[348] Shaftesbury has thrown out, on this head, some important
truths:--"If men are forbid to speak their minds _seriously_,
they will do it _ironically_. If they find it dangerous to
do so, they will then redouble their disguise, _invoke
themselves into mysteriousness_, and talk so as hardly to be
understood. The _persecuting_ spirit has raised the
_bantering_ one. The higher the slavery, the more exquisite
the buffoonery."--Vol. i. p. 71. The subject of our present
inquiry is a very remarkable instance of "involving himself
into mysteriousness." To this cause we owe the strong raillery
of Marvell; the cloudy "Oracles of Reason" of Blount; and
the formidable, though gross burlesque, of Hickeringill, the
rector of All-Saints, in Colchester. "Of him (says the
editor of his collected works, 1716), the greatest writers of
our times trembled at his pen; and as great a genius as
Sir Roger L'Estrange's was, it submitted to his _superior
way of reasoning_"--that is, to a most extraordinary
burlesque spirit in politics and religion. But even he who
made others tremble felt the terrors he inflicted; for he
complains that "some who have thought his pen too sharp and
smart, those who have been galled, sore men where the skin's
off, have long lain to catch for somewhat to accuse me--upon
such touchy subjects, a man had need have the _dexterity to
split a hair_, to handle them pertinently, usefully, and
yet _safely_ and _warily_."--Such men, however, cannot
avoid their fate: they will be persecuted, however they
succeed in "splitting a hair;" and it is then they have
recourse to the most absurd _subterfuges_, to which our
Hobbes was compelled. Thus also it happened to Woolston, who
wrote in a ludicrous way "Blasphemies" against the miracles of
Christ; calling them "tales and rodomontados." He rested his
defence on this subterfuge, that "it was meant to place the
Christian religion on a better footing," &c. But the Court
answered, that "if the author of a treasonable libel should
write at the conclusion, _God save the king!_ it would not
excuse him."
[349] The moral axiom of Solon "KNOW THYSELF" (_Nosce teipsum_),
applied by the ancient sage as a corrective for our own pride
and vanity, Hobbes contracts into a narrow principle, when, in
his introduction to "The Leviathan," he would infer that, by
this self-inspection, we are enabled to determine on the
thoughts and passions of other men; and thus he would make the
taste, the feelings, the experience of the individual decide
for all mankind. This simple error has produced all the dogmas
of cynicism; for the cynic is one whose insulated feelings,
being all of the selfish kind, can imagine no other stirrer of
even our best affections, and strains even our loftiest
virtues into pitiful motives. Two noble authors, men of the
most dignified feelings, have protested against this
principle. Lord Shaftesbury keenly touches the characters of
Hobbes and Rochester:--"Sudden courage, says our modern
philosopher (Hobbes), is anger. If so, courage, considered as
constant, and belonging to a character, must, in his account,
be defined constant anger, or anger constantly recurring. All
men, says a witty poet (Rochester), would be cowards, if they
durst: that the poet and the philosopher both were cowards,
may be yielded, perhaps, without dispute! they may have spoken
the best of their knowledge."--SHAFTESBURY, vol. i. p. 119.
With an heroic spirit, that virtuous statesman, Lord
Clarendon, rejects the degrading notion of Hobbes. When _he_
looked into his own breast, he found that courage was a real
virtue, which had induced him, had it been necessary, to have
shed his blood as a patriot. But death, in the judgment of
Hobbes, was the most terrible event, and to be avoided by any
means. Lord Clarendon draws a parallel between a "man of
courage" and one of the disciples of Hobbes, "brought to die
together, by a judgment they cannot avoid." "How comes it to
pass, that one of these undergoes death, with no other
concernment than as if he were going any other journey; and
the other with such confusion and trembling, that he is even
without life before he dies; if it were true that all men fear
alike upon the like occasion?"--_Survey of the Leviathan_, p.
14.
[350] They were distinguished as _Hobbists_, and the opinions as
_Hobbianism_. Their chief happened to be born on a Good
Friday; and in the metrical history of his own life he seems
to have considered it as a remarkable event. An atom had its
weight in the scales by which his mighty egotism weighed
itself. He thus marks the day of his birth, innocently
enough:--
"Natus erat noster Servator Homo-Deus annos
Mille et quingentos, octo quoque undecies."
But the _Hobbists_ declared more openly (as Wood tells us),
that "as our Saviour Christ went out of the world on that day
to save the men of the world, so another saviour came into the
world on that day to save them!"
That the sect spread abroad, as well as at home, is told us
by Lord Clarendon, in the preface to his "Survey of the
Leviathan." The qualities of the author, as well as the
book, were well adapted for proselytism; for Clarendon,
who was intimately acquainted with him, notices his
confidence in conversation--his never allowing himself to
be contradicted--his bold inferences--the novelty of his
expressions--and his probity, and a life free from scandal.
"The humour and inclination of the time to all kind of
paradoxes," was indulged by a pleasant clear style, an
appearance of order and method, hardy paradoxes, and
accommodating principles to existing circumstances.
