who is the father of english essay

Gondwana University and Other Exam News

Father of English Essay – Francis Bacon!

Last updated on February 14th, 2023 at 01:27 am

The “father of the English essay” is often considered to be Francis Bacon. He was an English philosopher, statesman, and writer who lived in the 16th and 17th centuries. Bacon is best known for his essays, which are considered to be some of the earliest examples of the form in English literature. In his essays, Bacon explored a wide range of topics, including love, death, truth, anger, friendship, and more. He was known for his concise, direct writing style and his ability to convey complex ideas in simple, easy-to-understand language. Through his essays, Bacon helped establish the essay as a literary form, and he remains an important figure in the history of English literature.

Table of Contents

Francis Bacon

During the transition from the Renaissance to the early modern era, Sir Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was one of the most influential people in natural philosophy and the study of scientific methods.  Bacon is regarded as the father of English essay. He introduced this genre into the English language and literature by importing it from French writer Michel de Montaigne. No less important than the innovative act of importing this form was his own personal contribution to its enrichment and development. He is additionally referred to as the Father of Modern English Prose. In addition to these two very outstanding accomplishments, Bacon was a diligent classical scholar with an encyclopedic breadth of knowledge. He was a distinguished empirical scientist, a distinguished lawyer, and a significant statesman. He was a member of parliament and a superb orator. Bacon’s intellect was not entirely lofty and magnificent despite his diversity.

Francis Bacon – Notable Work & Contributions

Francis Bacon is widely considered the father of the English essay. He was a prolific writer and his essays, which were first published in 1597, are considered to be some of the earliest examples of the form in English literature. Bacon’s essays are characterized by their conciseness, directness, and their ability to convey complex ideas in simple language. He explored a wide range of topics in his essays, including love, death, truth, anger, friendship, and more.

Bacon’s essays helped establish the essay as a literary form, and his writing style and approach to essay writing influenced subsequent generations of writers. He is often credited with popularizing the essay as a form of writing and making it accessible to a wider audience.

Bacon’s essays remain widely read and studied to this day, and his contributions to the development of the English essay continue to be recognized and celebrated. He remains an important figure in the history of English literature and his essays are considered to be classic examples of the form.

Major Works-

Francis Bacon was a prolific writer and produced a number of important works in a variety of fields. Some of his major works include:

• Essays: Bacon’s essays were first published in 1597 and are considered some of the earliest examples of the essay form in English literature. He wrote about a wide range of topics, including love, death, truth, anger, friendship, and more.
• The Advancement of Learning: This work was published in 1605 and is considered one of Bacon’s most important philosophical works. In it, he outlines his views on the importance of learning and the role of science in the advancement of knowledge.
• Novum Organum: This work was published in 1620 and is considered one of Bacon’s most important scientific works. It lays the foundation for the scientific method and argues for the importance of observation and experimentation in the pursuit of knowledge.
• The New Atlantis: This work was published in 1627 and is considered one of Bacon’s most important works of fiction. It is a utopian novel that explores Bacon’s vision of a perfect society based on the principles of science and reason.
• The History of the Reign of King Henry VII: This work was published in 1622 and is considered one of Bacon’s most important works of history. It is a comprehensive history of the reign of King Henry VII and is noted for its balanced and impartial approach to its subject.

These work, which are still read and studied worldwide, show Bacon’s enormous intellectual range and his enduring influence on philosophy, science, and literature.

Check the latest updates below-

Francis Bacon as Father of English Essay

Francis Bacon is regarded as the “Father of English Essay” for several reasons:

• Pioneering work: Bacon wrote some of the earliest examples of the essay form in English literature, and his essays helped establish the essay as a recognized literary genre.
• Writing style: Bacon’s essays are characterized by their conciseness, directness, and clear expression of complex ideas. He was known for his ability to convey his thoughts in simple and easily understandable language.
• Range of topics: Bacon wrote about a wide range of topics in his essays, from love and death to truth and anger. This broad scope helped to popularize the essay as a form of writing that could be used to address a variety of subjects.
• Influence: Bacon’s essays had a profound impact on subsequent generations of writers, who were inspired by his writing style and approach to essay writing. His work continues to be widely read and studied to this day, and his contributions to the development of the English essay are widely recognized.
• Legacy: Bacon’s essays remain classic examples of the essay form, and he remains an important figure in the history of English literature. His contributions to the development of the essay have been widely celebrated, and he is regarded as the “Father of the English Essay” for his pioneering work in this field.

FAQs on the Father of English Essay

Francis Bacon is widely considered to be the “Father of the English Essay.”

Bacon’s prose is distinguished by its brevity, vividness, and terseness. Concreteness, vividness, clarity, control, and force are all present in plenty. His essays are advice pieces written in short, oppositional, and epigrammatic phrases. His essays were dubbed “separated meditations” by him.

Bacon’s essays are known for their conciseness, directness, and their ability to convey complex ideas in simple language.

Bacon wrote about a wide range of topics in his essays, including love, death, truth, anger, friendship, and more.

Bacon is considered the “Father of the English Essay” because he wrote some of the earliest examples of the essay form in English literature and helped establish the essay as a recognized literary genre. He was known for his concise and direct writing style and his ability to convey complex ideas in simple language. His contributions to the development of the English essay continue to be widely recognized and celebrated.

By Gauri Malik

Related post, who is the father of yellow revolution- learn about the contributions of sam pitroda here, who is the father of nutrition: antoine laurent de lavoisier learn about his contributions here, father of ashtanga yoga – learn about sri k. pattabhi jois here, leave a reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Unlocking Opportunities: BSSC Inter-Level Vacancy, Salary, and Job Profile

Exploring the geographical marvels and hill stations of maharashtra, यूपीएससी जीएस पेपर 4 पाठ्यक्रम के मुख्य पहलुओं का अनावरण, आईएएस मुख्य पाठ्यक्रम हिंदी में और यूपीएससी जीएस 3 पाठ्यक्रम हिंदी में जानें.

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

Francis Bacon

Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was one of the leading figures in natural philosophy and in the field of scientific methodology in the period of transition from the Renaissance to the early modern era. As a lawyer, member of Parliament, and Queen's Counsel, Bacon wrote on questions of law, state and religion, as well as on contemporary politics; but he also published texts in which he speculated on possible conceptions of society, and he pondered questions of ethics ( Essays ) even in his works on natural philosophy ( The Advancement of Learning ).

After his studies at Trinity College, Cambridge and Gray's Inn, London, Bacon did not take up a post at a university, but instead tried to start a political career. Although his efforts were not crowned with success during the era of Queen Elizabeth, under James I he rose to the highest political office, Lord Chancellor. Bacon's international fame and influence spread during his last years, when he was able to focus his energies exclusively on his philosophical work, and even more so after his death, when English scientists of the Boyle circle ( Invisible College ) took up his idea of a cooperative research institution in their plans and preparations for establishing the Royal Society.

To the present day Bacon is well known for his treatises on empiricist natural philosophy ( The Advancement of Learning , Novum Organum Scientiarum ) and for his doctrine of the idols, which he put forward in his early writings, as well as for the idea of a modern research institute, which he described in Nova Atlantis .

1. Biography

2. natural philosophy: struggle with tradition, 3.1 the idols, 3.2 system of sciences, 3.3 matter theory and cosmology, 4. scientific method: the project of the instauratio magna, 5. scientific method: novum organum and the theory of induction, 6. science and social philosophy, 7. the ethical dimension in bacon's thought, major philosophical works by bacon, selected works on bacon, other secondary literature, other internet resources, related entries.

Francis Bacon was born January, 22, 1561, the second child of Sir Nicholas Bacon (Lord Keeper of the Seal) and his second wife Lady Anne Cooke Bacon, daughter of Sir Anthony Cooke, tutor to Edward VI and one of the leading humanists of the age. Lady Anne was highly erudite: she not only had a perfect command of Greek and Latin, but was also competent in Italian and French. Together with his older brother Anthony, Francis grew up in a context determined by political power, humanist learning, and Calvinist zeal. His father had built a new house in Gorhambury in the 1560s, and Bacon was educated there for some seven years; later, along with Anthony, he went to Trinity College, Cambridge (1573–5), where he sharply criticized the scholastic methods of academic training. Their tutor was John Whitgift, in later life Archbishop of Canterbury. Whitgift provided the brothers with classical texts for their studies: Cicero, Demosthenes, Hermogenes, Livy, Sallust, and Xenophon (Peltonen 2007). Bacon began his studies at Gray's Inn in London in 1576; but from 1577 to 1578 he accompanied Sir Amias Paulet, the English ambassador, on his mission in Paris. According to Peltonen (2007):

During his stay in France, perhaps in autumn 1577, Bacon once visited England as the bearer of diplomatic post, delivering letters to Walsingham, Burghley, Leicester, and to the Queen herself.

