"Let Fame that all hunt after in their lives,Live registred upon our brazen Tombes,And then grace us, in the disgrace of death:When spight of cormorant devouring time,Th' endevour of this present breath may buy:That honour which shall bate his sythes keene edge,And make us heyres of all eternitie.Therefore brave Conquerours, for so you are,That warre against your own affections,And the huge Armie of the worlds desires.Our late Edict shall strongly stand in force,Navar shall be the wonder of the world.Our Court shall be a little Achademe,Still and contemplative in living Art.You three, Berowne, Doumaine, and Longavill,Have sworne for three yeeres terme, to live with me,My fellow Schollers, and to keepe those statutesThat are recorded in this schedule heere.Your oathes are past, and now subscribe your names;That his owne hand may strike his honour downe,That violates the smallest branch heerein:If you are arm'd to doe, as sworne to do,Subscribe to your deepe oathes, and keepe it to."
"Let Fame that all hunt after in their lives,Live registred upon our brazen Tombes,And then grace us, in the disgrace of death:When spight of cormorant devouring time,Th' endevour of this present breath may buy:That honour which shall bate his sythes keene edge,And make us heyres of all eternitie.Therefore brave Conquerours, for so you are,That warre against your own affections,And the huge Armie of the worlds desires.Our late Edict shall strongly stand in force,Navar shall be the wonder of the world.Our Court shall be a little Achademe,Still and contemplative in living Art.You three, Berowne, Doumaine, and Longavill,Have sworne for three yeeres terme, to live with me,My fellow Schollers, and to keepe those statutesThat are recorded in this schedule heere.Your oathes are past, and now subscribe your names;That his owne hand may strike his honour downe,That violates the smallest branch heerein:If you are arm'd to doe, as sworne to do,Subscribe to your deepe oathes, and keepe it to."
Four young men in the French "Academie" associated together, as in "Love's Labour Lost," to war against their own affections and the whole army of the world's desires. Dumaine, in giving his acquiescence to Ferdinand, ends:—
"To love, to wealth, to pompe, I pine and dieWith all these living in Philosophie."
"To love, to wealth, to pompe, I pine and dieWith all these living in Philosophie."
Philosophie was the subject of study of the four young men to the "Academie."
Berowne was a visitor, for he says:—
"I only swore to study with your graceAnd stay heere in your Court for three yeeres' space."
"I only swore to study with your graceAnd stay heere in your Court for three yeeres' space."
Upon his demurring to subscribe to the oath as drawn, Ferdinand retorts:—
Well, sit you out: go home, Berowne: adue."
Well, sit you out: go home, Berowne: adue."
To which Berowne replies:—
No, my good lord; I have sworn to stay with you."
No, my good lord; I have sworn to stay with you."
Achitob was a visitor at the Academie in France. There are other points of resemblance, but sufficient has been said to warrant consideration of the suggestion that the French "Academie" contains the serious studies of the four young men whose experiences form the subject of the play.
The parallels between passages in the Shakespeare plays and the French "Academie" are numerous, but they form no part of the present contention.
One of these may, however, be mentioned. In the third Tome the following passage occurs[11]:—
Psal. xix.: "It is not without cause that the Prophet said (The heavens declare the glory of God, and the earth sheweth the workes of his handes) For thereby he evidently teacheth, as with the finger even to our eies, the great and admirable providence of God their Creator; even as if the heavens should speake to anyone. In another place it is written (Eccles. xliii.): (This high ornament, this cleere firmament, the beauty of the heaven so glorious to behold, tis a thing full of Majesty)."
On turning to the revised version of the Bible it will be found that the first verse is thus translated: "Thepride of the height, the cleare firmament the beauty of heaven with his glorious shew." The rendering of the text in "The French Academy" is strongly suggestive of Hamlet's famous soliloquy. "This most excellent canopy, this brave o'erhanging firmament, this majestical roof fritted with golden fire, why it appears to me no other than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours." The author has forsaken the common-place rendering of the Apocrypha, and has adopted the same declamatory style which Shakespeare uses. It is strongly reminiscent of Hamlet's famous speech, Act II., scene ii.
Only one of the Shakespeare commentators makes any reference to the work. The Rev. Joseph Hunter, writing in 1844, points out that the dramatist in "As You Like It," describing the seven ages of man, follows the division made in the chapter on "The Ages of Man" in the "Academie."[12]
The suggestion now made is that the French "Academie" was written by Bacon, who is represented in the dialogues as Achitob—the first part when he was about 18 years of age, that he continued it until, in 1618, the complete work was published. In the dedication the author describes himself as a youth ofimmature experience, but the contents bear evidence of a wide knowledge of classical authors and their works, a close acquaintance with the ancient philosophies, and a store of general information which it would be impossible for any ordinary youth of such an age to possess. But was not the boy who at 15 years of age left Cambridge disagreeing with the teaching there of Aristotle's philosophy, and whose mental qualities and acquirements provoked as "the natural ejaculation of the artist's emotion" the significant words, "Si tabula daretur digna animum mallem," altogether abnormal?
Was the "French Academie" Bacon'stemporis partus maximus? It is only in a letter written to Father Fulgentio about 1625 that this work is heard of. Bacon writes: "Equidem memini me, quadraginta abhinc annis, juvenile opusculum circa has res confecisse, quod magna prorsus fiducia et magnifico titulo 'Temporis Partum Maximum' inscripsi."[13]
Spedding says: "This was probably the work of which Henry Cuffe (the great Oxford scholar who was executed in 1601 as one of the chief accomplices in the Earl of Essex's treason) was speaking when he said that 'a fool could not have written it and a wise man would not.' Bacon's intimacy with Essex had begun about thirty-five years before this letter was written."