Who were the sect composed of? The monstrous court of Charles
II.--the grossest materialists! The secret history of that
court could scarcely find a Suetonius among us. But our author
was frequently in the hands of those who could never have
comprehended what they pretended to admire; this appears by a
publication of the times, intituled, "Twelve Ingenious
Characters, &c." 1686, where, in that of a town-fop, who, "for
genteel breeding, posts to town, by his mother's indulgence,
three or four wild companions, half-a-dozen bottles of
Burgundy, _two leaves of Leviathan_," and some few other
obvious matters, shortly make this young philosopher nearly
lose his moral and physical existence. "He will not confess
himself an Atheist, yet he boasts aloud that he holds his
_gospel_ from _the Apostle of Malmesbury_, though it is more
than probable he never read, at least understood, ten leaves
of _that unlucky author_." If such were his wretched
disciples, Hobbes was indeed "an unlucky author," for their
morals and habits were quite opposite to those of their
master. EACHARD, in the preface to his Second Dialogue, 1673,
exhibits a very Lucianic arrangement of his disciples--Hobbes'
"Pit, Box, and Gallery Friends." The _Pit-friends_ were sturdy
practicants who, when they hear that "Ill-nature, Debauchery,
and Irreligion were Mathematics and Demonstration, clap and
shout, and swear by all that comes from Malmesbury." The
_Gallery_ are "a sort of small, soft, little, pretty, fine
gentlemen, who having some little wit, some little modesty,
some little remain of conscience and country religion, could
not hector it as the former, but quickly learnt to chirp and
giggle when t'other clapt and shouted." But "the Don-admirers,
and _Box-friends_ of Mr. Hobbes are men of gravity and
reputation, who will scarce simper in favour of the
philosopher, but can make shift to nod and nod again." Even
amid this wild satire we find a piece of truth in a dark
corner; for the satirist confesses that "his Gallery-friends,
who were such resolved practicants in _Hobbianism_ (by which
the satirist means all kinds of licentiousness) would most
certainly have been so, had there never been any such man as
Mr. Hobbes in the world." Why then place to the account of the
philosopher those gross immoralities which he never
sanctioned? The life of Hobbes is without a stain! He had
other friends besides these "Box, Pit, and Gallery"
gentry--the learned of Europe, and many of the great and good
men of his own country.
[351] Hobbes, in defending Thucydides, whom he has so admirably
translated, from the charge of some obscurity in his design,
observes that "Marcellinus saith he was obscure, on purpose
that the common people might not understand him; and not
unlikely, for a wise man should so write (though in words
understood by all men), that wise men only should be able to
commend him." Thus early in life Hobbes had determined on a
principle which produced all his studied ambiguity, involved
him in so much controversy, and, in some respects, preserved
him in an inglorious security.
[352] Hobbes explains the image in his Introduction. He does not
disguise his opinion that _Men_ may be converted into
_Automatons_; and if he were not very ingenious we might lose
our patience. He was so delighted with this whimsical fancy of
his "artificial man," that he carried it on to government
itself, and employed the engraver to impress the monstrous
personification on our minds, even clearer than by his
reasonings. The curious design forms the frontispiece of "The
Leviathan." He borrowed the name from that sea-monster, that
mightiest of powers, which Job has told is not to be compared
with any on earth. The sea-monster is here, however, changed
into a colossal man, entirely made up of little men from all
the classes of society, bearing in the right hand the sword,
and in the left the crosier. The compartments are full of
political allegories. An expression of Lord Clarendon's in the
preface to his "Survey of the Leviathan," shows our
philosopher's infatuation to this "idol of the Den," as Lord
Bacon might have called the intellectual illusion of the
philosopher. Hobbes, when at Paris, showed a proof-sheet or
two of his work to Clarendon, who, he soon discovered, could
not approve of the hardy tenets. "He frequently came to me,"
says his lordship, "and told me his book (_which he would call
LEVIATHAN_) was then printing in England. He said, that he
knew when I read his book I would not like it, and mentioned
some of his conclusions: upon which I asked him, why he would
publish such doctrine: to which, after a discourse, _between
jest and earnest_, he said, _The truth is, I have a mind to go
home!_" Some philosophical systems have, probably, been raised
"between jest and earnest;" yet here was a text-book for the
despot, as it is usually accepted, deliberately given to the
world, for no other purpose than that the philosopher was
desirous of changing his lodgings at Paris for his old
apartments in London!
[353] The duplicity of the system is strikingly revealed by Burnet,
who tells of Hobbes, that "he put all the law in the will of
the _prince_ or the _people_; for he writ his book _at first_
in favour of _absolute monarchy_, but turned it afterwards to
gratify the _republican party_. These were his true
principles, though he had disguised them for deceiving unwary
readers." It is certain Hobbes became a suspected person among
the royalists. They were startled at the open extravagance of
some of his political paradoxes; such as his notion of the
necessity of extirpating all the _Greek_ and _Latin_ authors,
"by reading of which men from their childhood have gotten a
habit of licentious controuling the actions of their
sovereigns."--p. 111. But the doctrines of liberty were not
found only among the Greeks and Romans; the _Hebrews_ were
stern republicans; and liberty seems to have had a nobler
birth in the North among our German ancestors, than perhaps in
any other part of the globe. It is certain that the Puritans,
who warmed over the Bible more than the classic historians,
had their heads full of Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea;
the hanging of the five kings of Joshua; and the fat king of
the Moabites, who in his summer-room received a present, and
then a dagger, from the left-handed Jewish Jacobin. Hobbes
curiously compares "The _tyrannophobia_, or fear of being
strongly governed," to the _hydrophobia_. "When a monarchy is
once bitten to the quick by those democratical writers, and,
by their poison, men seem to be converted into dogs," his
remedy is, "a strong monarch," or "the exercise of entire
sovereignty," p. 171; and that the authority he would
establish should be immutable, he hardily asserts that "the
ruling power cannot be punished for mal-administration." Yet
in this elaborate system of despotism are interspersed some
strong republican axioms, as The safety of the people is the
supreme law,--The public good to be preferred to that of the
individual:--and that God made the one for the many, and not
the many for the one. The effect the LEVIATHAN produced on the
royal party was quite unexpected by the author. His hardy
principles were considered as a satire on arbitrary power, and
Hobbes himself as a concealed favourer of democracy. This has
happened more than once with such vehement advocates. Our
philosopher must have been thunderstruck at the insinuation,
for he had presented the royal exile, as Clarendon in his
"Survey" informs us, with a magnificent copy of "The
Leviathan," written on vellum; this beautiful specimen of
calligraphy may still be seen, as we learn from the
_Gentleman's Magazine_ for January, 1813, where the curiosity
is fully described. The suspicion of Hobbes's principles was
so strong, that it produced his sudden dismissal from the
presence of Charles II. when at Paris. The king, indeed, said
he believed Hobbes intended him no hurt; and Hobbes said of
the king, "that his majesty understood his writings better
than his accusers." However, happy was Hobbes to escape from
France, where the officers were in pursuit of him, amid snowy
roads and nipping blasts. The lines in his metrical life open
a dismal winter scene for an old man on a stumbling horse:--
"Frigus erat, nix alta, senex ego, ventus acerbus,
Vexat equus sternax, et salebrosa via--"
A curious spectacle! to observe, under a despotic government,
its vehement advocate in flight!
