and axioms of arts, than has hitherto shone upon mankind. For like as a man's disposition is never well known or proved till he be crossed, nor Proteus ever changed shapes till he was straitened and held fast; so nature exhibits herself more clearly under the trials and vexations of art than when left to herself.

Before I dismiss this part of Natural History (which I call mechanical and experimental) I must add that the body of this kind of history should not be made up from the mechanical arts alone, but also from the operative part of the liberal sciences, as well as from many other practices which have not as yet grown up into arts; so as to omit nothing which may tend to inform the intellect. And this is the first division of Natural History.

CHAP. III.

The Second Division of Natural History, according to its Use and End, into Narrative and Inductive; and that the noblest end of Natural History is to minister and be in order for the Foundation of Philosophy; which is the end aimed at in Induction. The Division of the History of Generations into the History of the Heavenly Bodies, the History of Meteors, the History of the Globe of Earth and Sea, the History of the Masses or Greater Colleges, and the History of the Species or Lesser Colleges.

NATURAL History, which is threefold (as I said) in subject, is in use twofold. For it is used either for the sake of the knowledge of the things themselves that are committed to the history, or as the primary matter of philosophy. Now the first kind, which aims either to please by the agreeableness of the narrative or to help by the use of experiments, and is pursued for the sake of such pleasure or such profit, I account as far inferior in importance to that which is the stuff and material of a solid and lawful Induction, and may be called the nursingmother of philosophy. Accordingly I shall now make a second division of Natural History into Narrative and Inductive; the

latter whereof I set down as wanting. But let not any one be dazzled either by the great names of ancient philosophers or the great volumes of modern. For I well know that a natural history is extant, large in its bulk, pleasing in its variety, curious often in its diligence; but yet weed it of fables, antiquities, quotations, idle controversies, philology and ornaments (which are more fitted for table talk and the noctes of learned men than for the instauration of philosophy), and it will shrink into a small compass. Certainly it is very different from that kind of history which I have in view. For in the first place there are wanting those two parts of natural history which I have just mentioned, Pretergenerations and Arts, of which I make great account; and next, in the third and remaining part, that of Generations, only one out of five parts is sufficiently handled. For the history of Generations is composed of five subordinate parts. First, a history of the Celestial Bodies, exhibiting the actual phenomena simply and apart from theories. Second, a history of Meteors (including comets), and what they call the Regions of the Air; for there is no history of comets, fiery meteors, winds, rains, storms, and the like, which is of any value. Third, a history of the Earth and Sea (considered as integral parts of the universe), mountains, rivers, tides, sands, woods, islands, and the shapes of continents as they lie; in all these, inquiring and observing rather the laws of nature than cosmography. Fourth, a history of the Common Masses of Matter, which I call the Greater Colleges (commonly called the Elements); for I find there are no accounts of fire, air, earth, and water, with their natures, motions, operations, and impressions, such as to form a just body of history. Fifth and last, a history of the Exquisite Collections of Matter, which I call the Lesser Colleges, but which are generally called Species. Now it is only in this last that writers have shown any conspicuous industry; and yet in such sort that they have rather filled it with things superfluous (as figures of animals, plants, and the like), than enriched it with sound and careful observations, which should ever be annexed to natural history. And in a word all the natural history we have, whether in the mode of inquiry or in the matter collected, is quite unfit for the end which I have mentioned, namely, the Foundation of Philosophy. Wherefore I set down Inductive History as wanting. And so much for Natural History.

CHAP. IV.

The Division of Civil History into Ecclesiastical, Literary, and Civil (which retains the name of the Genus) and that the History of Literature is wanting. Precepts for the Construction of it.

CIVIL History may rightly be divided into three species. First, Sacred or Ecclesiastical; next, that which we call Civil History (using the generic name specially); lastly, the History of Learning and the Arts. I will begin with the kind lastmentioned; for the two former are extant, while the latterthe History of Learning (without which the history of the world seems to me as the statue of Polyphemus without the eye; that very feature being left out which most marks the spirit and life of the person), I set down as wanting. Not but I know that in the particular sciences of the jurisconsults, mathematicians, rhetoricians, philosophers, we have some slight mention or some barren narrations about the sects, schools, books, authors, and successions belonging to them; also that there exist some meagre and unprofitable memoirs of the inventors of arts and usages; but I say that a complete and universal History of Learning is yet wanting. Of this therefore I will now proceed to set forth the argument, the method of construction, and the use.