Forty years from 1625 would carry back to 1585, the year preceding the date of publication of the first edition in English. If Cuffe's remark was intended to apply to the "French Academy," it is just such a criticism as the book might be expected to provoke.
The first edition of "The French Academie" in English appeared in 1586, the second in 1589, the third (two parts) in 1594, the fourth (three parts) in 1602, the fifth in 1614 (all quartos), then, in 1618, the largefolio edition containing the fourth part "never before published in English." It appears to have been more popular in England than it was in France. Brunet in his 1838 edition mentions neither the book nor the author, Primaudaye. The question as to whether there was at this time a reading public in England sufficiently wide to absorb an edition in numbers large enough to make the publication of this and similar works possible at a profit will be dealt with hereafter. In anticipation it may be said that the balance of probabilities justifies the conjecture that the issue of each of these editions involved someone in loss, and the folio edition involved considerable loss.
A comparison between the French and English publications points to both having been written by an author who was a master of each language rather than that the latter was a mere translation of the former. The version is so natural in idiom and style that it appears to be an original rather than a translation. In 1586 how many men were there who could write such English? The marginal notes are in the exact style of Bacon. "A similitude"—"A notable comparison"—occur frequently just as the writer finds them again and again in Bacon's handwriting in volumes which he possesses. The book abounds in statements, phrases, and quotations which are to be found in Bacon's letters and works.
One significant fact must be mentioned. The first letter of the text in the dedication in the first English translation is the letter S. It is printed from a wood block (Fig. I.). Thirty-nine years after (in 1625) when the last edition of Bacon's Essays—and, with the exception of the small pamphlet containing his versification of certain Psalms, the last publication during his life—was printed, that identical wood block (Fig. II.) was again used to print the first letter in the dedication of that book. Every defect and peculiarity in the onewill be found in the other. A search through many hundreds of books printed during these thirty-nine years—1586 to 1625—has failed to find it used elsewhere, except on one occasion, either then, before, or since.
Fig. I.Fig. I.The first letter in the text of the dedication of the 1st edition of the English translation of the "French Academie,"1586. Printed at London by G. Bollifant. The block is also used in a similar manner in the 2nd edition,1589. Londini Impensis, John Bishop.
The first letter in the text of the dedication of the 1st edition of the English translation of the "French Academie,"1586. Printed at London by G. Bollifant. The block is also used in a similar manner in the 2nd edition,1589. Londini Impensis, John Bishop.
Fig. II.Fig. II.The first letter in the text of the dedication of the1625edition of Bacon's Essays, printed in London, by John Haviland.
The first letter in the text of the dedication of the1625edition of Bacon's Essays, printed in London, by John Haviland.
Both letters were printed from the same block.
Did Bacon mark his first work on philosophy and his last book by printing the first letter in each from the same block?[14]
There is another work which it is impossible not to associate with this period, and that is John Barclay's "Argenis." It is little better known than is "The French Academy," and yet Cowper pronounced it the most amusing romance ever written. Cardinal Richelieu is said to have been extremely fond of reading it, and to have derived thence many of his political maxims. It is an allegorical novel. It is proposed now only to mention some evidence connected with the "Argenis" which supports the contention that the 1625 English edition contains the original composition, and that its author was young Francis Bacon.
The first edition of the "Argenis" in Latin was published in 1621. The authority to the publisher, Nicholas Buon, to print and sell the "Argenis" is dated the 21st July, 1621, and was signed by Barclay at Rome. The Royal authority is dated on the 31st August following.
Barclay's death took place between these dates, on the 12th of August, at Rome. It is reported that the cause of death was stone, but in an appreciation of him, published by his friend, Ralph Thorie, his death is attributed to poison.
The work is an example of the highest type of Latinity. So impressed was Cowper with its style that he stated that it would not have dishonoured Tacitus himself. A translation in Spanish was published in 1624, and in Italian in 1629. The Latin version was frequently reprinted during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries—perhaps more frequently than any other book.
In a letter dated 11th May, 1622, Chamberlain, writing to Carleton, says: "The King has ordered Ben Jonson to translate the 'Argenis,' but he will not be able to equal the original." On the 2nd October, 1623, Ben Jonson entered a translation in Stationers' Hall, but it was never published. About that time there was a fire in Jonson's house, in which it is said some manuscripts were destroyed; but it is a pure assumption that the "Argenis" was one of these.
In 1629 an English translation appeared by Sir Robert Le Grys, Knight, and the verses by Thomas May, Esquire. The title-page bears the statement: "The prose upon his Majesty's command." There is a Clavis appended, also stated to be "published at his Majesties command." It was printed by Felix Kyngston for Richard Mughten and Henry Seile. In the address to "The understanding Reader" Le Grys says, "What then should I say? Except it were to entreate thee, that where my English phrase doth not please thee, thou wilt compare it with the originall Latin and mend it. Which I doe not speak as thinking it impossible, but as willing to have it done, for the saving me a labour, who, if his Majesty had not so much hastened the publishing it, would have reformed some things in it, that did not give myselfe very full satisfaction."