The ambiguity of "The Leviathan" seemed still more striking,
when Hobbes came, at length, to place the right of government
merely in what he terms "the Seat of Power,"--a wonderful
principle of expediency; for this was equally commodious to
the republicans and to the royalists. By this principle, the
republicans maintained the right of Cromwell, since his
authority was established, while it absolved the royalists
from their burdensome allegiance; for, according to "The
Leviathan," Charles was the English monarch only when in a
condition to force obedience; and, to calm tender consciences,
the philosopher further fixed on that precise point of time,
"when a subject may obey an unjust conqueror." After the
Restoration, it was subtilely urged by the Hobbists, that this
very principle had greatly served the royal cause; for it
afforded a plea for the emigrants to return, by compounding
for their estates, and joining with those royalists who had
remained at home in an open submission to the established
government; and thus they were enabled to concert their
measures in common, for reinstating the old monarchy. Had the
Restoration never taken place, Hobbes would have equally
insisted on the soundness of his doctrine; he would have
asserted the title of Richard Cromwell to the Protectorate, if
Richard had had the means to support it, as zealously as he
afterwards did that of Charles II. to the throne, when the
king had firmly re-established it. The philosophy of Hobbes,
therefore, is not dangerous in any government; its sole aim is
to preserve it from intestine divisions; but for this purpose,
he was for reducing men to mere machines. With such little
respect he treated the species, and with such tenderness the
individual!
I will give Hobbes's own justification, after the Restoration
of Charles II., when accused by the great mathematician,
Dr. Wallis, a republican under Cromwell, of having written
his work in defence of Oliver's government. Hobbes does not
deny that "he placed the right of government wheresoever
should be the strength." Most subtilely he argues, how this
very principle "was designed in behalf of the faithful
subjects of the king," after they had done their utmost to
defend his rights and person. The government of Cromwell
being established, these found themselves without the
protection of a government of their own, and therefore
might lawfully promise obedience to their victor for the
saving of their lives and fortunes; and more, they ought even
to protect that authority in war by which they were
themselves protected in peace. But this plea, which he so ably
urged in favour of the royalists, will not, however,
justify those who, like Wallis, voluntarily submitted to
Cromwell, because they were always the enemies of the king;
so that this submission to Oliver is allowed only to the
royalists--a most admirable political paradox! The whole of
the argument is managed with infinite dexterity, and is thus
unexpectedly turned against his accusers themselves. The
principle of "self-preservation" is carried on through the
entire system of Hobbes.--_Considerations upon the Reputation,
Loyalty, &c., of Mr. Hobbes._
[354] The passage in Hobbes to which I allude is in "The Leviathan,"
c. 32. He there says, sarcastically, "It is with the
_mysteries of religion_ as with wholesome pills for the sick,
which, swallowed whole, have the virtue to cure; but, chewed,
are for the most part cast up again without effect." Hobbes is
often a wit: he was much pleased with this thought, for he had
it in his _De Cive_; which, in the English translation, bears
the title of "Philosophical Rudiments Concerning Government
and Society," 1651. There he calls "the wholesome pills,"
"bitter." He translated the _De Cive_ himself; a circumstance
which was not known till the recent appearance of Aubrey's
papers.
[355] Warburton has most acutely distinguished between the intention
of Hobbes and that of some of his successors. The bishop does
not consider Hobbes as an enemy to religion, not even to the
Christian; and even doubts whether he has attacked it in "The
Leviathan." At all events, he has "taken direct contrary
measures from those of Bayle, Collins, Tindal, Bolingbroke,
and all that school. They maliciously endeavoured to show the
Gospel was _unreasonable_; Hobbes, as reasonable as his
admirable wit could represent it: they contended for the most
unbounded _toleration_, Hobbes for the most rigorous
_conformity_." See the "Alliance between Church and State,"
book i. c. v. It is curious to observe the noble disciple of
Hobbes, Lord Bolingbroke, a strenuous advocate for his
political and moral opinions, enraged at what he calls his
"High Church notions." Trenchard and Gordon, in their
_Independent Whig_, No. 44, that libel on the clergy, accuse
them of _Atheism_ and _Hobbism_; while some divines as
earnestly reject Hobbes as an Atheist! Our temperate sage,
though angried at that spirit of contradiction which he had
raised, must, however, have sometimes smiled both on his
advocates and his adversaries!
[356] The odious term of _Atheist_ has been too often applied to many
great men of our nation by the hardy malignity of party. Were
I to present a catalogue, the very names would refute the
charge. Let us examine the religious sentiments of Hobbes. The
materials for its investigation are not common, but it will
prove a dissertation of facts. I warn some of my readers to
escape from the tediousness, if they cannot value the
curiosity.
Hobbes has himself thrown out an observation in his "Life of
Thucydides" respecting Anaxagoras, that "his opinions, being
of a strain above the apprehension of the vulgar, procured him
the estimation of an _Atheist_, which name they bestowed upon
all men that thought not as they did of their ridiculous
religion, and in the end cost him his life." This was a
parallel case with Hobbes himself, except its close, which,
however, seems always to have been in the mind of our
philosopher.
Bayle, who is for throwing all things into doubt, acknowledging
that the life of Hobbes was blameless, adds, One might,
however, have been tempted to ask him this question:
Heus age responde; minimum est quod scire laboro;
_De Jove quid sentis?_--PERSIUS, Sat. ii. v. 17.