When his father died in 1579, he returned to England. Bacon's small inheritance brought him into financial difficulties and since his maternal uncle, Lord Burghley, did not help him to get a lucrative post as a government official, he embarked on a political career in the House of Commons, after resuming his studies in Gray's Inn. In 1581 he entered the Commons as a member for Cornwall, and he remained a Member of Parliament for thirty-seven years. He was admitted to the bar in 1582 and in 1587 was elected as a reader at Gray's Inn. His involvement in high politics started in 1584, when he wrote his first political memorandum, A Letter of Advice to Queen Elizabeth . Right from the beginning of his adult life, Bacon aimed at a revision of natural philosophy and—following his father's example—also tried to secure high political office. Very early on he tried to formulate outlines for a new system of the sciences, emphasizing empirical methods and laying the foundation for an applied science ( scientia operativa ). This twofold task, however, proved to be too ambitious to be realized in practice. Bacon's ideas concerning a reform of the sciences did not meet with much sympathy from Queen Elizabeth or from Lord Burghley. Small expectations on this front led him to become a successful lawyer and Parliamentarian. From 1584 to 1617 (the year he entered the House of Lords) he was an active member in the Commons. Supported by Walsingham's patronage, Bacon played a role in the investigation of English Catholics and argued for stern action against Mary Queen of Scots. He served on many committees, including one in 1588 which examined recusants; later he was a member of a committee to revise the laws of England. He was involved in the political aspects of religious questions, especially concerning the conflict between the Church of England and nonconformists. In a tract of 1591, he tried to steer a middle course in religious politics; but one year later he was commissioned to write against the Jesuit Robert Parson (Jardine and Stewart 1999, p. 125), who had attacked English sovereignty.

From the late 1580s onwards, Bacon turned to the Earl of Essex as his patron. During this phase of his life, he particularly devoted himself to natural philosophy. He clearly expressed his position in a famous letter of 1592 to his uncle, Lord Burghley:

I confess that I have as vast contemplative ends, as I have moderate civil ends: for I have taken all knowledge to be my province; and if I could purge it of two sorts of rovers, whereof the one with frivolous disputations, confutations, and verbosities, the other with blind experiments and auricular traditions and impostures, hath committed so many spoils, I hope I should bring in industrious observations, grounded conclusions, and profitable inventions and discoveries; the best state of that province. This, whether it be curiosity, or vain glory, or nature, or (if one take 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. (Bacon 1857–74, VIII, 109)

In 1593 Bacon fell out favor with the queen on account of his refusal to comply with her request for funds from Parliament. Although he did not vote against granting three subsidies to the government, he demanded that these should be paid over a period six, rather than three, years. This led Sir Robert Cecil and Sir Walter Raleigh to argue against him in Parliament. Bacon's patron, the Earl of Essex, for whom he had already served as a close political advisor and informer, was not able to mollify the queen's anger over the subsidies; and all Essex's attempts to secure a high post for Bacon (attorney-general or solicitor-general) came to nothing. Nevertheless, the queen valued Bacon's competence as a man of law. He was involved in the treason trial of Roderigo Lopez and later on in the proceedings against the Earl of Essex. In his contribution to the Gesta Grayorum (the traditional Christmas revels held in Gray's Inn) of 1594–5, Bacon had emphasized the necessity of scientific improvement and progress. Since he failed to secure for himself a position in the government, he considered the possibility of giving up politics and concentrating on natural philosophy. It is no wonder, then, that Bacon engaged in many scholarly and literary pursuits in the 1590s. His letters of advice to the Earl of Rutland and to the Earl of Essex should be mentioned in this context. The advice given to Essex is of particular importance because Bacon recommended that he should behave in a careful and intelligent manner in public, above all abstaining from aspiring to military commands. Bacon also worked in this phase of his career for the reform of English law. In 1597 his first book was published, the seminal version of his Essays , which contained only ten pieces (Klein 2004b). His financial situation was still insecure; but his plan to marry the rich widow Lady Hatton failed because she was successfully courted by Sir Edward Coke. In 1598 Bacon was unable to sell his reversion of the Star Chamber clerkship, so that he was imprisoned for a short time on account of his debts. His parliamentary activities in 1597–98, mainly involving committee work, were impressive; but when the Earl of Essex in 1599 took command of the attempt to pacify the Irish rebels, Bacon's hopes sank. Essex did not solve the Irish question, returned to court and fell from grace, as Bacon had anticipated he would. He therefore lost a valuable patron and spokesman for his projects. Bacon tried to reconcile the queen and Essex; but when the earl rebelled against the crown in 1601, he could do nothing to help him. The queen ordered Bacon to participate in the treason trial against Essex. In 1601 Bacon sat in Elizabeth's last parliament, playing an extremely active role.

Bacon looked forward to the next reign and tried to get in contact with James VI of Scotland, Elizabeth's successor. During James' reign Bacon rose to power. He was knighted in 1603 and was created a learned counsel a year later. He took up the political issues of the union of England and Scotland, and he worked on a conception of religious toleration, endorsing a middle course in dealing with Catholics and nonconformists. Bacon married Alice Barnhem, the young daughter of a rich London alderman in 1606. One year later he was appointed Solicitor General. He was also dealing with theories of the state and developed the idea, in accordance with Machiavelli, of a politically active and armed citizenry. In 1608 Bacon became clerk of the Star Chamber; and at this time, he made a review of his life, jotting down his achievements and failures. Though he still was not free from money problems, his career progressed step by step. In the period from 1603 to 1613 Bacon was not only busy within English politics. He also created the foundations of his philosophical work by writing seminal treatises which prepared the path for the Novum Organum and for the Instauratio Magna . In 1613 he became Attorney General and began the rise to the peak of his political career: he became a member of the Privy Council in 1616, was appointed Lord Keeper of the Great Seal the following year—thus achieving the same position as his father—and was granted the title of Lord Chancellor and created Baron of Verulam in 1618. In 1621, however, Bacon, after being created Viscount of St Alban, was impeached by Parliament for corruption. He fell victim to an intrigue in Parliament because he had argued against the abuse of monopolies, indirectly attacking his friend, the Duke of Buckingham, who was the king's favorite. In order to protect Buckingham, the king sacrificed Bacon, whose enemies had accused him of taking bribes in connection with his position as a judge. Bacon saw no way out for himself and declared himself guilty. His fall was contrived by his adversaries in Parliament and by the court faction, for which he was a scapegoat to save the Duke of Buckingham not only from public anger but also from open aggression (Mathews 1996). He lost all his offices and his seat in Parliament, but retained his titles and his personal property. Bacon devoted the last five years of his life—the famous quinquennium—entirely to his philosophical work. He tried to go ahead with his huge project, the Instauratio Magna Scientiarum ; but the task was too big for him to accomplish in only a few years. Though he was able to finish important parts of the Instauratio , the proverb, often quoted in his works, proved true for himself: Vita brevis, ars longa . He died in April 1626 of pneumonia after experiments with ice.

Bacon's struggle to overcome intellectual blockades and the dogmatic slumber of his age and of earlier periods had to be fought on many fronts. Very early on he criticized not only Plato, Aristotle and the Aristotelians, but also humanists and Renaissance scholars such as Paracelsus and Bernardino Telesio.

Although Aristotle provided specific axioms for every scientific discipline, what Bacon found lacking in the Greek philosopher's work was a master principle or general theory of science, which could be applied to all branches of natural history and philosophy (Klein 2003a). For Bacon, Aristotle's cosmology, as well as his theory of science, had become obsolete and consequently so too had many of the medieval thinkers who followed his lead. He does not repudiate Aristotle completely, but he opposes the humanistic interpretation of him, with its emphasis on syllogism and dialectics ( scientia operativa versus textual hermeneutics) and the metaphysical treatment of natural philosophy in favor of natural forms (or nature's effects as structured modes of action, not artifacts), the stages of which correspond—in the shape of a pyramid of knowledge—to the structural order of nature itself.

If any ‘modern’ Aristotelians came near to Bacon, it was the Venetian or Paduan branch, represented by Jacopo Zabarella. On the other hand, Bacon criticized Telesio, who—in his view—had only halfway succeeded in overcoming Aristotle's deficiencies. Although we find the debate with Telesio in an unpublished text of his middle period ( De Principiis atque Originibus, secundum fabulas Cupidinis et Coelum or On Principles and Origins According to the Fables of Cupid and Coelum , written in 1612; Bacon V [1889], 461–500), Bacon began to struggle with tradition as early as 1603. In Valerius Terminus (1603?) he already repudiates any mixture of natural philosophy and divinity; he provides an outline of his new method and determines that the end of knowledge was “a discovery of all operations and possibilities of operations from immortality (if it were possible) to the meanest mechanical practice” (Bacon III [1887], 222). He opposes Aristotelian anticipatio naturae , which favored the inquiry of causes to satisfy the mind instead of those “as will direct him and give him light to new experiences and inventions” (Bacon III [1887], 232).