In 1622 King James ordered a translation of the "Argenis." In 1629[15]Charles I. was so impatient to have a translation that he hastened the publication, thus preventing the translator from revising his work. Three years previously, however, in 1625—if the date may be relied on—there was published as printed by G. P. for Henry Seile a translation by Kingesmill Long. James died on the 25th March, 1625. The "Argenis" may not have been published in his lifetime; but if thedate be correct, three or four years before Charles hastened the publication of Le Grys's translation, this far superior one with Kingesmill Long's name attached to it could have been obtained from H. Seile. Surely the publisher would have satisfied the King's impatience by supplying him with a copy of the 1625 edition had it been on sale. The publication of a translation of the "Argenis" must have attracted attention. Is it possible that it could have been in existence and not brought to the notice of the King? There is something here that requires explanation. The Epistle Dedicatorie of the 1625 edition is written in the familiar style of another pen, although it bears the name of Kingesmill Long. The title-page states that it is "faithfully translated out of Latine into English," but it is not directly in the Epistle Dedicatorie spoken of as a translation. The following extract implies that the work had been lying for years waiting publication:—
"This rude piece, such as it is, hath long lyen by me, since it was finished; I not thinking it worthy to see the light. I had always a desire and hope to have it undertaken by a more able workman, that our Nation might not be deprived of the use of so excellent a Story: But finding none in so long time to have done it; and knowing that it spake notEnglish, though it were a rich jewell to the learned Linguist, yet it was close lockt from all those, to whom education had not given more languages, than Nature Tongues: I have adventured to become the key to this piece of hidden Treasure, and have suffered myselfe to be overruled by some of my worthy friends, whose judgements I have alwayes esteemed, sending it abroad (though coursely done) for the delight and use of others."
Not a word about the author! The translations, said to be by Thomas May, of the Latin verses in the 1629 are identical with those in the 1625 edition, although Kingesmill Long, on the title-page, appears as the translator. Nothing can be learnt as to who or what Long was.
Over lines "Authori," signed Ovv: Fell:[16]in the 1625 edition is one of the well-known light and dark A devices. This work is written in flowing and majestic English; the 1629 edition in the cramped style of translation.
The copy bearing date 1628, to which reference has been made, belonged to John Henry Shorthouse. He has made this note on the front page: "Jno. Barclay's description of himself under the person of Nicopompus Argenis, p. 60." This is the description to which he alludes:—
"Him thus boldly talking, Nicopompus could no longer endure: he was a man who from his infancy loved Learning; but who disdaining to be nothing but a booke-man had left the schooles very young, that in the courts of Kings and Princes, he might serve his apprenticeship in publicke affairs; so he grew there with an equall abilitie, both in learning and imployment, his descent and disposition fitting him for that kind of life: wel esteemed of many Princes, and especially of Meleander, whose cause together with the rest of the Princes, he had taken upon him to defend."
This description is inaccurate as applied to John Barclay, but in every detail it describes Francis Bacon.
A comparison has been made between the editions of 1625 and 1629 with the 1621 Latin edition. It leaves little room for doubting that the 1625 is the original work. Throughout the Latin appears to follow it rather than to be the leader; whilst the 1629 edition follows the Latin closely. In some cases the word used in the 1625 edition has been incorrectly translated into the 1621 edition, and the Latin word re-translated literally and incorrectly in view of the sense in the 1629 edition. But space forbids this comparison being further followed; suffice it to say that everything points to the 1625 edition being the original work.
As to the date of composition much may be said;but the present contention is that "The French Academie," "The Argenis," and "Love's Labour's Lost" are productions from the same pen, and that they all represent the work of Francis Bacon probably between the years 1577 and 1580. At any rate, the first-named was written whilst he was in France, and the others were founded on the incidents and experience obtained during his sojourn there.
This brilliant young scholar landed with Sir Amias Paulet at Calais on the 25th of September, 1576, and with him went straight to the Court of Henry III. of France. It is remarkable that neither Montagu, Spedding, Hepworth Dixon, nor any other biographer seems to have thought it worth while to consider under what influences he was brought when he arrived there at the most impressionable period of his life. Hepworth Dixon, without stating his authority, says that he "quits the galleries of the Louvre and St. Cloud with his morals pure," but nothing more. And yet Francis Bacon arrived in France at the most momentous epoch in the history of French literature. This boy, with his marvellous intellect—the same intellect which nearly half a century later produced the "Novum Organum"—with a memory saturated with the records of antiquity and with the writings of the classical authors, with an industry beyond the capacity and a mind beyond the reach of his contemporaries, skilled in the teachings of the philosophers, with independence of thought and a courage which enabled him to condemn the methods of study followed at the University where he had spent three years; this boy who had a "beam of knowledge derived from God" upon him, who "had not his knowledge from books, but from some grounds and notions from himself," and above and beyond all who was conscious of his powers and had unbounded confidence in his capacity for using them; this boy walked beside the English Ambassador elect into the highest circles of French Society at the time when themost important factors of influence were Ronsard and his confrères of the Pléiade. He had left behind him in his native country a language crude and almost barbaric, incapable of giving expression to the knowledge which he possessed and the thoughts which resulted therefrom.
At this time there were few books written in the English tongue which could make any pretence to be considered literature: Sir Thomas Eliot's "The Governor," Robert Ascham's "The Schoolmaster," and Thomas Wright's "Arts of Rhetoric," almost exhaust the list. Thynne's edition, 1532, and Lidgate's edition, 1561, of Chaucer's works are not intelligible. Only in the 1598 edition can the great poet be read with any understanding. The work of re-casting the poems for this edition was Bacon's, and he is the man referred to in the following lines, which are prefixed to it:—
The Reader to Geffrey Chaucer.
Rea.—Where hast thou dwelt, good Geffrey al this while,Unknown to us save only by thy bookes?Chau.—In haulks, and hernes, God wot, and in exile,Where none vouchsaft to yeeld me words or lookes:Till one which saw me there, and knew my friends,Did bring me forth: such grace sometimes God sends.Rea.—But who is he that hath thy books repar'd,And added moe, whereby thou are more graced?Chau.—The selfe same man who hath no labor spar'd,To helpe what time and writers had defaced:And made old words, which were unknoun of many,So plaine, that now they may be knoun of any.Rea.—Well fare his heart: I love him for thy sake,Who for thy sake hath taken all this pains.Chau.—Would God I knew some means amends to make,That for his toile he might receive some gains.But wot ye what? I know his kindnesse such,That for my good he thinks no pains too much:And more than that; if he had knoune in time,He would have left no fault in prose nor rime.