Hark, now! resolve this one short question, friend!
_What are thy thoughts of Jove?_
But Bayle, who compared himself to the Jupiter of Homer,
powerful in gathering and then dispersing the clouds,
dissipates the one he had just raised, by showing how "Hobbes
might have answered the question with sincerity and belief,
_according to the writers of his life_."--But had Bayle known
that Hobbes was the author of all the lives of himself, so
partial an evidence might have raised another doubt with the
great sceptic. It appears, by Aubrey's papers, that Hobbes did
not wish his biography should appear when he was living, that
he might not seem the author of it.
Baxter, who knew Hobbes intimately, ranks him with Spinosa, by
a strong epithet for materialists--"The _Brutists_, Hobbes,
and Spinosa." He tells us that Selden would not have him in
his chamber while dying, calling out, "No Atheists!" But by
Aubrey's papers it appears that Hobbes stood by the side of
his dying friend. It is certain his enemies raised stories
against him, and told them as suited their purpose. In the
Lansdowne MSS. I find Dr. Grenville, in a letter, relates how
"Hobbes, when in France, and like to die, betrayed such
expressions of repentance to a great prelate, from whose mouth
I had this relation, that he admitted him to the sacrament.
But Hobbes afterwards made this a subject of ridicule in
companies."--_Lansdowne MSS._ 990--73.
Here is a strong accusation, and a fact too; yet, when fully
developed, the result will turn out greatly in favour of
Hobbes.
Hobbes had a severe illness at Paris, which lasted six months,
thus noticed in his metrical life:
Dein per sex menses morbo decumbo propinque
Accinctus morti; nec fugio, illa fugit.
It happened that the famous Guy Patin was his physician; and
in one of these amusing letters, where he puts down the events
of the day, like a newspaper of the times, in No. 61, has
given an account of his intercourse with the philosopher, in
which he says that Hobbes endured such pain, that he would
have destroyed himself--"_Qu'il avoit voulu se tuer._"--Patin
is a vivacious writer: we are not to take him _au pied de la
lettre_. Hobbes was systematically tenacious of life: and, so
far from attempting suicide, that he wanted even the courage
to allow Patin to bleed him! It was during this illness that
the Catholic party, who like to attack a Protestant in a state
of unresisting debility, got his learned and intimate friend,
Father Mersenne, to hold out all the benefits a philosopher
might derive from their Church. When Hobbes was acquainted
with this proposed interview (says a French contemporary,
whose work exists in MS., but is quoted in Joly's folio volume
of Remarks on Bayle), the sick man answered, "Don't let him
come for this; I shall laugh at him; and perhaps I may convert
him myself." Father Mersenne did come; and when this
missionary was opening on the powers of Rome to grant a
plenary pardon, he was interrupted by Hobbes--"Father, I have
examined, a long time ago, all these points; I should be sorry
to dispute now; you can entertain me in a more agreeable
manner. When did you see Mr. Gassendi?" The monk, who was a
philosopher, perfectly understood Hobbes, and this interview
never interrupted their friendship. A few days after, Dr.
Cosin (afterwards Bishop of Durham), the great prelate whom
Dr. Grenville alludes to, prayed with Hobbes, who first
_stipulated_ that the prayers should be those authorised by
the _Church of England_; and he also received the sacrament
with reverence. Hobbes says:--"Magnum hoc erga disciplinam
Episcopalem signum erat reverentiae."--It is evident that the
conversion of Father Mersenne, to which Hobbes facetiously
alluded, could never be to Atheism, but to Protestantism: and
had Hobbes been an Atheist, he would not have risked his
safety, when he arrived in England, by his strict attendance
to the _Church of England_, resolutely refusing to unite with
any of the sects. His views of the national religion were not
only enlightened, but in this respect he showed a boldness in
his actions very unusual with him.
But the religion of Hobbes was "of a strain beyond the
apprehension of the vulgar," and not very agreeable to some of
the Church. A man may have peculiar notions respecting the
Deity, and yet be far removed from Atheism; and in his
political system the Church may hold that subordinate place
which some Bishops will not like. When Dr. Grenville tells us
"Hobbes ridiculed in companies" certain matters which the
Doctor held sacred, this is not sufficient to accuse a man of
Atheism, though it may prove him not to have held orthodox
opinions. From the MS. collections of the French contemporary,
who well knew Hobbes at Paris, I transcribe a remarkable
observation:--"Hobbes said, that he was not surprised that the
Independents, who were enemies of monarchy, could not bear it
in heaven, and that therefore they placed there three Gods
instead of one; but he was astonished that the English
bishops, and those Presbyterians who were favourers of
monarchy, should persist in the same opinion concerning the
Trinity. He added, that the Episcopalians ridiculed the
Puritans, and the Puritans the Episcopalians; but that the
wise ridiculed both alike."--_Lantiniana MS._ quoted by Joly,
p. 434.
The _religion_ of Hobbes was in _conformity_ to _State and
Church_. He had, however, the most awful notions of the
Divinity. He confesses he is unacquainted with "the nature of
God, but not with the _necessity_ of the existence of the
Power of all powers, and First Cause of all causes; so that we
know that God is, though not what he is." See his "Human
Nature," chap. xi. But was the God of Hobbes the inactive
deity of Epicurus, who takes no interest in the happiness or
misery of his created beings; or, as Madame de Stael has
expressed it, with the point and felicity of French
antithesis, was this "an Atheism with a God?" This consequence
some of his adversaries would draw from his principles, which
Hobbes indignantly denies. He has done more; for in his _De
Corpore Politico_, he declares his belief of all the
fundamental points of Christianity, part i. c. 4, p. 116. Ed.
