false philosophy is not here mentioned. In the Novum Organum Bacon perhaps intended particularly to refer to the Mosaical philosophy of Fludd, who is one of the most learned of the Cabalistic writers.1

In (69.) Bacon speaks of faulty demonstrations as the defences and bulwarks of idols, and divides the common process for the establishment of axioms and conclusions into four parts, each of which is defective. He here describes in general terms the new method of induction. In the next aphorism, which concludes this part of his subject, he condemns the way in which experimental researches have commonly been carried on.

The doctrine of idols seems, when the Novum Organum was published, to have been esteemed one of its most important portions. Mersenne at least, the earliest critic on Bacon's writings, his Certitude des Sciences having been published in 1625,2 speaks of the four idols, or rather of Bacon's remarks upon them, as the four buttresses of his philosophy. In Bacon's own opinion this doctrine was of much importance. Thus in the De Interpretatione Naturæ Sententiæ Duodecim he says, in the abrupt style of his earlier philosophical writings, "Qui primum et

in particular are compared to the spider; a passage which has been misunderstood by a distinguished writer, whose judgments seem not unfrequently to be as hastily formed as they are fluently expressed, and who conceives that Bacon intended to condemn the study of psychology.

In speaking of the field and the garden, Bacon refers respectively to observations of Nature and artificial experiment; an instance of the "curiosa felicitas" of his metaphors.

1 Fludd's work, entitled Philosophia Moysaica, was published in 1638. 2 In the Biographie Universelle (Mersenne) it is incorrectly said that this work was published in 1636, and an idle story is mentioned that it was in reality written, not by Mersenne, but by Lord Herbert of Cherbury, story sufficiently refuted by its scrupulous and submissive orthodoxy.

-8

ante alia omnia animi motus humani penitus non explorarit, ibique scientiæ meatus et errorum sedes accuratissime descriptas non habuerit, is omnia larvata et veluti incantata reperiet; fascinum ni solverit interpretari non poterit.1

From (71.) to (78.) he speaks of the signs and tokens whereby the defects and worthlessness of 'the received sciences are made manifest. The origin of these sciences, the scanty fruits they have borne, the little progress they have made, all testify against them; as likewise the confessions of the authors who have treated of them, and even the general consent with which they have been received. "Pessimum," says Bacon, "omnium est augurium, quod ex consensu capitur in rebus intellectualibus.” 2

From (78.) to (92.) Bacon speaks of the causes of the errors which have hindered the progress of science; intending thereby to show that there is no reason to doubt the value of the reform which he is about to propose, because though in itself seemingly plain and obvious it has nevertheless remained so long unthought of. On the contrary, there is, he affirms, good reason for being surprised that even now any one should have thought of it.

The first of these causes is the comparative shortness of the periods which, out of the twenty-five centuries which intervene between Thales and Bacon's own

1 So also in the Valerius Terminus, c. 17.: "That if any have had or shall have the power and resolution to fortify and inclose his mind against all anticipations, yet if he have not been or shall not be cautioned by the full understanding of the nature of the mind and spirit of man, and therein of the seats, pores, and passages both of knowledge and error, he hath not been, nor shall not be, possibly able to guide or keep on his course aright." -J. S.

2 He however excepts matters political and religious.

time, have been really favourable to the progress of science. The second, that even during the more favourable times natural philosophy, the great mother of the sciences, has been for the most part neglected; men having of late chiefly busied themselves with theology, and among the Greeks and Romans with moral philosophy, "quæ ethnicis vice theologiæ erat." Moreover, even when men occupied themselves the most with natural philosophy (Bacon refers to the age of the early Greek physicists), much time was wasted through controversies and vain glory. Again, even those who have bestowed pains upon natural philosophy have seldom, especially in these latter times, given themselves wholly up to it. Thus, natural philosophy having been neglected and the sciences thereby severed from their root, it is no wonder that their growth has been stopped.

Another cause of their scanty progress is, that their true end, the benefit and relief of man's estate, has not been had in remembrance. This error Bacon speaks of in the Advancement as the greatest of all, coupling however there with the relief of man's estate the glory of the Creator. Again, the right path for the advancement of knowledge has not only been neglected but blocked up, men having come not only to neglect experience but also to despise it. Also the reverence for antiquity has hindered progress; and here Bacon repeats the remark he had made in the Advancement, that antiquity was the world's youth, and the latter times its age.1

1 This remark is in itself not new; we read, for instance, in the book of Esdras, that the world has lost its youth, and that the times begin to wax old. Nor is it new in the application here made of it. Probably several writers in the age which preceded Bacon's had already made it, for in that

Again, the progress of science has been hindered by too much respect for what has been already accomplished. And this has been increased by the appearance of completeness which systematic writers on science have given to their works, and also by the vain and boastful promises of some who have pretended to reform philosophy. Another reason why more has not been accomplished, is that so little has been attempted.

To these hindrances Bacon adds three others, -superstitious bigotry, the constitution of schools, universities, and colleges, and the lack of encouragement; and then concludes this part of the subject with that which he affirms to have been the greatest obstacle of all, namely despair of the possibility of progress. To remove this, he goes on to state the grounds of hope for the future,—a discussion which extends from (93.) to (115.).

"Principium autem," he begins, "sumendum a Deo;" that is to say, the excellence of the end proposed is in itself an indication that the matter in hand is from God, nor is the prophecy of Daniel concerning the latter times to be omitted, namely that many shall go to and fro and knowledge shall be increased. Again, the errors committed in time past are a reason

age men were no longer willing to submit to the authority of antiquity, and still felt bound to justify their dissent. Two writers may at any rate be mentioned by whom the thought is as distinctly expressed as by Bacon, namely Giordano Bruno and Otto Casmann; the former in the Cena di Cenere, the latter in the preface to his Problemata Marina, which was published in 1596, and therefore a few years later than the Cena, with which however it is not likely that Casmann was acquainted. Few writers of celebrity comparable to Bruno's appear to have been so little read.

I have quoted both passages in a note on the corresponding passage in [the first book of] the De Augmentis: that in the Cena di Cenere was first noticed by Dr. Whewell. See his Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, ii. 198.

for hoping better things in the time to come. He therefore sets forth these errors at some length (95— 107.). This enumeration begins with the passage already mentioned [as occurring in the Cogitata et Visa], in which the true method is spoken of as intermediate to those of the dogmatici or rationales, and of the empirici. There will be, he concludes, good ground for hope when the experimental and reasoning faculties are more intimately united than they have ever yet been. So likewise when natural philosophy ceases to be alloyed with matter extraneous to it, and when any one can be found content to begin at the beginning and, putting aside all popularly received notions and opinions, to apply himself afresh to experience and particulars. And here Bacon introduces an illustration which he has also employed elsewhere, comparing the regeneration of the sciences to the exploits of Alexander, which were at first esteemed portentous and more than human, and yet afterwards it was Livy's judgment that he had done no more than despise a vain show of difficulty. Bacon then resumes his enumeration of the improvements which are to be made, each of which will be a ground of hope. The first is a better natural history than has yet been composed; and it is to be observed that a natural history which is designed to contain the materials for the instauration. of philosophy differs essentially from a natural history which has no such ulterior end: the chief difference is, that an ordinary natural history does not contain the experimental results furnished by the arts. In the second place, among these results themselves there is a great lack of experimenta lucifera, that is of experiments which, though not practically useful, yet serve