When Bacon introduces his new systematic structure of the disciplines in The Advancement of Learning (1605), he continues his struggle with tradition, primarily with classical antiquity, rejecting the book learning of the humanists, on the grounds that they “hunt more after words than matter” (Bacon III [1887], 283). Accordingly, he criticizes the Cambridge University curriculum for placing too much emphasis on dialectical and sophistical training asked of “minds empty and unfraught with matter” (Bacon III [1887], 326). He reformulates and functionally transforms Aristotle's conception of science as knowledge of necessary causes. He rejects Aristotle's logic, which is based on his metaphysical theory, whereby the false doctrine is implied that the experience which comes to us by means of our senses (things as they appear ) automatically presents to our understanding things as they are . Simultaneously Aristotle favors the application of general and abstract conceptual distinctions, which do not conform to things as they exist. Bacon, however, introduces his new conception of philosophia prima as a meta-level for all scientific disciplines.

From 1606 to 1612 Bacon pursued his work on natural philosophy, still under the auspices of a struggle with tradition. This tendency is exemplified in the unpublished tracts Temporis partus masculus , 1603/1608 (Bacon III [1887], 521–31), Cogitata et Visa , 1607 (Bacon III, 591–620), Redargutio Philosophiarum , 1608 (III, 557–85), and De Principiis atque Originibus …, 1612 (Bacon V [1889], 461–500). Bacon rediscovers the Pre-Socratic philosophers for himself, especially the atomists and among them Democritus as the leading figure. He gives preference to Democritus' natural philosophy in contrast to the scholastic—and thus Aristotelian—focus on deductive logic and belief in authorities. Bacon does not expect any approach based on tradition to start with a direct investigation of nature and then to ascend to empirical and general knowledge. This criticism is extended to Renaissance alchemy, magic, and astrology ( Temporis partus masculus ), because the ‘methods’ of these ‘disciplines’ are based on occasional insights, but do not command strategies to reproduce the natural effects under investigation. His criticism also concerns contemporary technical literature, in so far as it lacks a new view of nature and an innovative methodological program. Bacon takes to task the ancients, the scholastics and also the moderns. He not only criticizes Plato, Aristotle, and Galen for these failings, but also Jean Fernel, Paracelsus, and Telesio, while praising the Greek atomists and Roger Bacon.

Bacon's manuscripts already mention the doctrine of the idols as a necessary condition for constituting scientia operativa . In Cogitata et Visa he compares deductive logic as used by the scholastics to a spider's web, which is drawn out of its own entrails, whereas the bee is introduced as an image of scientia operativa . Like a bee, the empiricist, by means of his inductive method, collects the natural matter or products and then works them up into knowledge in order to produce honey, which is useful for healthy nutrition.

In Bacon's follow-up paper, Redargutio Philosophiarum , he carries on his empiricist project by referring to the doctrine of twofold truth, while in De Principiis atque Originibus he rejects alchemical theories concerning the transformation of substances in favor of Greek atomism. But in the same text he sharply criticizes his contemporary Telesio for propagating a non-experimental halfway house empiricism. Though Telesio proves to be a moderate ‘modern’, he clings to the Aristotelian framework by continuing to believe in the quinta essentia and in the doctrine of the two worlds, which presupposes two modes of natural law (one mode for the sublunary and another for the superlunary sphere).

3. Natural Philosophy: Theory of the Idols and the System of Sciences

Bacon's doctrine of the idols not only represents a stage in the history of theories of error (Brandt 1979) but also functions as an important theoretical element within the rise of modern empiricism. According to Bacon, the human mind is not a tabula rasa . Instead of an ideal plane for receiving an image of the world in toto, it is a crooked mirror, on account of implicit distortions (Bacon IV [1901], 428–34). He does not sketch a basic epistemology but underlines that the images in our mind right from the beginning do not render an objective picture of the true objects. Consequently, we have to improve our mind, i.e., free it from the idols, before we start any knowledge acquisition.

As early as Temporis partus masculus , Bacon warns the student of empirical science not to tackle the complexities of his subject without purging the mind of its idols:

On waxen tablets you cannot write anything new until you rub out the old. With the mind it is not so; there you cannot rub out the old till you have written in the new. (Farrington 1964, 72)

In Redargutio Philosophiarum Bacon reflects on his method, but he also criticizes prejudices and false opinions, especially the system of speculation established by theologians, as an obstacle to the progress of science (Farrington 1964, 107), together with any authoritarian stance in scholarly matters.

Bacon deals with the idols in the Second Book of The Advancement of Learning , where he discusses Arts intellectual (Invention, Judgment, Memory, Tradition). In his paragraph on judgment he refers to proofs and demonstrations, especially to induction and invention. When he comes to Aristotle's treatment of the syllogism, he reflects on the relation between sophistical fallacies (Aristotle, De Sophisticis Elenchis ) and the idols (Bacon III [1887], 392–6). Whereas induction, invention, and judgment presuppose “the same action of the mind”, this is not true for proof in the syllogism. Bacon, therefore, prefers his own interpretatio naturae , repudiating elenches as modes of sophistical ‘juggling’ in order to persuade others in redargutions (“degenerate and corrupt use … for caption and contradiction”). There is no finding without proof and no proof without finding. But this is not true for the syllogism, in which proof (syllogism: judgment of the consequent) and invention (of the ‘mean’ or middle term) are distinct. The caution he suggests in relation to the ambiguities in elenches is also recommended in face of the idols :

there is yet a much more important and profound kind of fallacies in the mind of man, which I find not observed or enquired at all, and think good to place here, as that which of all others appertaineth most to rectify judgment: the force whereof is such, as it doth not dazzle or snare the understanding in some particulars, but doth more generally and inwardly infect and corrupt the state thereof. For the mind of man is far from the nature of a clear and equal glass, wherein the beams of things should reflect according to their true incidence, nay, it is rather like an enchanted glass, full of superstition and imposture, if it be not delivered and reduced. For this purpose, let us consider the false appearances that are imposed upon us by the general nature of the mind …. (Bacon III [1887], 394–5)

Bacon still presents a similar line of argument to his reader in 1623, namely in De Augmentis (Book V, Chap. 4; see Bacon IV [1901], 428–34). Judgment by syllogism presupposes—in a mode agreeable to the human mind—mediated proof, which, unlike in induction, does not start from sense in primary objects. In order to control the workings of the mind, syllogistic judgment refers to a fixed frame of reference or principle of knowledge as the basis for “all the variety of disputations” (Bacon IV [1901], 491). The reduction of propositions to principles leads to the middle term. Bacon deals here with the art of judgment in order to assign a systematic position to the idols. Within this art he distinguishes the ‘Analytic’ from the detection of fallacies (sophistical syllogisms). Analytic works with “true forms of consequences in argument” (Bacon IV [1901], 429), which become faulty by variation and deflection. The complete doctrine of detection of fallacies, according to Bacon, contains three segments:

• Sophistical fallacies,
• Fallacies of interpretation, and
• False appearances or Idols.

Concerning (1) Bacon praises Aristotle for his excellent handling of the matter, but he also mentions Plato honorably. Fallacies of interpretation (2) refer to “Adventitious Conditions or Adjuncts of Essences”, similar to the predicaments, open to physical or logical inquiry. He focuses his attention on the logical handling when he relates the detection of fallacies of interpretation to the wrong use of common and general notions, which leads to sophisms. In the last section (3) Bacon finds a place for his idols, when he refers to the detection of false appearances as

the deepest fallacies of the human mind: For they do not deceive in particulars, as the others do, by clouding and snaring the judgment; but by a corrupt and ill-ordered predisposition of mind, which as it were perverts and infects all the anticipations of the intellect. (IV, 431)

Idols are productions of the human imagination (caused by the crooked mirror of the human mind) and thus are nothing more than “untested generalities” (Malherbe 1996, 80).

In his Preface to the Novum Organum Bacon promises the introduction of a new method, which will restore the senses to their former rank (Bacon IV [1901], 17f.), begin the whole labor of the mind again, and open two sources and two distributions of learning, consisting of a method of cultivating the sciences and another of discovering them. This new beginning presupposes the discovery of the natural obstacles to efficient scientific analysis, namely seeing through the idols, so that the mind's function as the subject of knowledge acquisition comes into focus (Brandt 1979, 19).

According to Aphorism XXIII of the First Book, Bacon makes a distinction between the Idols of the human mind and the Ideas of the divine mind: whereas the former are for him nothing more than “certain empty dogmas”, the latter show “the true signatures and marks set upon the works of creation as they are found in nature” (Bacon IV [1901], 51).

3.1.1 Idols of the Tribe

The Idols of the Tribe have their origin in the production of false concepts due to human nature, because the structure of human understanding is like a crooked mirror, which causes distorted reflections (of things in the external world).