1652. But he was an open enemy to those "who presume, out of
Scripture, by their own interpretation, to raise any _doctrine
to the understanding_, concerning those things which are
incomprehensible;" and he refers to St. Paul, who gives a good
rule "_to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every
man_ the measure of faith."--Rom. xii. 3.
[357] This he pictures in a strange engraving prefixed to his book,
and representing a crowned figure, whose description will be
found in the note, p. 440. It is remarkable that when Hobbes
adopted the principle that the _ecclesiastical_ should be
united with the _sovereign_ power, he was then actually
producing that portentous change which had terrified Luther
and Calvin; who, even in their day, were alarmed by a new kind
of political Antichrist; that "Caesarean Popery" which Stubbe
so much dreaded, and which I have here noticed, p. 358.
Luther predicted that as the pope had at times seized on the
political sword, so this "Caesarean Popery," under the pretence
of policy, would grasp the ecclesiastical crosier, to form a
_political church_. The curious reader is referred to Wolfius
_Lectionum Memorabilium et reconditarum_, vol. ii. cent. x. p.
987. Calvin, in his commentary on Amos, has also a remarkable
passage on this _political church_, animadverting on Amaziah,
the priest, who would have proved the Bethel worship
warrantable, because settled by the royal authority: "It is
the king's chapel." Amos, vii. 13. Thus Amaziah, adds Calvin,
assigns the king a double function, and maintains it is in his
power to transform religion into what shape he pleases, while
he charges Amos with disturbing the public repose, and
encroaching on the royal prerogative. Calvin zealously
reprobates the conduct of those inconsiderate persons, "who
give the civil magistrate a sovereignty in religion, and
dissolve the Church into the State." The supremacy in Church
and State, conferred on Henry VIII., was the real cause of
these alarms; but the passage of domination raged not less
fiercely in Calvin than in Henry VIII.; in the enemy of kings
than in kings themselves. Were the _forms_ of religion more
celestial from the sanguinary hands of that tyrannical
reformer than from those of the reforming tyrant? The system
of our philosopher was, to lay all the wild spirits which have
haunted us in the chimerical shapes of _nonconformity_. I have
often thought, after much observation on our Church history
since the Reformation, that _the devotional feelings_ have not
been so much concerned in this bitter opposition to the
National Church as the rage of dominion, the spirit of vanity,
the sullen pride of sectarism, and the delusions of madness.
[358] Hobbes himself tells us that "some bishops are content to hold
their authority from _the king's letters patents_; others will
needs have somewhat more they know not what of _divine
rights_, &c., _not acknowledging the power of the king_. It is
a relic still remaining of the venom of popish ambition,
lurking in that _seditious distinction and division_ between
the power _spiritual_ and _civil_. The safety of the State
does not depend on the safety of the clergy, but on the
_entireness of the sovereign power_."--_Considerations upon
the Reputation, &c., of Mr. Hobbes_, p. 44.
[359] This royal observation is recorded in the "Sorberiana." Sorbiere
gleaned the anecdote during his residence in England. By the
"Aubrey Papers," which have been published since I composed
this article, I find that Charles II. was greatly delighted by
the wit and repartees of Hobbes, who was at once bold and
happy in making his stand amidst the court wits. The king,
whenever he saw Hobbes, who had the privilege of being
admitted into the royal presence, would exclaim, "Here comes
the bear to be baited." This did not allude to his native
roughness, but the force of his resistance when attacked.
[360] See "Mr. Hobbes's State of Nature considered, in a Dialogue
between Philautus and Timothy." The second dialogue is not
contained in the eleventh edition of Eachard's Works, 1705,
which, however, was long after his death, so careless were the
publishers of those days of their authors' works. The literary
bookseller, Tom Davies, who ruined himself by giving good
editions of our old authors, has preserved it in his own.
[361] "A Discourse Concerning Irony," 1729, p. 13.
[362] Men of very opposite principles, but aiming at the same purpose,
are reduced to a dilemma, by the spirit of party in
controversy. Sir Robert Filmer, who wrote against "The
Anarchy of a Limited Monarchy," and "Patriarcha," to
re-establish _absolute power_, derived it from the scriptural
accounts of the patriarchal state. But Sir Robert and Hobbes,
though alike the advocates for supremacy of power, were as
opposite as possible on theological points. Filmer had the
same work to perform, but he did not like the instruments of
his fellow-labourer. His manner of proceeding with Hobbes
shows his dilemma: he refutes the doctrine of the "Leviathan,"
while he confesses that Hobbes is right in the main. The
philosopher's reasonings stand on quite another foundation
than the scriptural authorities deduced by Filmer. The result
therefore is, that Sir Robert had the trouble to confute the
very thing he afterwards had to establish!
[363] It may be curious to some of my readers to preserve that part of
Hobbes's Letter to Anthony Wood, in the rare tract of his
"Latin Life," in which, with great calmness, the philosopher
has painfully collated the odious interpolations. All that was
written in favour of the morals of Hobbes--of the esteem in
which foreigners held him--of the royal patronage, &c., were
maliciously erased. Hobbes thus notices the amendments of
Bishop Fell:--
"Nimirum ubi mihi tu ingenium attribuis _Sobrium_, ille,
deleto _Sobrio_, substituit _Acri_.
"Ubi tu scripseras _Libellum scripsit de Cive_,
interposuit ille inter _Libellum_ et _de Cive, rebus
permiscendis natum_, de _Cive_, quod ita manifeste falsum
est, &c.
"Quod, ubi tu de libro meo _Leviathan_ scripsisti, primo,
quod esset, _Vicinis gentibus notissimus_ interposuit
ille, _publico damno_. Ubi tu scripseras, _scripsit
librum_, interposuit ille _monstrosissimum_."