There is a catalogue of the library of Sir Thomas Smith[17]on August 1, 1566, in his gallery at Hillhall. It was said to contain nearly a thousand books. Of these only five were written in the English language. Under Theologici, K. Henry VIII. book; under Juris Civilis, Littleton's Tenures, an old abridgement of Statutes; under Historiographi, Hall's Chronicles, and Fabian's Chronicles and The Decades of P. Martyr; under Mathematica, The Art of Navigation. The remainder are in Greek, Latin, French, and Italian. Burghley's biographer states that Burghley "never read any books or praiers but in Latin, French, or Italian, very seldom in Englishe."
At this time Francis Bacon thought in Latin, for his mother tongue was wholly insufficient. There is abundant proof of this in his own handwriting. Under existing conditions there could be no English literature worthy of the name. If a Gentleman of the Court wrote he either suppressed his writings or suffered them to be published without his name to them, as it was a discredit for a gentleman to seem learned and to show himself amorous of any good art. Here is where Spedding missed his way and never recovered himself. Deep as is the debt of gratitude due to him for his devoted labours in the preparation of "Bacon's Life and Letters" and in the edition of his works, it must be asserted that he accomplished this work without seeing Francis Bacon. There was a vista before young Bacon's eyes from which the practice of the law and civil dignities were absent. He arrived at the French Court at the psychological moment when an object-lesson met his eyes which had a more far-reaching effecton the language and literature of the Anglo-Saxon race than any or all other influences that have conspired to raise them to the proud position which to-day they occupy. It is necessary briefly to explain the position of the French language and literature at this juncture.
The French Renaissance of literature had its beginning in the early years of the sixteenth century. It had been preceded by that of Italy, which opened in the fourteenth century, and reached its limit with Ariosto and Tasso, Macchiavelli and Guicciardini during the sixteenth century. Towards the end of the fifteenth century modern French poetry may be said to have had its origin in Villon and French prose in Comines. The style of the former was artificial and his poems abounded in recurrent rhymes and refrains. The latter had peculiarities of diction which were only compensated for by weight of thought and simplicity of expression. Clement Marot, who followed, stands out as one of the first landmarks in the French Renaissance. His graceful style, free from stiffness and monotony, earned for him a popularity which even the brilliancy of the Pléiade did not extinguish, for he continued to be read with genuine admiration for nearly two centuries. He was the founder of a school of which Mellia de St. Gelais, the introducer of the sonnet into France, was the most important member. Rabelais and his followers concurrently effected a complete revolution in fiction. Marguerite of Navarre, who is principally known as the author of "The Heptameron," maintained a literary Court in which the most celebrated men of the time held high place. It was not until the middle of the sixteenth century that the great movement took place in French literature which, if that which occurred in the same country three hundred years subsequently be excepted, is without parallel in literary history.
The Pléiade consisted of a group of seven men and boys who, animated by a sincere and intelligent love oftheir native language, banded themselves together to remodel it and its literary forms on the methods of the two great classical tongues, and to reinforce it with new words from them. They were not actuated by any desire for gain. In 1549 Jean Daurat, then 49 years of age, was professor of Greek at le Collège de Coqueret in Paris. Amongst those who attended his classes were five enthusiastic, ambitious youths whose ages varied from seventeen to twenty-four. They were Pierre de Ronsard, Joachim du Bellay, Remy Belleau, Antoine de Baïf, and Etienne Jodelle. They and their Professor associated themselves together and received as a colleague Pontus de Tyard, who was twenty-eight. They formed a band of seven renovators, to whom their countrymen applied the cognomen of the Pléiade, by which they will ever be known. Realising the defects and possibilities of their language, they recognised that by appropriations from the Greek and Latin languages, and from the melodious forms of the Italian poetry, they might reform its defects and develop its possibilities so completely that they could place at the service of great writers a vehicle for expression which would be the peer if not the superior of any language, classical or modern. It was a bold project for young men, some of whom were not out of their teens, to venture on. That they met with great success is beyond question; the extent of that success it is not necessary to discuss here. The main point to be emphasised is that it was a deliberate scheme, originated, directed, and matured by a group of little more than boys. The French Renaissance was not the result of a spontaneous bursting out on all sides of genius. It was wrought out with sheer hard work, entailing the mastering of foreign languages, and accompanied by devotion and without hope of pecuniary gain. The manifesto of the young band was written by Joachim de Bellay in 1549, and was entitled, "La Défense et Illustration de la langue Francaise."In the following year appeared Ronsard's Ode—the first example of the new method. Pierre de Ronsard entered Court life when ten years old. In attendance on French Ambassadors he visited Scotland and England, where he remained for some time. A severe illness resulted in permanent deafness and compelled him to abandon his profession, when he turned to literature. Although Du Bellay was the originator of the scheme, Ronsard became the director and the acknowledged leader of the band. His accomplishments place him in the first rank of the poets of the world. Reference would be out of place here to the movement which was after his death directed by Malherbe against Ronsard's reputation and fame as a poet and his eventual restoration by the disciples of Sainte Beuve and the followers of Hugo. It is desirable, however, to allude to other great Frenchmen whose labours contributed in other directions to promote the growth of French literature. Jean Calvin, a native of Noyon, in Picardy, had published in Latin, in 1536, when only twenty-seven years of age, his greatest work, both from a literary and theological point of view, "The Institution of the Christian Religion," which would be accepted as the product of full maturity of intellect rather than the firstfruits of the career of a youth. What the Pléiade had done to create a French language adequate for the highest expression of poetry Calvin did to enable facility in argument and discussion. A Latin scholar of the highest order, avoiding in his compositions a tendency to declamation, he developed a stateliness of phrase which was marked by clearness and simplicity. Théodore Beza, historian, translator, and dramatist, was another contributor to the literature of this period. Jacques Amyot had commenced his translations from "Ethiopica," treating of the royal and chaste loves of Theagenes and Chariclea three years before Du Bellay's manifesto appeared. Montaigne,referring to his translation of Plutarch, accorded to him the palm over all French writers, not only for the simplicity and purity of his vocabulary, in which he surpassed all others, but for his industry and depth of learning. In another field Michel Eyquem Sieur de Montaigne had arisen. His moral essays found a counterpart in the biographical essays of the Abbé de Brantôme. Agrippa D'Aubigné, prose writer, historian, and poet; Guillaume de Saluste du Bartas, the Protestant Ronsard whose works were more largely translated into English than those of any other French writer; Philippes Desportes and others might be mentioned as forming part of that brilliant circle of writers who had during a comparatively short period helped to achieve such a high position for the language and literature of France.