3.1.2 Idols of the Cave

The Idols of the Cave consist of conceptions or doctrines which are dear to the individual who cherishes them, without possessing any evidence of their truth. These idols are due to the preconditioned system of every individual, comprising education, custom, or accidental or contingent experiences.

3.1.3 Idols of the Market Place

These idols are based on false conceptions which are derived from public human communication. They enter our minds quietly by a combination of words and names, so that it comes to pass that not only does reason govern words, but words react on our understanding.

3.1.4 Idols of the Theatre

According to the insight that the world is a stage, the Idols of the Theatre are prejudices stemming from received or traditional philosophical systems. These systems resemble plays in so far as they render fictional worlds, which were never exposed to an experimental check or to a test by experience. The idols of the theatre thus have their origin in dogmatic philosophy or in wrong laws of demonstration.

Bacon ends his presentation of the idols in Novum Organum , Book I, Aphorism LXVIII, with the remark that men should abjure and renounce the qualities of idols, “and the understanding [must be] thoroughly freed and cleansed” (Bacon IV [1901], 69). He discusses the idols together with the problem of information gained through the senses, which must be corrected by the use of experiments (Bacon IV [1901], 27).

Within the history of occidental philosophy and science, Bacon identifies only three revolutions or periods of learning: the heyday of the Greeks and that of the Romans and Western Europe in his own time (Bacon IV [1901], 70ff.). This meager result stimulated his ambition to establish a new system of the sciences. This tendency can already be seen in his early manuscripts, but is also apparent in his first major book, The Advancement of Learning . In this work Bacon presents a systematic survey of the extant realms of knowledge, combined with meticulous descriptions of deficiencies, leading to his new classification of knowledge. In The Advancement (Bacon III [1887], 282f.) a new function is given to philosophia prima , the necessity of which he had indicated in the Novum Organum , I, Aphorisms LXXIX–LXXX (Bacon IV [1901], 78–9). In both texts this function is attributed to philosophia naturalis , the basis for his concept of the unity of the sciences and thus of materialism.

Natural science is divided by Bacon into physics and metaphysics. The former investigates variable and particular causes, the latter reflects on general and constant ones, for which the term form is used. Forms are more general than the four Aristotelian causes and that is why Bacon's discussion of the forms of substances as the most general properties of matter is the last step for the human mind when investigating nature. Metaphysics is distinct from philosophia prima . The latter marks the position in the system where general categories of a general theory of science are treated as (1) universal categories of thought, (2) relevant for all disciplines. Final causes are discredited, since they lead to difficulties in science and tempt us to amalgamate theological and teleological points of doctrine. At the summit of Bacon's pyramid of knowledge are the laws of nature (the most general principles). At its base the pyramid starts with observations, moves on to invariant relations and then to more inclusive correlations until it reaches the stage of forms. The process of generalization ascends from natural history via physics towards metaphysics, whereas accidental correlations and relations are eliminated by the method of exclusion. It must be emphasized that metaphysics has a special meaning for Bacon. This concept (1) excludes the infinity of individual experience by generalization with a teleological focus and (2) opens our mind to generate more possibilities for the efficient application of general laws.

According to Bacon, man would be able to explain all the processes in nature if he could acquire full insight into the hidden structure and the secret workings of matter (Pérez-Ramos 1988, 101). Bacon's conception of structures in nature, functioning according to its own working method, concentrates on the question of how natural order is produced, namely by the interplay of matter and motion. In De Principiis atque Originibus , his materialistic stance with regard to his conception of natural law becomes evident. The Summary Law of Nature is a virtus (matter-cum-motion) or power in accordance with matter theory, or

the force implanted by God in these first particles, form the multiplication thereof of all the variety of things proceeds and is made up. (Bacon V [1889], 463)

Similarly, in De Sapientia Veterum he attributes to this force an

appetite or instinct of primal matter; or to speak more plainly, the natural motion of the atom; which is indeed the original and unique force that constitutes and fashions all things out of matter. (Bacon VI [1890], 729)

Suffice it to say here that Bacon, who did not reject mathematics in science, was influenced by the early mathematical version of chemistry developed in the 16 th century, so that the term ‘instinct’ must be seen as a keyword for his theory of nature. The natural philosopher is urged to inquire into the

appetites and inclination of things by which all that variety of effects and changes which we see in the works of nature and art is brought about. (Bacon III [1887], 17–22; V [1889], 422–6 and 510ff.: Descriptio Globi Intellectualis ; cf. IV [1901], 349)

Bacon's theory of active or even vivid force in matter accounts for what he calls Cupid in De Principiis atque Originibus (Bacon V [1889], 463–5). Since his theory of matter aims at an explanation of the reality which is the substratum of appearances, he digs deeper than did the mechanistic physics of the 17 th century (Gaukroger 2001, 132–7). Bacon's ideas concerning the quid facti of reality presuppose the distinction

between understanding how things are made up and of what they consist, … and by what force and in what manner they come together, and how they are transformed. (Gaukroger 2001, 137)

This is the point in his work where it becomes obvious that he tries to develop an explanatory pattern in which his theory of matter, and thus his atomism, are related to his cosmology, magic, and alchemy.

In De Augmentis , Bacon not only refers to Pan and his nymphs in order to illustrate the permanent atomic movement in matter but in addition revives the idea of magic in a ‘honourable meaning’ as

the knowledge of the universal consents of things …. I … understand [magic] as the science which applies the knowledge of hidden forms to the production of wonderful operations; and by uniting (as they say) actives with passives, displays the wonderful works of nature. (Bacon IV [1901], 366–7: De Augmentis III.5)

Bacon's notion of form is made possible by integration into his matter theory, which (ideally) reduces the world of appearances to some minimal parts accessible and open to manipulation by the knower/maker. In contrast to Aristotle, Bacon's knowing-why type of definition points towards the formulation of an efficient knowing-how type (Pérez-Ramos 1988, 119). In this sense a convergence between the scope of definition and that of causation takes place according to a ‘constructivist epistemology’. The fundamental research of Graham Rees has shown that Bacon's special mode of cosmology is deeply influenced by magic and semi-Paracelsian doctrine. For Bacon, matter theory is the basic doctrine, not classical mechanics as it is with Galileo. Consequently, Bacon's purified and modified versions of chemistry, alchemy, and physiology remain primary disciplines for his explanation of the world.

According to Rees, the Instauratio Magna comprises two branches: (1) Bacon's famous scientific method, and (2) his semi-Paracelsian world system as “a vast, comprehensive system of speculative physics” (Rees 1986, 418). For (2) Bacon conjoins his specific version of Paracelsian cosmic chemistry to Islamic celestial kinematics (especially in Alpetragius [al-Bitruji]; see Zinner 1988, 71). The chemical world system is used to support Bacon's explanation of celestial motion in the face of contemporary astronomical problems (Rees 1975b, 161f.). There are thus two sections in Bacon's Instauratio , which imply the modes of their own explanation.

Bacon's speculative cosmology and matter theory had been planned to constitute Part 5 of Instauratio Magna . The theory put forward refers in an eclectic vein to atomism, criticizes Aristotelians and Copernicans, but also touches on Galileo, Paracelsus, William Gilbert, Telesio, and Arabic astronomy.

For Bacon, ‘magic’ is classified as applied science, while he generally subsumes under ‘science’ pure science and technology. It is never identified with black magic, since it represents the “ultimate legitimate power over nature” (Rees 2000, 66). Whereas magia was connected to crafts in the 16 th and 17 th centuries, Bacon's science remains the knowledge of forms in order to transform them into operations. Knowledge in this context, however, is no longer exclusively based on formal proof.

Bacon's cosmological system—a result of thought experiments and speculation, but not proven in accordance with the inductive method—presupposes a finite universe, a geocentric plenum, which means that the earth is passive and consists of tangible matter. The remaining universe is composed of active or pneumatic matter. Whereas the interior and tangible matter of the earth is covered by a crust which separates it from the pneumatic heaven, the zone between earth and the “middle region of the air” allows a mixture of pneumatic and tangible matter, which is the origin of organic and non-organic phenomena. Bacon speaks here of “attached spirit” (Rees 1986, 418–20), while otherwise he assumes four kinds of free spirit: air and terrestrial fire, which refer to the sublunary realm; ether and sidereal fire, which are relevant to the celestial realm. Ether is explained as the medium in which planets move around the central earth. Air and ether, as well as watery non-inflammable bodies, belong to Bacon's first group of substances or to the Mercury Quaternion .

