Imágenes de páginas

void,' as an engine built against human society, worthy by all men to be fired and pulled down. I say the like of the Anabaptists of Munster; and this, although they had not been rebels to the empire: and put case likewise that they had done no mischief at all actually; yet if there shall be a congregation and consent of people2 that shall hold all things to be lawful, not according to any certain laws or rules, but according to the secret and variable motions and instincts of the spirit; this is indeed no nation, no people, no signory, that God doth know; any nation that is civil and polliced may (if they will not be reduced) cut them off from the face of the earth. Now let me put a feigned case, (and yet antiquity makes it doubtful whether it were fiction or history,) of a land of Amazons, where the whole government public and private, yea the militia itself, was in the hands of women. I demand, is not such a preposterous government (against the first order of nature, for women to rule over men,) in itself void, and to be suppressed? I speak not of the reign of women, (for that is supplied by counsel and subordinate magistrates masculine,) but where the regiment of state, justice, families, is all managed by women. And yet this last case differeth from the other before; because

1 totum illud regimen invalidum reddidit, et nullo jure subnixum.

2 Quin et si adhuc fuerit, aut in futurum exorturus sit, hominum cœtus aliquis, qui, &c.

8 cuivis sane nationi populum hunc (si ad sanitatem redire recuset) exterminare penitus ex cætu hominum et a facie terræ delere licebit. The word polliced (which I leave in the original spelling, not knowing any modern form of it) is translated, where it occurs on page 209, ad imperandum habili. 4 Num quis sanæ mentis affirmaverit, hujusmodi imperium, contra ordinem naturæ in principiis suis institutum, non esse in se vacuum et nullum et prorBus abolendum?

in the rest there is terror of danger, but in this there is only error of nature. Neither should I make any great difficulty to affirm the same of the Sultanry of the Mamaluches; where slaves, and none but slaves, bought for money and of unknown descent, reigned over families of freemen. And much like were the case, if you suppose a nation where the custom were, that after full age the sons should expulse their fathers and mothers out of their possessions, and put them to their pensions: for these cases, of women to govern men, sons the fathers, slaves freemen, are much in the same degree; all being total violations and perversions of the laws of nature and nations. For the West Indies, I perceive (Martius) you have read Garcilazzo de Viega, who himself was descended of the race of the Incaes, a Mestizo, and is willing to make the best of the virtues and manners of his country: and yet in troth he doth it soberly and credibly enough. Yet you shall hardly edify me, that those nations might not by the law of nature have been subdued by any nation that had only policy and moral virtue; though the propagation of the faith (whereof we shall speak in the proper place) were set by, and not made part of the case. Surely their nakedness (being with them, in most parts of that country, without all veil or covering,) was a great

[blocks in formation]


3 The words within the parenthesis are omitted in the translation: an omission possibly accidental, but possibly also intentional; Bacon, as he considered the subject more closely, inclining more and more to disallow "the propagation of the faith" as a motive for an offensive war, and tending towards the opinion in which he rested two years afterwards, that "offensive wars for religion were seldom to be approved, or never except they have some mixture of civil titles."



defacement for in the acknowledgement of nakedness was the first sense of sin; and the heresy of the Adamites was ever accounted an affront of nature. But upon these I stand not; nor yet upon their idiocy, in thinking that horses did eat their bits, and letters speak, and the like: nor yet upon their sorceries, which are (almost) common to all idolatrous nations.2 But, I say, their sacrificing, and more especially their eating of men, is such an abomination, as (methinks) a man's face should be a little confused, to deny that this custom, joined with the rest, did not make it lawful for the Spaniards to invade their territory, forfeited by the law of nature; and either to reduce them or displant them. But far be it from me, yet nevertheless, to justify the cruelties which were at first used towards them: which had their reward soon after, there being not one of the principal of the first conquerors, but died a violent death himself; and was well followed by the deaths of many more.4 Of examples enough; except we should add the labours of Hercules; an example which, though it be flourished with much fabulous matter, yet so much it hath, that it doth notably set forth the consent of all nations and ages in the approbation of the extirpating and debellating of giants, monsters, and foreign tyrants,5

1 Sed hoc fervoribus regionis detur: quandoquidem sit illis cum aliis nonnullis gentibus commune.

2 Neque rursus simplicitatem eorum commemorare placet, licet insignis fuerit, utpote qui equos fræna ipsorum manducare, literas autem loqui et commissa sibi nunciare putarent; et similia. Neque etiam sortilegia, divinationes, et magicas superstitiones narro: in quibus cum plerisque gentibus idololatris communicabant.

3 cum aliis improbissimis conjunctum.

4 quemque

etiam mors et calamitas complurium e suis non aut comitabatur aut a tergo insequebatur. 5 tyrannorum enormium.

[ocr errors]

not only as lawful, but as meritorious even of divine honour and this although the deliverer came from the one end of the world unto the other.2 Let us now set down some arguments to prove the same;3 regarding rather weight than number, as in such a conference as this is fit. The first argument shall be this. It is a great error, and a narrowness or straitness of mind, if any man think that nations have nothing to do one with another, except there be either an union in sovereignty or a conjunction in pacts or leagues. There are other bands of society, and implicit confederations. That of colonies, or transmigrants, towards their mother nation. Gentes unius labii is somewhat; for as the confusion of tongues was a mark of separation, so the being of one language is a mark of union. To have the same fundamental laws and customs in chief is yet more, as it was between the Grecians in respect of the barbarians. To be of one sect or worship, if it be a false worship, I speak not of it, for that is but fratres in malo. But above all these, there is the supreme and indissoluble consanguinity and society between men in general: of which the heathen poet (whom the apostle calls to witness 5) saith, We are all his generation. But much more we Christians, unto whom it is revealed in particularity, that all men came from one lump of earth, and that two singular persons were the parents

1 sed tanquam facinoribus egregiis; quæque divinos aut saltem heroicos ho

nores mererentur.

2 atque hoc, licet liberator ille, quisquis tandem sit, ex unâ orbis extremitate ad alteram penetraret.

8 Jam autem, exemplis his prælibatis, ad argumenta redeamus.

4 This sentence is omitted in the translation.

Paulo Apostolo citante.

from whom all the generations of the world are descended; we (I say) ought to acknowledge that no nations are wholly aliens and strangers the one to the other; and not to be less charitable than the person introduced by the comic poet, Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto. Now if there be such a tacit league or confederation, sure it is not idle; it is against somewhat, or somebody who should they be? Is it against wild beasts? or the elements of fire and water? No, it is against such routs and shoals of people, as have utterly degenerate from the laws of nature; as have in their very body and frame of estate a monstrosity; and may be truly accounted (according to the examples we have formerly recited) common enemies and grievances of mankind; or disgraces and reproaches to human nature. Such people, all nations are interessed, and ought to be resenting, to suppress; considering that the particular states themselves, being the delinquents, can give no redress. And this, I say, is not to be measured so much by the principles of jurists, as by lex charitatis; lex proximi ; which includes the Samaritan as well as the Levite; lex filiorum Adæ de massa unâ; upon which original laws this opinion is grounded: which to deny (if a man may speak freely) were almost to be a schismatic in nature.

[The rest was not perfected.]

« AnteriorContinuar »