In 1576, when Francis Bacon arrived in France, the fame of the Pléiade was at its zenith. Du Bellay and Jodelle were dead, but the fruit of their labours and of those of their colleagues was evoking the admiration of their countrymen. The popularity of Ronsard, the prince of poets and the poet of princes, was without precedent. It is said that the King had placed beside his throne a state chair for Ronsard to occupy. Poets and men of letters were held in high esteem by their countrymen. In England, for a gentleman to be amorous of any learned art was held to be discreditable, and any proclivities in this direction had to be hidden under assumed names or the names of others. In France it was held to be discreditable for a gentleman not to be amorous of the learned arts. The young men of the Pléiade were all of good family, and all came from cultured homes. Marguerite of Navarre had set the example of attracting poets and writers to her Court and according honours to them on account of their achievements. The kings of France had adopteda similar attitude. During the same period in England Henry VIII., Mary, and Elizabeth had been following other courses. They had given no encouragement to the pursuit of literature. Notwithstanding the repetition by historians of the assertion that the good Queen Bess was a munificent patron of men of letters, literature flourished in her reign in spite of her action and not by its aid.
Bacon implies this in the opening sentences of the second book of the "Advancement of Learning." He speaks of Queen Elizabeth as being "a sojourner in the world in respect of her unmarried life, rather than an inhabitant. She hath indeed adorned her own time and many waies enricht it; but in truth to Your Majesty, whom God hath blest with so much Royall issue worthy to perpetuate you for ever; whose youthfull and fruitfull Bed, doth yet promise more children; it is very proper, not only to iradiate as you doe your own times, but also to extend your Cares to those Acts which succeeding Ages may cherish, and Eternity itself behold: Amongst which, if my affection to learning doe not transport me, there is none more worthy, or more noble, than the endowment of the world with sound and fruitfull Advancement of Learning: For why should we erect unto ourselves some few authors, to stand like Hercules Columnes beyond which there should be no discovery of knowledge, seeing we have your Majesty as a bright and benigne starre to conduct and prosper us in this Navigation." As Elizabeth had been unfruitful in her body, and James fruitful, so had she been unfruitful in encouraging the Advancement of Learning, but the appeal is made to James that he, being blessed with a considerable issue, should also have an issue by the endowment of Learning.
What must have been the effect on the mind of this brilliant young Englishman, Francis Bacon, when he entered into this literary atmosphere so different fromthat of the Court which he had left behind him? There was hardly a classical writer whose works he had not read and re-read. He was familiar with the teachings of the schoolmen; imbued with a deep religious spirit, he had mastered the principles of their faiths and the subtleties of their disputations. The intricacies of the known systems of philosophies had been laid bare before his penetrating intellect. With the mysteries of mathematics and numbers he was familiar. What had been discovered in astronomy, alchemy and astrology he had absorbed; however technical might be a subject, he had mastered its details. In architecture the works of Vitruvius had been not merely read but criticised with the skill of an expert. Medicine, surgery—every subject—he had made himself master of. In fact, when he asserted that he had taken all knowledge to be his province he spoke advisedly and with a basis of truth which has never until now been recognised. The youth of 17 who possessed the intellect, the brain and the memory which jointly produced the "Novum Organum," whose mind was so abnormal that the artist painting his portrait was impelled to place round it "the significant words," "si tabula daretur digna, animum mallem," who had taken all knowledge to be his province, was capable of any achievement of the Admirable Crichton. And this youth it was who in 1576 passed from a country of literary and intellectual torpor into the brilliancy of the companionship of Pierre de Ronsard and his associates. It is one of the most stupendous factors in his life. Something happened to him before his return to England which affected the whole of his future life. It may be considered a wild assertion to make, but the time will come when its truth will be proved, that "The Anatomie of the Minde," "Beautiful Blossoms," and "The French Academy," are the product of one mind, and that same mind produced the "Arte of English Poesie," "An Apology for Poetrie," by Sir John Harrington, and "TheDefense of Poetry," by Sir Philip Sydney. The former three were written before 1578 and place the philosopher before the poet; the latter three were written after 1580 and place the poet—the creator—before the philosopher. Francis Bacon had recognised that the highest achievement was the act of creation. Henceforth he lived to create.