Terrestrial fire is presented as the weak variant of sidereal fire; it joins with oily substances and sulphur, for all of which Bacon introduces the Sulphur Quaternion. These quaternions comprise antithetical qualities: air and ether versus fire and sidereal fire. The struggle between these qualities is determined by the distance from the earth as the absolute center of the world system. Air and ether become progressively weaker as the terrestrial and sidereal fire grow stronger. The quaternion theory functions in Bacon's thought as a constructive element for constituting his own theory of planetary movement and a general theory of physics. This theory differs from all other contemporary approaches, even though Bacon states that “many theories of the heavens may be supposed which agree well enough with the phenomena and yet differ with each other” (Bacon IV [1901], 104). The diurnal motion of the world system (9 th sphere) is driven by sympathy; it carries the heavens westward around the earth. The sidereal fire is powerful and, accordingly, sidereal motion is swift (the stars complete their revolution in 24 hours). Since the sidereal fire becomes weaker if it burns nearer to the earth, the lower planets move more slowly and unevenly than the higher ones (in this way Bacon, like Alpetragius, accounts for irregular planetary movement without reference to Ptolemy's epicycle theory). He applies his theory of consensual motion to physics generally (e.g., wind and tides) and thus comes into conflict with Gilbert's doctrine of the interstellar vacuum and Galileo's theory of the tides (for Bacon, the cycle of tides depends on the diurnal motion of the heavens but, for Galileo, on the earth's motion).

With quaternion theory we see that, in the final analysis, Bacon was not a mechanist philosopher. His theory of matter underwent an important transformation, moving in the direction of ‘forms’, which we would nowadays subsume under biology or the life sciences rather than under physics. Bacon distinguishes between non-spiritual matter and spiritual matter. The latter, also called ‘subtle matter’ or ‘spirit’, is more reminiscent of Leibniz' ‘monads’ than of mechanically defined and materially, as well as spatially, determined atoms. The spirits are seen as active agents of phenomena; they are endowed with ‘appetition’ and ‘perception’ (Bacon I [1889], 320–21: Historia Vitae et Mortis ; see also V, 63: Sylva Sylvarum , Century IX: “It is certain that all bodies whatsoever, though they have no sense, yet they have perception: for when one body is applied to another, there is a kind of election to embrace that which is agreeable, and to exclude or expel that which is ingrate”).

These spirits are never at rest. In the Novum Organum , then, Bacon rejected the “existence of eternal and immutable atoms and the reality of the void” (Kargon 1966, 47). His new conception of matter was therefore “close to that of the chemists” in the sense of Bacon's semi-Paracelsian cosmology (Rees 2000, 65–69). The careful natural philosopher tries to disclose the secrets of nature step by step; and therefore he says of his method: “I propose to establish progressive stages of certainty” (Bacon IV [1901], 40: Novum Organum , Preface). This points towards his inductive procedure and his method of tables, which is a complicated mode of induction by exclusion. It is necessary because nature hides her secrets. In Aphorism XIX of Book I in his Novum Organum Bacon writes:

There are and can be only two ways of searching into and discovering truth. The one flies from the senses and particulars to the most general axioms, and from these principles, the truth of which it takes for settled and immoveable, proceeds to judgment and to the discovery of middle axioms. And this way is now in fashion. The other derives axioms from the senses and particulars, rising by gradual and unbroken ascent, so that it arrives at the most general axioms last of all. This is the true way, but as yet untried. (Bacon IV [1901], 50)

The laws of nature, which Bacon intended to discover by means of his new method, were expressed in the ‘forms’, in which the ‘unbroken ascent’ culminates. Through these forms the natural philosopher understands the general causes of phenomena (Kargon 1966, 48). In his endeavor to learn more about the secret workings of nature, Bacon came to the conclusion that the atomist theory could not provide sufficient explanations for the “real particles, such as really exist” (Bacon IV [1901], 126: Novum Organum , II.viii), because he thought that the immutability of matter and the void (both necessary assumptions for atomism) were untenable. His language turned from that of Greek physics to the usage of contemporary chemists. This is due to his insight that “subtlety of investigation” is needed, since our senses are too gross for the complexity and fineness of nature, so that method has to compensate for the shortcomings of our direct comprehension. Only method leads to the knowledge of nature: in Sylva Sylvarum , Century I.98 Bacon deals explicitly with the question of the asymmetrical relationship between man's natural instrument (i.e., the senses) and the intricacy of nature's structures and workings.

Bacon distinguishes ‘animate’ or vital spirits, which are continuous and composed of a substance similar to fire, from lifeless or inanimate spirits, which are cut off and resemble air: the spirits interact with gross matter through chemical processes (Bacon IV, 195–6 ( Novum Organum , II.xl)). These spirits have two different desires: self-multiplication and attraction of like spirits. According to Kargon (1966, 51):

Bacon's later theory of matter is one of the interaction of gross, visible parts of matter and invisible material spirits, both of which are physically mixed.

Spirits interact with matter by means of concoction, colliquation and other non-mechanical chemical processes, so that Bacon's scientific paradigm differs from Descartes' mechanist theory of matter in his Principia Philosophiae (1644), which presupposes res extensa moving in space. Bacon's theory of matter is thus closely related to his speculative philosophy:

The distinction between tangible and pneumatic matter is the hinge on which the entire speculative system turns. (Rees 1996, 125; Paracelsus had already stated that knowledge inheres in the object: see Shell 2004, 32)

Bacon's theory of matter in its final version was more corpuscular than atomist (Clericuzio 2000, 78). Bacon's particles are semina rerum : they are endowed with powers, which make a variety of motions possible and allow the production of all possible forms. These spirits are constitutive for Bacon's theory of matter. As material, fine substances, composed of particles, combined from air and fire, they can, as we have seen, be either inanimate or animate. Bacon thus suggests a corpuscular and chemical chain of being:

Small wonder, then, that Bacon's spirits are indispensable for his conception of physiology:

the vital spirits regulate all vegetative functions of plants and animals. Organs responsible for these functions, for digestion, assimilation, etc., seem to act by perception, mere reaction to local stimuli, but these reactions are coordinated by the vital spirit. These functions flow from the spirit's airy-flamy constitution. The spirit has the softness of air to receive impressions and the vigour of fire to propagate its actions. (Rees in OFB VI, 202–3)

This physiological stratum of Bacon's natural philosophy was influenced by his semi-Paracelsian cosmology (on Paracelsus see Müller-Jahncke 1985, 67–88), which Graham Rees (Rees and Upton 1984, 20–1) has reconstructed from the extant parts of the Instauratio Magna . Detailed consideration therefore has to be given to Bacon's theory of the ‘quaternions’.

Bacon's speculative system is a hybrid based on different sources which provided him with seminal ideas: e.g., atomism, Aristotelianism, Arabic astronomy, Copernican theory, Galileo's discoveries, the works of Paracelsus, and Gilbert. In his theory he combines astronomy, referring to Alpetragius (see Dijksterhuis 1956, 237–43; Rees and Upton 1984, 26; Gaukroger, 2001, 172–5; and see Grant 1994, 533–66, for discussion of the cosmology of Alpetragius), and chemistry (Rees 1975a, 84–5):

[i]t was partly designed to fit a kinematic skeleton and explain, in general terms, the irregularities of planetary motion as consequences of the chemical constitution of the universe. (Rees 1975b, 94)

Bacon had no explanation for the planetary retrogressions and saw the universe as a finite and geocentric plenum, in which the earth consists of the two forms of matter (tangible and pneumatic). The earth has a tangible inside and is in touch with the surrounding universe, but through an intermediate zone. This zone exists between the earth's crust and the pure pneumatic heavens; it reaches some miles into the crust and some miles into air. In this zone, pneumatic matter mixes with tangible matter, thus producing ‘attached spirits’, which must be distinguished from ‘free spirits’ outside tangible bodies. Bacon's four kinds of free spirits are relevant for his ‘quaternion theory’:

The planets move around the earth in the ether (a tenuous kind of air), which belongs to the ‘mercury quaternion’: it includes watery bodies and mercury. Terrestrial fire is a weakened form of sidereal fire. It is related to oily substances and sulphur, and constitutes the ‘sulphur quaternion’. The two quaternions oppose each other: air/ether vs. fire/sidereal fire. Air and ether loose power when terrestrial and sidereal fires grow more energetic—Bacon's sulphur and mercury are not principles in the sense of Paracelsus, but simply natural substances. The Paracelsian principle of salt is excluded by Bacon and the substance, which plays a role only in the sublunary realm, is for him a compound of natural sulphur and mercury (Rees and Upton 1984, 25).

Bacon used his quaternion theory for his cosmology, which differs greatly from other contemporary systems (Rees 2000, 68):

• the diurnal motion turns the heavens about the earth towards the west;
• under powerful sidereal fire (i.e., principle of celestial motion) the motion is swift: the revolution of the stars takes place in twenty-four hours;
• under weaker sidereal fire—nearer to the earth—planets move more slowly and more erratic.

Bacon, who tried to conceive of a unified physics, rejected different modes of motion in the superlunary and in the sublunary world (Bacon I [1889], 329). He did not believe in the existence of the (crystalline) spheres nor in the macrocosm-microcosm analogy. He revised Paracelsian ideas thoroughly. He rejected the grounding of his theories in Scripture and paid no attention at all to Cabbalistic and Hermetic tendencies (Rees 1975b, 90–1). But he extended the explanatory powers of the quaternions to earthly phenomena such as wind and tides.