A noble confidence in his own genius and celebrity breaks out
in this Epistle to Wood. "In leaving out all that you have
said of my character and reputation, the dean has injured you,
but cannot injure me; for long since has my fame winged its
way to a station from which it can never descend." One is
surprised to find such a Miltonic spirit in the contracted
soul of Hobbes, who in his own system might have cynically
ridiculed the passion for fame, which, however, no man felt
more than himself. In his controversy with Bishop Bramhall
(whose book he was cautious not to answer till ten years after
it was published, and his adversary was no more, pretending he
had never heard of it till then!) he breaks out with the same
feeling:--"What my works are, he was no fit judge; but now he
has provoked me, I will say thus much of them, that neither
he, if he had lived, could--nor I, if I would, can--extinguish
the light which is set up in the world by the greatest part of
them."
It is curious to observe that an idea occurred to Hobbes,
which some authors have attempted lately to put into practice
against their critics--to prosecute them in a court of law;
but the knowledge of mankind was one of the liveliest
faculties of Hobbes's mind; he knew well to what account
common minds place the injured feelings of authorship; yet
were _a jury of literary men_ to sit in judgment, we might
have a good deal of business in the court for a long time; the
critics and the authors would finally have a very useful body
of reports and pleadings to appeal to; and the public would be
highly entertained and greatly instructed. On this attack of
Bishop Fell, Hobbes says--"I might perhaps have an action on
the case against him, if it were worth my while; but juries
seldom consider the Quarrels of Authors as of much moment."
[364] Bayle has conjured up an amusing theory of apparitions, to show
that Hobbes might fear that a certain combination of atoms
agitating his brain might so disorder his mind that it would
expose him to spectral visions; and being very timorous, and
distrusting his imagination, he was averse to be left alone.
Apparitions happen frequently in dreams, and they may happen,
even to an incredulous man, when awake, for reading and
hearing of them would revive their images--these images, adds
Bayle, might play him some unlucky trick! We are here
astonished at the ingenuity of a disciple of Pyrrho, who in
his inquiries, after having exhausted all human evidence,
seems to have demonstrated what he hesitates to believe!
Perhaps the truth was, that the sceptical Bayle had not
entirely freed himself from the traditions which were then
still floating from the fireside to the philosopher's closet:
he points his pen, as AEneas brandished his sword at the
Gorgons and Chimeras that darkened the entrance of Hell;
wanting the admonitions of the sibyl, he would have rushed
in--
_Et frustra ferro diverberet umbras._
[365] The papers of Aubrey confirm my suggestion. I shall give the
words--"There was a report, and surely true, that in
parliament, not long after the king was settled, some of the
bishops made a motion to have the good old gentleman burned
for a heretique; which he hearing, feared that his papers
might be searched by their order, and he told me he had burned
part of them."--p. 612. When Aubrey requested Waller to write
verses on Hobbes, the poet said that he was afraid of the
Churchmen. Aubrey tells us--"I have often heard him say that
he was not afraid of _Sprights_, but afraid of being knocked
on the head for five or ten pounds which rogues might think he
had in his chamber." This reason given by Hobbes for his
frequent alarms was an evasive reply for too curious and
talkative an inquirer. Hobbes has not concealed the cause of
his terror in his metrical life--
"Tunc venit in mentem mihi Dorislaus et Ascham,
Tanquam proscripto terror ubique aderat."
Dr. Dorislaus and Ascham had fallen under the daggers of
proscription. [The former was assassinated in Holland, whither
he had fled for safety.]
[366] It is said that Hobbes completely recanted all his opinions; and
proceeded so far as to declare that the opinions he had
published in his "Leviathan," were not his real sentiments,
and that he neither maintained them in public nor in private.
Wood gives this title to a work of his--"An Apology for
Himself and his Writings," but without date. Some have
suspected that this Apology, if it ever existed, was not his
own composition. Yet why not? Hobbes, no doubt, thought that
"The Leviathan" would outlast any recantation; and, after all,
that a recantation is by no means a refutation!--recantations
usually prove the force of authority, rather than the force of
conviction. I am much pleased with a Dr. Pocklington, who hit
the etymology of the word _recantation_ with the spirit.
Accused and censured, for a penance he was to make a
recantation, which he began thus:--"If _canto_ be to sing,
_recanto_ is to sing again:" so that he _re-chanted_ his
offensive principles by his _recantation_!
I suspect that the apology Wood alludes to was only a
republication of Hobbes's Address to the King, prefixed to the
"Seven Philosophical Problems," 1662, where he openly disavows
his opinions, and makes an apology for the "Leviathan." It is
curious enough to observe how he acts in this dilemma. It was
necessary to give up his opinions to the clergy, but still to
prove they were of an innocent nature. He therefore
acknowledges that "his theological notions are not his
opinions, but propounded with submission to the power
ecclesiastical, never afterwards having maintained them in
writing or discourse." Yet, to show the king that the regal
power incurred no great risk in them, he laid down one
principle, which could not have been unpleasing to Charles II.
He asserts, truly, that he never wrote against episcopacy;
"yet he is called an Atheist, or man of no religion, because
he has made the authority of the Church depend wholly upon the
regal power, which, I hope, your majesty will think is neither
Atheism nor Heresy." Hobbes considered the _religion_ of his
country as a subject of _law_, and not _philosophy_. He was
not for _separating_ the Church from the State; but, on the
contrary, for _joining them_ more closely. The bishops ought
not to have been his enemies; and many were not.
[367] In the MS. collection of the French contemporary, who personally
knew him, we find a remarkable confession of Hobbes. He said
of himself that "he sometimes made openings to let in light,
but that he could not discover his thoughts but by half-views:
like those who throw open the window for a short time, but
soon closing it, from the dread of the storm." _"Il disoit
qu'il faisoit quelquefois des ouvertures, mais qu'il ne
pouvoit decouvrir ses pensees qu'a-demi; qu'il imitoit ceux
qui ouvrent la fenetre pendant quelques momens, mais qui la
referment promptement de peur de l'orage."_--Lantiniana MSS.,
quoted by Joly in his volume of "Remarques sur Bayle."