Sir Nicholas Bacon died on or about the 17th of February, 1578-9. How or where this news reached Francis is not recorded, but on the 20th of the following March he left Paris for England, after a stay of two and a-half years on the Continent. He brought with him to the Queen a despatch from Sir Amias Paulet, in which he was spoken of as being "of great hope, endued with many and singular parts," and one who, "if God gave him life, would prove a very able and sufficient subject to do her Highness good and acceptable service."[18]
Spedding states that the earliest composition of Bacon which he had been able to discover is a letter written in his 20th year from Grays Inn. From that time forward, he continues, compositions succeed each other without any considerable interval, and in following them we shall accompany him step by step through his life. What are the compositions which Spedding places as being written but not published up to the year 1597, when the first small volume of 10 essays containing less than 6,000 words was issued from the press? These are they:—
Notes on the State of Christendom[19](date 1580 to 1584).Letter of Advice to the Queen (1584-1586).An Advertisement touching the Controversies of the Church of England (1586-1589).Speeches written for some Court device, namely, Mr. Bacon in praise of Knowledge, and Mr. Bacon's discourse in praise of his Sovereign (1590-1592).Certain observations made upon a libel published this present year, 1592.A true report of the Detestable Treason intended by Dr. Roderigo Lopez, 1594.Gesta Grayorum, 1594, parts of which are printed by Spedding in type denoting doubtful authorship.Bacon's device, 1594-1598.Three letters to the Earl of Rutland on his travels, 1595-1596.
Notes on the State of Christendom[19](date 1580 to 1584).
Letter of Advice to the Queen (1584-1586).
An Advertisement touching the Controversies of the Church of England (1586-1589).
Speeches written for some Court device, namely, Mr. Bacon in praise of Knowledge, and Mr. Bacon's discourse in praise of his Sovereign (1590-1592).
Certain observations made upon a libel published this present year, 1592.
A true report of the Detestable Treason intended by Dr. Roderigo Lopez, 1594.
Gesta Grayorum, 1594, parts of which are printed by Spedding in type denoting doubtful authorship.
Bacon's device, 1594-1598.
Three letters to the Earl of Rutland on his travels, 1595-1596.
That is all! These are the compositions which follow each other without considerable interval, and by which we are to accompany him step by step through those seventeen years which should be the most important years in a man's life! He could have turned them out in ten days or a fortnight with ease. We expect from Mr. Spedding bread, and he gives us a stone!
This brilliant young man, who, when 15 years of age, left Cambridge, having possessed himself of all the knowledge it could afford to a student, who had travelled in France, Spain and Italy to "polish his mind and mould his opinion by intercourse with all kinds of foreigners," how was he occupying himself during what should be the most fruitful years of his life? Following his profession at the Bar? His affections did not that way tend. Spedding expresses the opinion that he had a distaste for his profession, and, writing of the circumstances with which he was surrounded in 1592, says: "I do not find that he was getting into practice. His main object still was to find ways and means for prosecuting his great philosophical enterprise." What was this enterprise? "I confess that I have as vast contemplative ends as I have moderate means," he says, writing to Burghley, "for I have taken all knowledge to be my province." This means more than mere academic philosophy.
In 1593, when Bacon was put forward and upheld for a year as a candidate for the post of Attorney-General, Spedding writes of him; "He had had little or no practice in the Courts; what proof he had given of professional proficiency was confined to his readings and exercises in Grays Inn.... Law, far from being his only, was not even his favourite study; ... his head was full of ideas so new andlarge that to most about him they must have seemed visionary."
Writing of him in 1594 Spedding says: "The strongest point against Bacon's pretensions for the Attorneyship was his want of practice. His opponents said that 'he had never entered the place of battle.'[20]Whether this was because he could not find clients or did not seek them I cannot say." In order to meet the objection, Bacon on the 25th January, 1593-4, made his first pleading, and Burghley sent his secretary "to congratulate unto him the first fruits of his public practice."
There is one other misconception to be corrected. It is urged that Bacon was, during this period, engrossed in Parliamentary life. From 1584 to 1597 five Parliaments were summoned. Bacon sat in each. In his twenty-fifth year he was elected member for Melcombe, in Dorsetshire. In the Parliament of 1586 he sat for Taunton, in that of 1588 for Liverpool, in that of 1592-3 for Middlesex, and in 1597 for Ipswich.
But the sittings of these Parliaments were not of long duration, and the speeches which he delivered and the meetings of committees upon which he was appointed would absorb but a small portion of his time. It must be patent, therefore, that Spedding does not account for his occupations from his return to England in 1578 until 1597, when the first small volume of his Essays was published.
During the whole of this period Bacon was in monetary difficulties, and yet there is no evidence that he was living a life of dissipation or even of extravagance. On the contrary, all testimony would point to the conclusion that he was following the path of a strictly moral and studious young man. On his return to England he took lodgings in Coney Court, GraysInn. There Anthony found him when he returned from abroad.
There are no data upon which to form any reliable opinion as to the amount of his income at this time. Rawley states that Sir Nicholas Bacon had collected a considerable sum of money which he had separated with intention to have made a competent purchase of land for the livelihood of his youngest son, but the purchase being unaccomplished at his death, Francis received only a fifth portion of the money dividable, by which means he lived in some straits and necessities in his younger years. It is not clear whether the "money dividable" was only that separated by Sir Nicholas, or whether he left other sums which went to augment the fund divisible amongst the brothers. His other children were well provided for. Francis was not, however, without income. Sir Nicholas had left certain manors, etc., in Herts to his sons Anthony and Francis in tail male, remainder to himself and his heirs. Lady Ann Bacon had vested an estate called Markes, in Essex, in Francis, and there is a letter, dated 16th April, 1593, from Anthony to his mother urging her to concur in its sale, so that the proceeds might be applied to the relief of his brother's financial position.[21]
Lady Bacon lived at Gorhambury. She was not extravagant, and yet in 1589 she was so impoverished that Captain Allen, in writing to Anthony, speaking of his mother, Lady Bacon, says she "also saith her jewels be spent for you, and that she borrowed the last money of seven several persons." Whatever her resources were, they had by then been exhausted for her sons. Anthony was apparently a man of considerable means. He was master of the manor and priory of Redburn, of the manor of Abbotsbury, Minchinbury and Hores, in the parish of Barley, in the county of Hertford; of the Brightfirth wood, Merydan-meads, and Pinner-Stoke farms, in the county of Middlesex.[22]
But within a few years after his return to England Anthony was borrowing money wherever he could. Mother and brother appear to have exhausted their resources and their borrowing capabilities. There is an account showing that in eighteen months, about 1593, Anthony lent Francis £373, equivalent to nearly £3,000 at to-day's value. In 1597 Francis was arrested by the sheriff for a debt of £300, for which a money-lender had obtained judgment against him, and he was cast into the Tower. Where had all the money gone? There is no adequate explanation.