Bacon's two systems were closely connected:

System 2 depends on System 1, since explanations for terrestrial things were subordinated to explanations of the cosmological level. The table of System 2 shows Bacon's matter theory. His quaternion theory is relevant for System 1. System 2 is explained in terms of ‘intermediates’, which combine the qualities of the items in one quaternion with their opposites in the other.

Bacon's system is built in a clear symmetrical way: each quaternion has four segments, together eight and there are four types of intermediates. Thus, the system distinguishes twelve segments in all. He wanted to explain all natural phenomena by means of this apparatus:

There are two principal intermediates:

Bacon's bi-quaternion theory necessarily refers to the sublunary as well as to the superlunary world. Although the quaternion theory is first mentioned in Thema Coeli (1612; see Bacon V [1889], 547–59), he provides a summary in his Novum Organum (Bacon II [1887], 50):

it has not been ill observed by the chemists in their triad of first principles, that sulphur and mercury run through the whole universe … in these two one of the most general consents in nature does seem to be observable. For there is consent between sulphur, oil and greasy exhalation, flame, and perhaps the body of a star. So is there between mercury, water and watery vapors, air, and perhaps the pure and intersiderial ether. Yet these two quaternions or great tribes of things (each within its own limits) differ immensely in quantity of matter and density, but agree very well in configuration. (Bacon IV [1901], 242–3; see also V [1889], 205–6; for tables of the two quaternions and Bacon's theory of matter see Rees 1996, 126, 137; Rees 2000, 68–9)

Bacon regarded his cosmological worldview as a system of anticipations, which was open to revision in light of further scientific results based on the inductive method (Rees 1975b, 171). It was primarily a qualitative system, standing aside from both mathematical astronomers and Paracelsian chemists. It thus emphasized the priority which he gave to physics over mathematics in his general system of the sciences.

Bacon's two quaternions and his matter theory provide a speculative framework for his thought, which was open to the future acquisition of knowledge and its technical application. His Nova Atlantis can be understood as a text which occupies an intermediate position between his theory of induction and his speculative philosophy (Klein 2003c; Price 2002).

It is important to bear in mind that Bacon's speculative system was his way out of a dilemma which had made it impossible for him to finish his Instauratio Magna . His turn towards speculation can only be interpreted as an intellectual anticipation during an intermediate phase of the history of science, when a gigantic amount of research work was still to be accomplished, so that empirical theories could neither be established nor sufficiently guaranteed. Speculation in Bacon's sense can therefore be seen as a preliminary means of explaining the secrets of nature until methodical research has caught up with our speculations. The speculative stance remains a relative and intermediate procedure for the ‘man of science’.

The Great Instauration , Bacon's main work, was published in 1620 under the title: Franciscus de Verulamio Summi Angliae Cancellaris Instauratio magna . This great work remained a fragment, since Bacon was only able to finish parts of the planned outline. The volume was introduced by a Prooemium , which gives a general statement of the purpose, followed by a Dedication to the King (James I) and a Preface , which is a summary of all “directions, motifs, and significance of his life-work” (Sessions 1996, 71). After that, Bacon printed the plan of the Instauratio , before he turned to the strategy of his research program, which is known as Novum Organum Scientiarum . Altogether the 1620 book constitutes the second part of Part II of the Instauratio , the first part of which is represented by De Augmentis and Book I of The Advancement of Learning . When Bacon organized his Instauratio , he divided it into six parts, which reminded contemporary readers of God's work of the six days (the creation), already used by writers like Guillaume Du Bartas ( La Sepmaine, ou Création du Monde , 1579, transl. by Joshua Sylvester, Bartas His Devine Weekes & Workes , 1605) and Giovanni Pico della Mirandola ( Heptaplus , 1489).

Bacon sees nature as a labyrinth, whose workings cannot be exclusively explained by reference to “excellence of wit” and “repetition of chance experiments”:

Our steps must be guided by a clue, and see what way from the first perception of the sense must be laid out upon a sure plan. (Bacon IV [1901], 18)

Bacon's Plan of the Work runs as follows (Bacon IV [1901], 22):

• The Divisions of the Sciences.
• The New Organon; or Directions concerning the Interpretation of Nature.
• The Phenomena of the Universe; or a Natural and Experimental History for the foundation of Philosophy.
• The Ladder of Intellect.
• The Forerunners; or Anticipations of the New Philosophy.
• The New Philosophy; or Active Science .

Part 1 contains the general description of the sciences including their divisions as they presented themselves in Bacon's time. Here he aimed at a distinction between what was already invented and known in contrast to “things omitted which ought be there” (Bacon IV [1901], 23). This part could be taken from The Advancement of Learning (1605) and from the revised and enlarged version De Dignitate et Augmentis Scientiarum (1623).

Part 2 develops Bacon's new method for scientific investigation, the Novum Organum , equipping the intellect to pass beyond ancient arts and thus producing a radical revision of the methods of knowledge; but it also introduces a new epistemology and a new ontology. Bacon calls his new art Interpretatio Naturae , which is a logic of research going beyond ordinary logic, since his science aims at three inventions: of arts (not arguments), of principles (not of things in accordance to principles), and of designations and directions for works (not of probable reasons). The effect Bacon looks for is to command nature in action, not to overcome an opponent in argument. The Novum Organum is the only part of the Instauratio Magna which was brought near to completion.

Part 3 was going to contain natural and experimental history or the record of the phenomena of the universe. According to De Augmentis Scientarum (Bacon IV [1901], 275), natural history is split up into narrative and inductive, the latter of which is supposed “to minister and be in order to the building up of Philosophy ”. These functional histories support human memory and provide the material for research , or the factual knowledge of nature, which must be certain and reliable. Natural history starts from and emphasizes the subtlety of nature or her structural intricacy, but not the complexity of philosophical systems, since they have been produced by the human mind. Bacon sees this part of Instauratio Magna as a foundation for the reconstruction of the sciences in order to produce physical and metaphysical knowledge. Nature in this context is studied under experimental conditions, not only in the sense of the history of bodies, but also as a history of virtues or original passions, which refer to the desires of matter (Rees 1975a). This knowledge was regarded by Bacon as a preparation for Part 6, the Second Philosophy or Active Science , for which he gave only the one example of Historia Ventorum (1622); but—following his plan to compose six prototypical natural histories—he also wrote Historia vitae et mortis (1623) and the Historia densi , which was left in manuscript. The text, which develops the idea of Part 3, is called Parasceve ad Historiam Naturalem et Experimentalem.

Part 4, which Bacon called The Ladder of Intellect or Scala Intellectus , was intended to function as a link between the method of natural history and that of Second Philosophy/Active Science. It consists not only of the fragment Filum labyrinthi (Bacon III [1887], 493–504), but also includes the Abecedarium nouum naturae (OFB XIII, xxi), which was planned as a preface to all of section 4 “[to] demonstrate the whole process of the mind” (OFB XIII, xxii). Filum labyrinthi is similar to, but not identical with, Cogitata et Visa . Speaking of himself in an authorial voice, Bacon reflects on the state of science and derives his construction of a research program from the gaps and deficiencies within the system of disciplines: sciences of the future should be examined and further ones should be discovered. Emphasis must be laid on new matter (not on controversies). It is necessary to repudiate superstition, zealous religion, and false authorities. Just as the Fall was not caused by knowledge of nature, but rather by moral knowledge of good and evil, so knowledge of natural philosophy is for Bacon a contribution to the magnifying of God's glory, and, in this way, his plea for the growth of scientific knowledge becomes evident.

Part 5 deals with the forerunners or anticipations of the new philosophy, and Bacon emphasizes that the ‘big machinery’ of the Instauratio Magna needs a good deal of time to be completed. Anticipations are ways to come to scientific inferences without recourse to the method presented in the Novum Organum . Meanwhile, he has worked on his speculative system, so that portions of his Second Philosophy are treated and finished: De Fluxu et Refluxu Maris and Thema Coeli . For this part of the Great Instauration , texts are planned that draw philosophical conclusions from collections of facts which are not yet sufficient for the use or application of Bacon's inductive method.

Part 6 was scheduled to contain Bacon's description of the new philosophy, as the last part of his Great Instauration ; but nothing came of this plan, so that there is no extant text at all from this part of the project.

