceed of cunning and the other of

simplicity, yet certainly they do for the most part concur: for, as the

verse noteth—

“Percontatorem fugito, nam garrulus idem est,”

an inquisitive man is a prattler; so upon the like reason a credulous man

is a deceiver: as we see it in fame, that he that will easily believe

rumours will as easily augment rumours and add somewhat to them of his

own; which Tacitus wisely noteth, when he saith, _Fingunt simul

creduntque_: so great an affinity hath fiction and belief.

(9) This facility of credit and accepting or admitting things weakly

authorised or warranted is of two kinds according to the subject: for it

is either a belief of history, or, as the lawyers speak, matter of fact;

or else of matter of art and opinion. As to the former, we see the

experience and inconvenience of this error in ecclesiastical history;

which hath too easily received and registered reports and narrations of

miracles wrought by martyrs, hermits, or monks of the desert, and other

holy men, and their relics, shrines, chapels and images: which though

they had a passage for a time by the ignorance of the people, the

superstitious simplicity of some and the politic toleration of others

holding them but as divine poesies, yet after a period of time, when the

mist began to clear up, they grew to be esteemed but as old wives’

fables, impostures of the clergy, illusions of spirits, and badges of

Antichrist, to the great scandal and detriment of religion.

(10) So in natural history, we see there hath not been that choice and

judgment used as ought to have been; as may appear in the writings of

Plinius, Cardanus, Albertus, and divers of the Arabians, being fraught

with much fabulous matter, a great part not only untried, but notoriously

untrue, to the great derogation of the credit of natural philosophy with

the grave and sober kind of wits: wherein the wisdom and integrity of

Aristotle is worthy to be observed, that, having made so diligent and

exquisite a history of living creatures, hath mingled it sparingly with

any vain or feigned matter; and yet on the other side hath cast all

prodigious narrations, which he thought worthy the recording, into one

book, excellently discerning that matter of manifest truth, such

whereupon observation and rule was to be built, was not to be mingled or

weakened with matter of doubtful credit; and yet again, that rarities and

reports that seem uncredible are not to be suppressed or denied to the

memory of men.

(11) And as for the facility of credit which is yielded to arts and

opinions, it is likewise of two kinds; either when too much belief is

attributed to the arts themselves, or to certain authors in any art. The

sciences themselves, which have had better intelligence and confederacy

with the imagination of man than with his reason, are three in number:

astrology, natural magic, and alchemy; of which sciences, nevertheless,

the ends or pretences are noble. For astrology pretendeth to discover

that correspondence or concatenation which is between the superior globe

and the inferior; natural magic pretendeth to call and reduce natural

philosophy from variety of speculations to the magnitude of works; and

alchemy pretendeth to make separation of all the unlike parts of bodies

which in mixtures of natures are incorporate. But the derivations and

prosecutions to these ends, both in the theories and in the practices,

are full of error and vanity; which the great professors themselves have

sought to veil over and conceal by enigmatical writings, and referring

themselves to auricular traditions and such other devices, to save the

credit of impostures. And yet surely to alchemy this right is due, that

it may be compared to the husbandman whereof Æsop makes the fable; that,

when he died, told his sons that he had left unto them gold buried

underground in his vineyard; and they digged over all the ground, and

gold they found none; but by reason of their stirring and digging the

mould about the roots of their vines, they had a great vintage the year

following: so assuredly the search and stir to make gold hath brought to

light a great number of good and fruitful inventions and experiments, as

well for the disclosing of nature as for the use of man’s life.

(12) And as for the overmuch credit that hath been given unto authors in

sciences, in making them dictators, that their words should stand, and

not consuls, to give advice; the damage is infinite that sciences have

received thereby, as the principal cause that hath kept them low at a

stay without growth or advancement. For hence it hath come, that in arts

mechanical the first deviser comes shortest, and time addeth and

perfecteth; but in sciences the first author goeth furthest, and time

leeseth and corrupteth. So we see artillery, sailing, printing, and the

like, were grossly managed at the first, and by time accommodated and

refined; but contrariwise, the philosophies and sciences of Aristotle,

Plato, Democritus, Hippocrates, Euclides, Archimedes, of most vigour at

the first, and by time degenerate and imbased: whereof the reason is no

other, but that in the former many wits and industries have contributed

in one; and in the latter many wits and industries have been spent about

the wit of some one, whom many times they have rather depraved than

illustrated; for, as water will not ascend higher than the level of the

first spring-head from whence it descendeth, so knowledge derived from

Aristotle, and exempted from liberty of examination, will not rise again

higher than the knowledge of Aristotle. And, therefore, although the

position be good, _Oportet discentem credere_, yet it must be coupled

with this, _Oportet edoctum judicare_; for disciples do owe unto masters

only a temporary belief and a suspension of their own judgment till they

be fully instructed, and not an absolute resignation or perpetual

captivity; and therefore, to conclude this point, I will say no more, but

so let great authors have their due, as time, which is the author of

authors, be not deprived of his due—which is, further and further to

discover truth. Thus have I gone over these three diseases of learning;

besides the which there are some other rather peccant humours than formed

diseases, which, nevertheless, are not so secret and intrinsic, but that

they fall under a popular observation and traducement, and, therefore,

are not to be passed over.

The Advancement of Learning · 第 3 / 8 题