The argument is no other than to inquire and collect out of the records of all time what particular kinds of learning and arts have flourished in what ages and regions of the world; their antiquities, their progresses, their migrations (for sciences migrate like nations) over the different parts of the globe; and again their decays, disappearances, and revivals. The occasion and origin of the invention of each art should likewise be observed; the manner and system of transmission, and the plan and order of study and practice. To these should be added a history of the sects, and the principal controversies in which learned men have been engaged, the calumnies to which they have been exposed, the praises and honours by which they have been rewarded; an account of the principal authors, books, schools, successions, academies, societies, colleges, orders, in a word, everything which relates to the state of learning. Above all

things (for this is the ornament and life of Civil History), I wish events to be coupled with their causes. I mean, that an account should be given of the characters of the several regions and peoples; their natural disposition, whether apt and suited for the study of learning, or unfitted and indifferent to it; the accidents of the times, whether adverse or propitious to science; the emulations and infusions of different religions; the enmity or partiality of laws; the eminent virtues and services of individual persons in the promotion of learning, and the like. Now all this I would have handled in a historical way, not wasting time, after the manner of critics, in praise and blame, but simply narrating the fact historically, with but slight intermixture of private judgment.

For the manner of compiling such a history I particularly advise that the matter and provision of it be not drawn from histories and commentaries alone; but that the principal books written in each century, or perhaps in shorter periods, proceeding in regular order from the earliest ages, be themselves taken into consultation; that so (I do not say by a complete perusal, for that would be an endless labour, but) by tasting them here and there, and observing their argument, style, and method, the Literary Spirit of each age may be charmed as it were from the dead.

With regard to the use of the work, it is not so much to swell the honour and pomp of learning with a profusion of images; nor because out of my exceeding love for learning I wish the inquiry, knowledge, and preservation of everything that relates thereto to be pursued even to curiosity; but chiefly for a purpose more serious and important; which, in a word, is this: I consider that such a history as I have described, would very greatly assist the wisdom and skill of learned men in the use and administration of learning; that it would exhibit the movements and perturbations, the virtues and vices, which take place no less in intellectual than in civil matters; and that from the observation of these the best system of government might be derived and established. For the works of St. Ambrose or St. Augustine will not make so wise a bishop or divine as a diligent examination and study of Ecclesiastical History; and the History of Learning would be of like service to learned men. For everything is subject to chance and error which is not supported by examples and experience. And so much for the History of Learning.

CHAP. V.

On the Dignity and Difficulty of Civil History.

I COME next to Civil History, properly so called, whereof the dignity and authority are pre-eminent among human writings. For to its fidelity are entrusted the examples of our ancestors, the vicissitudes of things, the foundations of civil policy, and the name and reputation of men. But the difficulty is no less than the dignity. For to carry the mind in writing back into the past, and bring it into sympathy with antiquity; diligently to examine, freely and faithfully to report, and by the light of words to place as it were before the eyes, the revolutions of times, the characters of persons, the fluctuations of counsels, the courses and currents of actions, the bottoms of pretences, and the secrets of governments; is a task of great labour and judgment-the rather because in ancient transactions the truth is difficult to ascertain, and in modern it is dangerous to tell. Hence Civil History is beset on all sides with faults; some (and these are the greater part) write only barren and commonplace narratives, a very reproach to history; others hastily and disorderly string together a few particular relations and trifling memoirs; others merely run over the heads of events: others, on the contrary, go into all the minutest particularities, and such as have no relation to the main action; some indulge their imaginations in bold inventions; while others impress on their works the image not so much of their minds as of their passions, ever thinking of their party, but no good witnesses as to facts; some are always inculcating their favourite political doctrines, and idly interrupting the narrative by going out of the way to display them; others are injudiciously prolix in reporting orations and harangues, and even in relating the actions themselves; so that, among all the writings of men, there is nothing rarer than a true and perfect Civil History. But my present purpose in this division of learning is to mark omissions, and not to censure faults. I will now pursue the divisions of Civil History, and those of the different kinds; for the species will be exhibited more clearly under several heads, than under one head curiously traced through all its members.