Already in his early text Cogitata et Visa (1607) Bacon dealt with his scientific method, which became famous under the name of induction . He repudiates the syllogistic method and defines his alternative procedure as one “which by slow and faithful toil gathers information from things and brings it into understanding” (Farrington 1964, 89). When later on he developed his method in detail, namely in his Novum Organum (1620), he still noted that

[of] induction the logicians seem hardly to have taken any serious thought, but they pass it by with a slight notice, and hasten to the formulae of disputation. I on the contrary reject demonstration by syllogism …. (Bacon IV [1901], 24)

Bacon's method appears as his conceptual plot,

applied to all stages of knowledge, and at every phase the whole process has to be kept in mind. (Malherbe 1996, 76)

Induction implies ascending to axioms, as well as a descending to works, so that from axioms new particulars are gained and from these new axioms. The inductive method starts from sensible experience and moves via natural history (providing sense-data as guarantees) to lower axioms or propositions, which are derived from the tables of presentation or from the abstraction of notions. Bacon does not identify experience with everyday experience, but presupposes that method corrects and extends sense-data into facts, which go together with his setting up of tables (tables of presence and of absence and tables of comparison or of degrees, i.e., degrees of absence or presence). “Bacon's antipathy to simple enumeration as the universal method of science derived, first of all, from his preference for theories that deal with interior physical causes, which are not immediately observable” (Urbach 1987, 30; see: sect. 2). The last type can be supplemented by tables of counter-instances, which may suggest experiments:

To move from the sensible to the real requires the correction of the senses, the tables of natural history, the abstraction of propositions and the induction of notions. In other words, the full carrying out of the inductive method is needed. (Malherbe 1996, 85)

The sequence of methodical steps does not, however, end here, because Bacon assumes that from lower axioms more general ones can be derived (by induction). The complete process must be understood as the joining of the parts into a systematic chain. From the more general axioms Bacon strives to reach more fundamental laws of nature (knowledge of forms), which lead to practical deductions as new experiments or works (IV, 24–5). The decisive instruments in this process are the middle or ‘living axioms,’ which mediate between particulars and general axioms. For Bacon, induction can only be efficient if it is eliminative by exclusion, which goes beyond the remit of induction by simple enumeration. The inductive method helps the human mind to find a way to ascertain truthful knowledge.

Novum Organum , I, Aphorism CXV (Bacon IV [1901], 103) ends the “pulling down” of “the signs and causes of the errors” within the sciences, achieved by means of three refutations, which constituted the condition for a rational introduction of method: refutation of ‘natural human reason’ (idols); refutation of ‘demonstrations’ (syllogisms) and refutation of ‘theories’ (traditional philosophical systems).

The Second Part of the Novum Organum deals with Bacon's rule for interpreting nature, even if he provides no complete or universal theory. He contributes to the new philosophy by introducing his tables of discovery ( Inst. Magna , IV), by presenting an example of particulars ( Inst. Magna , II), and by observations on history ( Inst. Magna , III). It is well known that he worked hard in the last five years of his life to make progress on his natural history, knowing that he could not always come up to the standards of legitimate interpretation.

Bacon's method presupposes a double starting-point: empirical and rational. True knowledge is acquired if we want to proceed from a lower certainty to a higher liberty and from a lower liberty to a higher certainty. The rule of certainty and liberty in Bacon converges with his repudiation of the old logic of Aristotle, which determined true propositions by the criteria of generality, essentiality, and universality. Bacon rejects anticipatio naturae (“anticipation of nature”) in favor of interpretatio naturae (“interpretation of nature”), which starts with the collecting of facts and their methodical (inductive) investigation, shunning entanglement in pure taxonomy (as in Ramism), which establishes the order of things (Urbach 1987, 26; see also Foucault 1966 [1970]), but does not produce knowledge. For Bacon, making is knowing and knowing is making (Bacon IV [1901], 109–10). In accordance with the maxim “command nature … by obeying her” (Sessions 1996, 136; Gaukroger 2001, 139ff.), the exclusion of superstition, imposture, error, and confusion are obligatory. Bacon introduces variations into “the maker's knowledge tradition” as the discovery of the forms of a given nature lead him to develop his method for acquiring factual and proven knowledge.

Bacon argues against “anticipation of nature”, which he regards as a conservative method, leading to theories that recapitulate the data without producing new ones conducive to the growth of knowledge. Moreover, such theories are considered to be final, so that they are never replaced.

“Anticipation of nature” resembles “conventionalism” (Urbach 1987, 30–41), according to which theories refer to unobservable entities (e.g., atoms, epicycles). The theories are “computation rules” or “inference licences” within this given framework, which give explanations and predictions of particular kinds of observable events. The conventionalist acceptance of making predictions concerning future events cannot be separated from the question of probability. Bacon's procedure of knowledge acquisition goes against “conventionalism”, because “anticipation of nature” does not reject authoritative and final speculations concerning “unobservables” and because it permits “ad hoc adjustments”. Nowadays, however,

philosophers would not accept the idea that just because we can't observe something directly … it follows that there is no such thing. (Huggett 2010, 82. See also Von Weizsäcker and Juilfs 1958, pp.67–70; Rae 1986 [2000], 1–27 and passim)

Conventionalist deep-level theories of the world are chosen from among alternative ways of observing phenomena. Although theories revealing the world structure are not directly provable or disprovable by means of observation or experiment, conventionalists might maintain their chosen theory even in the face of counter-evidence. They therefore avoid changes of theory. Any move to a new theory is not taken on the basis of new evidence, but because a new theory seems to be simpler, more applicable or more beautiful. Laws of nature are generally understood as being unrevisable (O'Hear 1995, 165). The famous debate, sparked by Thomas Kuhn, on paradigmatic and non-paradigmatic science and theory is relevant here. Bacon's position—open to scientific progress—is nearer to Kuhn than to Duhem or Poincaré. For Bacon, “anticipation of nature” (as a mode of “conventionalism”) produces obstacles to the progress of knowledge. Traditional methods shun speculation concerning things which are not immediately visible; Bacon's speculation, however, is an element of “interpretation of nature”. He presupposes hypothetical theories, but these do not go beyond the collected data. His acceptance of hypotheses is connected with his rejection of “ anticipation of nature”. Thus, hypotheses are related to the axioms of “interpretation of nature”, which go beyond the original data. The amount of established facts is not identical with that of possible data (Gillies 1998, 307). Anticipation is rejected, only if it “flies from the senses and particulars to the most general axioms” (OFB XI, xxv). Because of the dangers of premature generalization, Bacon is careful about speculations and rigorously rejects any dogmatic defense of them and the tendency to declare them infallible.

…the philosophy that we now possess clutches to its breast certain tenets with which (if we look into it carefully) they want wholly to conceive men that nothing difficult, nothing with real power and influence over nature, should be expected from art or human effort; […] These things, if we examine them minutely, tend wholly towards a wicked circumscription of human power and an intentional and unnatural despair which not only confounds the presages of hope but breaks every nerve and spur of industry, and throws away the chances afforded by experience itself—while all they care about is that their art be considered perfect, expending their effort to achieve the most foolish and bankrupt glory of having it believed that whatever has not been found out or understood so far cannot be found out or understood in the future. (OFB XI, 141)

Bacon sees nature as an extremely subtle complexity, which affords all the energy of the natural philosopher to disclose her secrets.

For him, new axioms must be larger and wider than the material from which they are taken. At the same time, “interpretation of nature” must not leap to remote axioms. In terms of his method, he rejects general ideas as simple abstractions from very few sense perceptions. Such abstract words may function as conventions for organizing “new observations”, but only in the sense of means for taxonomical order. Such a sterile procedure is irrelevant for “interpretation of nature”, which is not final or infallible and is based on the insight that confirming hypotheses do not provide strict proofs. Bacon's method is therefore characterized by openness:

Nevertheless, I do not affirm that nothing can be added to what I prescribe; on the contrary, as one who observes the mind not only in its innate capacity but also insofar as it gets to grips with things, it is my conviction that the art of discovering will grow as the number of things discovered will grow. (OFB, XI, 197)

Peter Urbach's commentary exactly underlines Bacon's openness:

He believed that theories should be advanced to explain whatever data were available in a particular domain. These theories should preferably concern the underlying physical, causal mechanisms and ought, in any case, to go beyond the data which generated them. They are then tested by drawing out new predictions, which, if verified in experience, may confirm the theory and may eventually render it certain, at least in the sense that it becomes very difficult to deny. (Urbach 1987, 49)

Bacon was no seventeenth-century Popperian. Rather, on account of his theory of induction, he was:

the first great theorist of experimentalism”: “the function of experiment was both to test theories and to establish facts” (Rees, in OFB XI, xli). Encyclopaedic repetition with an Aristotelian slant is being displaced by original compilation in which deference to authority plays no part whatever. Individual erudition is being dumped in favour of collective research. Conservation of traditional knowledge is being discarded in the interest of a new, functional realization of natural history, which demands that legenda —things worth reading—be supplanted by materials which will form the basis of a thoroughgoing attempt to improve the material conditions of the human race. (Rees, in OFB XI, xlii)

Form is for Bacon a structural constituent of a natural entity or a key to its truth and operation, so that it comes near to natural law, without being reducible to causality. This appears all the more important, since Bacon—who seeks out exclusively causes which are necessary and sufficient for their effects—rejects Aristotle's four causes (his four types of explanation for a complete understanding of a phenomenon) on the grounds that the distribution into material, formal, efficient, and final causes does not work well and that they fail to advance the sciences (especially the final, efficient, and material causes). Consider again the passage quoted in Section 3.3:

There are and can be only two ways of searching into and discovering truth. The one flies from the senses and particulars to the most general axioms, and from these principles, the truth of which it takes for settled and immovable, proceeds to judgment and to the discovery of middle axioms. And this way is now in fashion. The other derives axioms from the senses and particulars, rising by a gradual and unbroken ascent, so that it arrives at the most general axioms at last. This is the true way, but as yet untried. (Bacon IV [1901], 50: Novum Organum , I, Aphorism XIX).

