NOVUM ORGANUM.

NOTE.

MR. ELLIS's preface to the Novum Organum was written when he was travelling abroad and had not his books of reference about him. He was at work upon it the night he was taken ill at Mentone, and was not afterwards able either to finish or to revise it. I have added a page or two at the end, by which the analysis of the first book is completed. Of the second book it was not necessary to say anything; the subject of it being Bacon's method, which has been fully discussed in the General Preface. A few bibliographical inaccuracies of little consequence in themselves I have corrected, either in notes or by the insertion of words within brackets. These were merely oversights, hardly avoidable in the first draft of a work written in such circumstances. But there are also a few opinions expressed incidentally in which I cannot altogether concur, though they have evidently been adopted deliberately. With regard to these (Mr. Ellis not being in a condition to enter into a discussion of them) I had no course but to explain the grounds of my dissent, and leave every man to decide for himself upon the questions at issue. To avoid inconvenient interruptions however, I have thrown my arguments into an appendix, and contented myself in the foot notes with marking the particular expressions which I hold to be questionable. — J. S.

PREFACE TO THE NOVUM ORGANUM.

BY ROBERT LESLIE ELLIS.

THE Novum Organum was published in 1620. Certain prolegomena to the whole of the Instauratio were prefixed to it, namely a Proœmium beginning "Franciscus de Verulamio sic cogitavit," a dedication to King James, a general preface, and an account, entitled Distributio Operis, of the parts of which the Instauratio was to consist. Of these the Novum Organum is the second; the De Augmentis, which was not then published, occupying the place of the first. Accordingly in most editions of Bacon's works the prolegomena are prefixed, not to the Novum Organum, but to the De Augmentis; and this is doubtless their natural place. Nevertheless as Bacon's general design was not completed, it seems better to allow them to remain in their original position, especially as in the Prooemium Bacon explains why he publishes one portion of the Instauratio apart from the rest. "Decrevit," he there says, speaking of himself, "prima quæque quæ perficere licuit in publicum edere. Neque hæc festinatio ambitiosa fuit, sed sollicita, ut si quid illi humanitus accideret, exstaret tamen designatio quædam ac destinatio rei quam animo complexus est," &c.

After the Prooemium and the dedication we come to

the Præfatio Generalis, in which Bacon speaks of the unprosperous state of knowledge and of the necessity of a new method; and then follows the Distributio Operis. The Instauratio is to be divided into six portions, of which the first is to contain a general survey of the present state of knowledge. In the second men are to be taught how to use their understanding aright in the investigation of Nature. In the third all the phenomena of the universe are to be stored up as in a treasure-house, as the materials on which the new method is to be employed. In the fourth examples are to be given of its operation and of the results to which it leads. The fifth is to contain what Bacon had accomplished in natural philosophy without the aid of his own method, but merely ex eodem intellectûs usu quem alii in inquirendo et inveniendo adhibere consueverunt." It is therefore less important than the rest, and Bacon declares that he will not bind himself to the conclusions it contains. Moreover its value will altogether cease when the sixth part can be completed, wherein will be set forth the new philosophy — the result of the application of the new method to all the phenomena of the universe. But to complete this, the last part of the Instauratio, Bacon does not hope: he speaks of it as a thing "et supra vires et ultra spes nostras collocata."

66

The greater part of the plan traced in the Distributio remained unfulfilled. Not to speak of the last division of the Instauratio, no part of Bacon's writings can properly be referred either to the fourth or fifth, except two prefaces which are found among the fragments published by Gruter.1 To the fifth division

1 Francisci Baconi de Verulamio Scripta in naturali et universali Phil

however M. Bouillet1 is disposed to refer several of Bacon's philosophical writings; as, for instance, the tracts entitled De Fluxu et Refluxu Maris, and Thema Coeli. But though they correspond with the description which Bacon gives of the contents of the fifth part of the Instauratio, there is no reason to suppose that they would have been comprised in it. They were written a considerable time before the publication of the Novum Organum; the Thema Coeli being clearly of the same date as the Descriptio Globi intellectualis, written in 1612,2 and the De Fluxu et Refluxu Maris being probably written before Bacon had become acquainted with Galileo's theory of the tides. This theory was published in 1616; and it is reasonable to suppose that Bacon, who speaks of it in the Novum Organum, would have mentioned it in the De Fluxu, if the latter had not been written either before it was published, or but a short time afterwards.3 These tracts, and the others which M. Bouillet mentions, are clearly occasional writings not belonging to the circuit of the Instauratio.

osophia. Amst. 1653. For a particular account of this volume, see my preface to Part III.-J. S.

1 Euvres Philosophiques de Bacon, publiées d'après les textes originaux, avec notice, sommaires et éclaircissemens, par M. N. Bouillet. Paris, 1834. -J. S.

2 See the Preface to the Descriptio Globi intellectualis.-J. S.

8 That the De Fluxu was written before the Thema Cali is almost proved by the allusion to it in the following passage: "Verum hujusce rei demonstrationes et evidentias in anticipatione nostrâ de fluxu et refluxu maris plene tractavimus." I say almost proved, because Bacon in writing a piece which was designed to come after another which was not yet written, would sometimes refer to that other as if it were already done. But it is not likely that he should have done so here; for in any general scheme the Thema Coeli would have come before the De Fluxu. In a letter to Bacon, dated 14th April 1619, Tobie Matthew speaks of Galileo's having answered Bacon's discourse touching the flux and reflux of the sea: but he alludes apparently to a discourse of Galileo's on that subject which had never been printed. J. S.

To the fourth part have been referred the Historia Ventorum, the Historia Vita et Mortis, &c. This however is contrary to Bacon's description of them in the dedication to Prince Charles prefixed to the Historia Ventorum. They are there spoken of as the "primitia Historiæ nostræ naturalis." Even the general title with which the Historia Ventorum and the titles of five other Historia were published, shows that they belong not to the fourth but to the third part of the Instauratio. It is as follows: Historia Naturalis ad condendam Philosophiam, sive Phænomena Universi, quae est Instaurationis Magna pars tertia. It is moreover manifest that as the fourth part was to contain applications to certain subjects of Bacon's method of induction, these treatises, in which the method is nowhere employed, cannot belong to it. M. Bouillet, though he justly dissents from Shaw's1 arrangement, by whom they are referred to the fourth part, nevertheless commits an error of the same kind by introducing into this division of the Instauratio a fragment on Motion, published by Gruter with the title Filum Labyrinthi, sive Inquisitio legitima de Motu. This fragment, which is doubtless anterior to the Novum Organum, contains many thoughts and expressions which are found more perfectly developed either in the Novum Organum itself, or in the Distributio Operis. It is not to be supposed that Bacon, after thus expressing himself in the Distributio — "Neque enim hoc siverit Deus ut phantasiæ nostræ somnium pro exemplari mundi edamus; sed potius

1 The Philosophical Works of Francis Bacon, Baron of Verulam, &c.; methodised and made English from the Originals, by Peter Shaw, M.D. London, 1733. — J. S.