The first letter of Francis Bacon's which Spedding met with, to which reference has already been made, is dated 11th July, 1580, to Mr. Doylie, and is of little importance. The six letters which follow—all thereare between 1580 and 1590[23]—relate to one subject, and are of great significance. The first is dated from Grays Inn, 16th September, 1580, to Lady Burghley. In it young Francis, now 19 years of age, makes this request: "That it would please your Ladyship in your letters wherewith you visit my good Lord to vouchsafe the mention and recommendation of my suit; wherein your Ladyship shall bind me more unto you than I can look ever to be able to sufficiently acknowledge."
The next letter—written on the same day—is addressed to Lord Burghley. Its object is thus set forth:—
"My letter hath no further errand but to commend unto your Lordship the remembrance of my suit which then I moved unto you, whereof it also pleased your Lordship to give me good hearing so far forth as to promise to tender it unto her Majesty, and withal to add in the behalf of it that which I may better deliver by letter than by speech, which is, that although it must be confessed that the request is rare and unaccustomed, yet if it be observed how few there be which fall in with the study of the common laws either being well left or friended, or at their own free election, or forsaking likely success in other studies of more delight and no less preferment, or setting hand thereunto early without waste of years upon such survey made, it may be my case may not seem ordinary, no more than my suit, and so more beseeming unto it. As I force myself to say this in excuse of my motion, lest it should appear unto your Lordship altogether undiscreet and unadvised, so my hope to obtain it resteth only upon your Lordship's good affection towards me and grace with her Majesty, who methinks needeth never to call for the experience of the thing, where she hath so great and so good of the person which recommendeth it."
What was this suit? Spedding cannot suggest any explanation. He says: "What the particular employment was for which he hoped I cannot say; something probably connected with the service of the Crown, to which the memory of his father, an old and valued servant prematurely lost, his near relationship to the Lord Treasurer, and the personal notice which he had himself received from the Queen, would naturally lead him to look.... The proposition, whatever it was, having been explained to Burghley in conversation, is only alluded to in these letters. It seems to have been so far out of the common way as to require an apology, and the terms of the apology imply that it was for some employment as a lawyer. And this is all the light I can throw upon it." Subsequently Spedding says the motion was one[24]"which would in some way have made it unnecessary for him to follow 'a course of practice,' meaning, I presume, ordinary practice at the Bar."
Another expression in the letter makes it clear that the object of the suit was an experiment. The Queen could not have "experience of the thing," and Bacon solicited Burghley's recommendation, because she would not need the experience if he, so great and so good, vouched for it.
Burghley appears to have tendered the suit to the Queen, for there is a letter dated 18th October, 1580, addressed to him by Bacon, commencing:
"Your Lordship's comfortable relation to her Majesty's gracious opinion and meaning towards me, though at that time your leisure gave me not leave to show how I was affected therewith, yet upon every representation thereof it entereth and striketh so much more deeply into me, as both my nature and duty presseth me to return some speech of thankfulness."
Spedding remarks thereon: "It seems that he hadspoken to Burghley on the subject and made some overture, which Burghley undertook to recommend to the Queen; and that the Queen, who though slow to bestow favours was careful always to encourage hopes, entertained the motion graciously and returned a favourable answer. The proposition, whatever it was, having been explained to Burghley in conversation, is only alluded to in these letters."
Spedding dismisses these three letters in 22 lines of comment, which contain the extracts before set out. He regards the matter as of slight consequence, and admits that he can throw no light upon it. But he points out that it was "so far out of the common way as to require an apology." Surely he has not well weighed the terms of the apology when he says they "imply that it was for some employment as a lawyer."
There had been a conversation between Bacon and Burghley during which Bacon had submitted a project to the accomplishment of which he was prepared to devote his life in the Queen's service. It necessitated his abandoning the profession of the law. Apparently Burghley had remonstrated with him, in the manner of experienced men of the world, against forsaking a certain road and avenue to preferment in favour of any course rare and unaccustomed. Referring in his letter to this, Bacon's parenthetical clause beginning "either being well left or friended," etc., is confession and avoidance. In effect he says:—Few study the common laws who have influence; few at their own free election; few desert studies of more delight and no less preferment; and few devote themselves to that study from their earliest years. Since there are few who, having my opportunities, devote themselves to the study of the common laws, my position in so doing would not be an ordinary one, no more than is my suit. Therefore, why should I, having your [Burleigh's] influence to help me, sacrifice my great intellectualcapabilities fitting me to accomplish my great contemplative ends? Why should I sacrifice them to a study of the common laws?
The sentence may be otherwise construed, but in any case it involves an apology for the abandonment of the profession which had been chosen for him.
The next letter is addressed to the Right Honourable Sir Francis Walsingham, principal secretary to her Majesty, and is dated from Grays Inn, 25th of August, 1585. Spedding's comment on it is as follows:—
"For all this time, it seems, the suit (whatever it was) which he had made to her through Burghley in 1580 remained in suspense, neither granted nor denied, and the uncertainty prevented him from settling his course of life. From the following letter to Walsingham we may gather two things more concerning it: it was something which had been objected to as unfit for so young a man; and which would in some way have made it unnecessary for him to follow 'a course of practice'—meaning, I presume, ordinary practice at the Bar."