[368] Could one imagine that the very head and foot of the stupendous
"Leviathan" bear the marks of the little artifices practised
for self by its author? This grave work is dedicated to
Francis Godolphin, a person whom its author had never seen,
merely to remind him of a certain legacy which that person's
brother had left to our philosopher. If read with this fact
before us, we may detect the concealed claim to the legacy,
which it seems was necessary to conceal from the Parliament,
as Francis Godolphin resided in England. It must be confessed
this was a miserable motive for dedicating a system of
philosophy which was addressed to all mankind. It discovers
little dignity. This secret history we owe to Lord Clarendon,
in his "Survey of the Leviathan," who adds another. The
postscript to the "Leviathan," which is only in the English
edition, was designed as an easy summary of the principles:
and his lordship adds, as a sly address to Cromwell, that he
might be induced to be master of them at once, and "as a pawn
of his new subject's allegiance." It is possible that Hobbes
might have anticipated the sovereign power which the _general_
was on the point of assuming in the _protectorship_. It was
natural enough, that Hobbes should deny this suggestion.
[369] The story his antagonist (Dr. Wallis) relates is perfectly in
character. Hobbes, to show the Countess of Devonshire his
attachment to life, declared that "were he master of all the
world to dispose of, he would give it to live one day." "But
you have so many friends to oblige, had you the world to
dispose of!" "Shall I be the better for that when I am dead?"
"No," repeated the sublime cynic, "I would give the whole
world to live one day." He asserted that "it was lawful to
make use of ill instruments to do ourselves good," and
illustrated it thus:--"Were I cast into a deep pit, and the
devil should put down his cloven foot, I would take hold of it
to be drawn out by it." It must be allowed this is a
philosophy which has a chance of being long popular; but it is
not that of another order of human beings! Hobbes would not,
like Curtius, have leaped into a "deep pit" for his country;
or, to drop the fable, have died for it in the field or on the
scaffold, like the Falklands, the Sidneys, the Montroses--all
the heroic brotherhood of genius! One of his last expressions,
when informed of the approaches of death, was--"I shall be
glad to find a hole to creep out of the world at." Everything
was seen in a little way by this great man, who, having
reasoned himself into an abject being, "licked the dust"
through life.
[370] In our country, Mandeville, Swift, and Chesterfield have trod in
the track of Hobbes; and in France, Helvetius, Rochefoucault
in his "Maxims," and L'Esprit more openly in his "Fausette des
Vertus Humaines." They only degrade us--they are polished
cynics! But what are we to think of the tremendous cynicism of
Machiavel? That great genius eyed human nature with the
ferocity of an enraged savage. Machiavel is a vindictive
assassin, who delights even to turn his dagger within the
mortal wound he has struck; but our Hobbes, said his friend
Sorbiere, "is a gentle and skilful surgeon, who, with regret,
cuts into the living flesh, to get rid of the corrupted." It
is equally to be regretted that the same system of degrading
man has been adopted by some, under the mask of religion.
Yet Hobbes, perhaps, never suspected the arms he was placing
in the hands of wretched men, when he furnished them with
such fundamental positions as, that "Man is naturally an evil
being; that he does not love his equal; and only seeks the
aid of society for his own particular purposes." He would at
least have disowned some of his diabolical disciples. One of
them, so late as in 1774, vented his furious philosophy in "An
Essay on the Depravity and Corruption of Human Nature,
wherein the Opinions of Hobbes, Mandeville, Helvetius, &c. are
supported against Shaftesbury, Hume, Sterne, &c. by Thomas
O'Brien M'Mahon." This gentleman, once informed that he was
_born wicked_, appears to have considered that wickedness
was his paternal estate, to be turned to as profitable an
account as he could. The titles of his chapters, serving as
a string of the most extraordinary propositions, have been
preserved in the "Monthly Review," vol. lii. 77. The
demonstrations in the work itself must be still more
curious. In these axioms we find that "Man has an _enmity_ to
all beings; that had he _power_, the first victims of his
revenge would be his wife, children, &c.--a sovereign, if
he could reign with the _unbounded authority_ every man _longs
for_, free from apprehension of punishment for misrule,
would slaughter all his subjects; perhaps he would not
leave one of them alive at the end of his reign." It was
perfectly in character with this wretched being, after having
quarrelled with human nature, that he should be still more
inveterate against a small part of her family, with whom
he was suffered to live on too intimate terms; for he
afterwards published another extraordinary piece--"The
Conduct and Good-Nature of Englishmen Exemplified in their
charitable way of Characterising the Customs, Manners, &c.
of Neighbouring Nations; their Equitable and Humane Mode of
Governing States, &c.; their Elevated and Courteous
Deportment, &c. of which their own Authors are everywhere
produced as Vouchers," 1777. One is tempted to think that
this O'Brien M'Mahon, after all, is only a wag, and has
copied the horrid pictures of his masters, as Hogarth did
the School of Rembrandt by his "Paul before Felix, designed
and _scratched_ in the true Dutch taste." These works
seem, however, to have their use. To have carried the
conclusions of the Anti-social Philosophy to as great lengths
as this writer has, is to display their absurdity. But, as
every rational Englishman will appeal to his own heart, in
declaring the one work to be nothing but a libel on the
nation; so every man, not destitute of virtuous emotions,
will feel the other to be a libel on human nature itself.
[371] "Human Nature," c. ix.
[372] Hobbes did not exaggerate the truth. Aubrey says of Cooper's
portrait of Hobbes, that "he intends to borrow the picture of
his majesty, for Mr. Loggan to engrave an accurate piece by,
which will sell well at home and abroad." We have only the
rare print of Hobbes by Faithorne, prefixed to a quarto
edition of his Latin Life, 1682, remarkable for its expression
and character. Sorbiere, returning from England, brought home
a portrait of the sage, which he placed in his collection; and
strangers, far and near, came to look on the physiognomy of a
great and original thinker. One of the honours which men of
genius receive is the homage the public pay to their images:
either, like the fat monk, one of the heroes of the _Epistolae
obscurorum Virorum_, who, standing before a portrait of
Erasmus, spit on it in utter malice; or when they are looked
on in silent reverence. It is alike a tribute paid to the
masters of intellect. They have had their shrines and
pilgrimages.