This is the letter:—
"It may please your Honour to give me leave amidst your great and diverse business to put you in remembrance of my poor suit, leaving the time unto your Honour's best opportunity and commodity. I think the objection of my years will wear away with the length of my suit. The very stay doth in this respect concern me, because I am thereby hindered to take a course of practice which, by the leave of God, if her Majesty like not my suit, I must and will follow: not for any necessity of estate, but for my credit sake, which I know by living out of action will wear. I spake when the Court was at Theball's to Mr. Vice-Chamberlain,[25]who promised me his furderance; which I did lest he mought be made for some other. If it may please your Honour, who as I hear hath great interest in him, to speak with him in it, I think he will be fast mine."
Spedding remarks: "This is the last we hear of this suit, the nature and fate of which must both be left toconjecture. With regard to its fate, my own conjecture is that he presently gave up all hope of success in it, and tried instead to obtain through his interest at Court some furtherance in the direct line of his profession."
He adds: "The solid grounds on which Bacon's pretensions rested had not yet been made manifest to the apprehension of Bench and Bar; his mind was full of matters with which they could have no sympathy, and the shy and studious habits which we have seen so offend Mr. Faunt would naturally be misconstrued in the same way by many others."[26]
This passage refers to a letter to Burghley dated the 6th of the following May,i.e., 1586, from which it will be seen that the last had not been heard of the motion. Burghley had been remonstrating with Bacon as to reports which had come to him of his nephew's proceedings. Bacon writes:—
"I take it as an undoubted sign of your Lordship's favour unto me that being hardly informed of me you took occasion rather of good advice than of evil opinion thereby. And if your Lordship had grounded only upon the said information of theirs, I mought and would truly have upholden that few of the matters were justly objected; as the very circumstances do induce in that they were delivered by men that did misaffect me and besides were to give colour to their own doings. But because your Lordship did mingle therewith both a late motion of mine own and somewhat which you had otherwise heard, I know it to be my duty (and so do I stand affected) rather to prove your Lordship's admonition effectual in my doings hereafter than causeless by excusing what is past. And yet (with your Lordship's pardon humbly asked) it may please you to remember that I did endeavour to set forth that said motion in such sort as it mought breed no harder effect than a denial, and I protest simply before God that I sought therein an ease in coming within Bars, and not any extraordinary and singular note of favour."
May not the interpretation of the phrase "I soughttherein an ease in coming within Bars" be "I sought in that motion a freedom from the burden (or necessity) of coming within Bars." The phrase "an ease in" is very unusual, and unless it was a term used in connection with the Inns it is difficult to see its precise meaning. In other words, he sought an alternative method to provide means for carrying out his great philosophical enterprise.
There is an interval of five years before the next and last letter of the six was written. It is undated, but an observation in it shows that it was written when he was about 31 years of age, thus fixing the date at 1591.
From an entry in Burghley's note book,[27]dated 29 October, 1589, it appears that in the meantime a grant had been made to Bacon of the reversion of the office of Clerk to the Counsel in the Star Chamber. This was worth about £1,600 per annum and executed by deputy, but the reversion did not fall in for twenty years, so it did not affect the immediate difficulty in ways and means.
There are occasional references to Francis in Anthony's correspondence which show that the brothers were residing at Grays Inn, but nothing is stated as to the occupation of the younger brother.
At this time, according to Spedding,[28]who, however, does not give his authority, Francis had a lodge at Twickenham. Many of his letters are subsequently addressed from it, and three years later he was keeping a staff of scriveners there.
The last letter is addressed to Lord Burghley, who is in it described by Bacon as "the second founder of my poor estate," and contains the following:—
"I cannot accuse myself that I am either prodigal or slothful, yet my health is not to spend nor my course to get. Lastly, I confess that I have as vast contemplative ends as I havemoderate civil ends: for I have taken all knowledge to be my province. This whether it be curiosity or vain glory, or (if one takes it favourably)philanthropia, is so fixed in my mind as it cannot be removed. And I do easily see, that place of any reasonable countenance doth bring commandment of more wits than of a man's own, which is the thing I greatly affect. And for your Lordship, perhaps you shall not find more strength and less encounter in any other. And if your Lordship shall find now, or at any time, that I do seek or affect any place, whereunto any that is nearer to your Lordship shall be concurrent, say then that I am a most dishonest man. And if your Lordship will not carry me on, I will not do as Anaxagoras did, who reduced himself with contemplation unto voluntary poverty; but this I will do, I will sell the inheritance that I have, and purchase some lease of quick revenue, or some office of gain that shall be executed by deputy, and so give over all care of service and become some sorry bookmaker, or a true pioneer in that mine of truth, which he said lay so deep. This which I have writ to your Lordship is rather thoughts than words, being set down without all art, disguising or reservation."
The suit has been of no avail. Once more Bacon appeals (and this is to be his final appeal) to his uncle. He is writing thoughts rather than words, set down without art, disguising or reservation. But if his Lordship will not carry him along he has definitely decided on his course of action. The law is not now even referred to. If the object of the suit was not stated in 1580, there cannot be much doubt now but that it had to do with the making of books and pioneer work in the mine of truth. For ten years Francis Bacon had waited, buoyed up by encouragements and false hopes. Now he decides to take his fortune into his own hands and rely no more on assistance either from the Queen or Burghley.
One sentence in the letter should be noted: "If your Lordship shall find now, or at any time, that I do seek or affect any place whereunto any that is nearer unto your Lordship shall be concurrent, say then that I am a most dishonest man." Surely this was an assurance onBacon's part that he did not seek or affect to stand in the way of the one—the only one, Robert Cecil—who stood nearer to Burghley in kinship.
It therefore appears evident from the foregoing facts:—