None of our authors have been better known, nor more highly
considered, than our Hobbes, abroad. I find many curious
particulars of him and his conversations recorded in French
works, which are not known to the English biographers or
critics. His residence at Paris occasioned this. See
Ancillon's Melange Critique, Basle, 1698; Patin's Letters, 61;
Sorberiana; Niceron, tome iv.; Joly's Additions to Bayle.--All
these contain original notices on Hobbes.
[373] To his Life are additions, which nothing but the self-love of
the author could have imagined.
"Amicorum Elenchus."--He might be proud of the list of
foreigners and natives.
"Tractuum contra Hobbium editorum Syllabus."
"Eorum qui in Scriptis suis Hobbio contradixerunt Indiculus."
"Qui Hobbii meminerunt seu in bonam seu in sequiorem partem."
"In Hobbii Defensionem."--Hobbes died 1679, aged 91. These two
editions are, 1681, 1682.
[374] This fact has been recorded in one of the pamphlets of Richard
Baxter, who, however, was no well-wisher to our philosopher.
"Additional Notes on the life and Death of Sir Matthew Hale,"
1682, p. 40.
[375] "Athen. Oxon.," vol. ii. p. 665, ed. 1721. No one, however, knew
better than Hobbes the vanity and uselessness of _words_: in
one place he compares them to "a spider's web; for, by
contexture of words, tender and delicate wits are insnared and
stopped, but strong wits break easily through them." The
pointed sentence with which Warburton closes his preface to
Shakspeare, is Hobbes's--that "words are the counters of the
wise, and the money of fools."
[376] Aubrey has minutely preserved for us the manner in which Hobbes
composed his "Leviathan:" it is very curious for literary
students. "He walked much, and contemplated; and he had in the
head of his cane a pen and inkhorn, and carried always a
note-book in his pocket; and as soon as a thought darted, he
presently entered it into his book, or otherwise might have
lost it. He had drawn the design of the book into chapters,
&c., and he knew whereabouts it would come in. Thus that book
was made."--Vol. ii. p. 607. Aubrey, the little Boswell of his
day, has recorded another literary peculiarity, which some
authors do not assuredly sufficiently use. Hobbes said that he
sometimes would set his thoughts upon researching and
contemplating, always with this proviso: "that he very much
and deeply considered one thing at a time--for a week, or
sometimes a fortnight."
[377] A small annuity from the Devonshire family, and a small pension
from Charles II., exceeded the wants of his philosophic life.
If he chose to compute his income, Hobbes says facetiously of
himself, in French sols or Spanish maravedis, he could
persuade himself that Croesus or Crassus were by no means
richer than himself; and when he alludes to his property, he
considers wisdom to be his real wealth:--
"An quam dives, id est, quam sapiens fuerim?"
He gave up his patrimonial estate to his brother, not wanting
it himself; but he tells the tale himself, and adds, that
though small in extent, it was rich in its crops. Anthony
Wood, with unusual delight, opens the character of Hobbes:
"Though he hath an ill name from some, and good from others,
yet he was a person endowed with an excellent philosophical
soul, was a contemner of riches, money, envy, the world, &c.;
a severe lover of justice, and endowed with great morals;
cheerful, open, and free of his discourse, yet without offence
to any, which he endeavoured always to avoid." What an
enchanting picture of the old man in the green vigour of his
age has Cowley sent down to us!
"Nor can the snow which now cold age does shed
Upon thy reverend head,
Quench or allay the noble fires within;
But all which thou hast been,
And all that youth can be, thou'rt yet:
So fully still dost thou
Enjoy the manhood and the bloom of wit,
And all the natural heat, but not the fever too.
So contraries on AEtna's top conspire:
Th' embolden'd snow next to the flame does sleep.--
To things immortal time can do no wrong;
And that which never is to die, for ever must be young."
[378]
"Ipse meos nosti, Verdusi candide, mores,
Et tecum cuncti qui mea scripta legunt:
Nam mea vita meis non est incongrua scriptis;
Justitiam doceo, Justitiamque colo.
Improbus esse potest nemo qui non sit avarus,
Nec pulchrum quisquam fecit avarus opus.
Octoginta ego jam complevi et quatuor annos;
Pene acta est vitae fabula longa meae."
[379] Hobbes, in his metrical (by no means his poetical) life, says,
the more the "Leviathan" was written against, the more it was
read; and adds,
"Firmius inde stetit, spero stabitque per omne
AEvum, defensus viribus ipse suis.
Justitiae mensura, atque ambitionis elenchus,
Regum arx, pax populo, si doceatur, erit."
The term _arx_ is here peculiarly fortunate, according to the
system of the author--it means a citadel or fortified place on
an eminence, to which the people might fly for their common
safety.
His works were much read; as appears by "The Court Burlesqued,"
a satire attributed to Butler.
"So those who wear the holy robes
That rail so much at _Father Hobbs_,
Because he has exposed of late
_The nakedness of Church and State_;
Yet tho' they do his books condemn,
They love to buy and read the same."
Our author, so late as in 1750, was still so commanding a
genius, that his works were collected in a handsome folio; but
that collection is not complete. When he could not get his
works printed at home, he published them in Latin, including
his mathematical works, at Amsterdam, by Blaew, 1668, 4to. His
treatises, "De Cive," and "On Human Nature," are of perpetual
value. Gassendi recommends these admirable works, and
Puffendorff acknowledges the depth of his obligations. The
Life of Hobbes in the "Biographia Britannica," by Dr.
Campbell, is a work of curious research.