Since for Bacon the formal necessity of the syllogism does not suffice to set up first principles, his method comprises two basic tasks: (1) the discovery of forms, and (2) the transformation of concrete bodies. The discovery from every case of generation and motion refers to a latent process according to which efficient and material causes lead to forms; but there is also the discovery of latent configurations of bodies at rest and not in motion (Bacon IV [1901], 119–20).

Bacon's new mode of using human understanding implies a parallelism between striving towards human power and constituting human knowledge. Technical know-how leads to successful operations, which converge with the discovery of forms (Pérez-Ramos 1988, 108; Bacon IV [1901], 121). To understand the workings of nature presupposes an arrangement of facts which makes the investigative analysis of cause and effect possible, especially by means of new experiments. At this point the idea of scientia operativa comes in again, since the direction for a true and perfect rule of operation is parallel to the discovery of a true form. Bacon's specific non-Aristotelian Aristotelianism (Pérez-Ramos 1988, 113, 115) is one of the main features of his theory. Other indispensable influences on Bacon, apart from a modified version of Aristotle, are critically assessed Hermeticism, rhetoric (Vickers) and alchemy (Rees).

Two kinds of axioms correspond to the following division of philosophy and the sciences: the investigation of forms or metaphysics ; and the investigation of efficient cause and matter, which leads to the latent process and configuration in physics . Physics itself is split up by Bacon into Mechanics , i.e., the practical, and Magic , i.e., the metaphysical.

Nowadays the view that Bacon “made little first-hand contribution to science” (Hesse 1964, 152) no longer coincides with the opinion that we have to assume an underestimation of the “place of hypothesis and mathematics” in his work (Urban 1987; Sessions 1999, 139; Rees 1986). But there were few doubts in the past that Bacon “encouraged detailed and methodical experimentation” (Hesse 1964, 152); and he did this on account of his new inductive method, which implied the need for negative instances and refuting experiments. Bacon saw that confirming instances could not suffice to analyze the structure of scientific laws, since this task presupposed a hypothetical-deductive system, which, according to Lisa Jardine, is closely connected to “the logical and linguistic backgrounds from which Bacon's New Logic proceeds …” (Sessions 1999, 140; Jardine 1974, 69ff.).

Bacon's interpretation of nature uses “Tables and Arrangements of Instances” concerning the natural phenomena under investigation, which function as a necessary condition for cracking the code of efficient causation. His prerogative instances are not examples or phenomena simply taken from nature but rather imply information with inductive potential which show priority conducive to knowledge or to methodological relevance when inserted into tables. The instances do not represent the order of sensible things, but instead express the order of qualities (natures). These qualities provide the working basis for the order of abstract natures. Bacon's tables have a double function: they are important for natural history , collecting the data on bodies and virtues in nature; and they are also indispensable for induction , which makes use of these data.

Already in Temporis Partus Masculus (1603) Bacon had displayed a “facility of shrewd observation” (Sessions 1999, 60) concerning his ideas on induction. In his Novum Organum the nature of all human science and knowledge was seen by him as proceeding most safely by negation and exclusion, as opposed to affirmation and inclusion. Even in his early tracts it was clear to Bacon that he had to seek a method of discovering the right forms, the most well known of which was heat ( Novum Organum II, Aph. XI–XII) or “the famous trial investigation of the form of heat” (Rees 2000, 66; see Bacon IV [1901], 154–5).

In his “[m]ethod of analysis by exclusion” (Sessions 1999, 141), negation proved to be “one of Bacon's strongest contributions to modern scientific method” (Wright 1951, 152). Most important were his tables of degrees and of exclusion. They were needed for the discovery of causes, especially for supreme causes, which were called forms. The method of induction works in two stages:

• Learned experience from the known to the unknown has to be acquired, and the tables (of presence, absence, degrees) have to be set up before their interpretation can take place according to the principle of exclusion. After the three tables of the first presentation have been judged and analyzed, Bacon declares the First Vintage or the first version of the interpretation of nature to be concluded.
• The second phase of the method concentrates on the process of exclusion. The aim of this procedure is the reduction of the empirical character of experience, so that the analysis converges with an anatomy of things. Here, too, tables of presence and of absence are set up. The research work proper consists of finding the relationship of the two natures of qualities. Here exclusion functions as the process of determination. Bacon's method starts from material determination in order to establish the formal determination of real causes, but does not stop there, because it aims at the progressive generalization of causes. Here, again, the central element of the inductive method is the procedure of exclusion.

Forms, as the final result of the methodical procedure, are:

nothing more than those laws and determinations of absolute actuality which govern and constitute any simple nature, as heat, light, weight, in every kind of matter and subject that is susceptible of them (Bacon IV [1901], 145–6);

They are not identical with natural law, but with definitions of simple natures (elements) or ultimate ingredients of things from which the basic material structure has been built (Gaukroger 2001, 140). Forms are the structures constituted by the elements in nature (microphysics). This evokes a cross-reference to Bacon's atomism, which has been called the “constructivist component” (Pérez-Ramos 1988, 116) of his system, including an alchemical theory about basic kinds of matter. He aims at “understanding the basic structures of things … as a means to transforming nature for human purposes” (Gaukroger 2001, 140; Clericuzio 2000, 78ff.); and thus he “ends” the unfinished Novum Organum with a list of things which still have to be achieved or with a catalogue of phenomena which are important and indispensable for a future natural history.

Historians of science, with their predilection for mathematical physics, used to criticize Bacon's approach, stating that “the Baconian concept of science, as an inductive science, has nothing to do with and even contradicts today's form of science” (Malherbe 1996, 75). In reaching this verdict, however, they overlooked the fact that a natural philosophy based on a theory of matter cannot be assessed on the grounds of a natural philosophy or science based on mechanics as the fundamental discipline. One can account for this chronic mode of misunderstanding as a specimen of the paradigmatic fallacy (Gaukroger 2001, 134ff.; see Rees 1986).

Bacon came to the fundamental insight that facts cannot be collected from nature, but must be constituted by methodical procedures, which have to be put into practice by scientists in order to ascertain the empirical basis for inductive generalizations. His induction, founded on collection, comparison, and exclusion of factual qualities in things and their interior structure, proved to be a revolutionary achievement within natural philosophy, for which no example in classical antiquity existed. His scala intellectus has two contrary movements “upwards and downwards: from axiomata to experimenta and opera and back again” (Pérez-Ramos 1988, 236). Bacon's induction was construed and conceived as an instrument or method of discovery. Above all, his emphasis on negative instances for the procedure of induction itself can claim a high importance with regard to knowledge acquisition and has been acclaimed as an innovation by scholars of our time. Some have detected in Bacon a forerunner of Karl Popper in respect of the method of falsification. Finally, it cannot be denied that Bacon's methodological program of induction includes aspects of deduction and abstraction on the basis of negation and exclusion. Contemporary scholars have praised his inauguration of the theory of induction. This theory has been held in higher esteem since the 1970s than it was for a long period before (see the work of Rees, Gaukroger and Pérez-Ramos 1988, 201–85). Nevertheless, it is doubtful that Bacon's critics, who were associated with the traditions of positivism and analytical philosophy, acquired sufficient knowledge of his writings to produce solid warrants for their criticisms (Cohen 1970, 124–34; Cohen 1985, 58ff.; on the general problem of induction see, e.g., Hempel 1966; Swinburne (ed.) 1974; Lambert and Brittan 1979 [1987]). In comparison to the neglect of Bacon in the twentieth century, a more recent and deeper assessment of his work has arisen in connection with the “Oxford Francis Bacon” project, which was launched in the late 1990s by Graham Rees, who directed it until his death in 2009; it is now under the general editorship of Brian Vickers.

In Bacon's thought we encounter a relation between science and social philosophy, since his ideas concerning a utopian transformation of society presuppose an integration into the social framework of his program concerning natural philosophy and technology as the two forms of the maker's knowledge. From his point of view, which was influenced by Puritan conceptions, early modern society has to make sure that losses caused by the Fall are compensated for, primarily by man's enlargement of knowledge, providing the preconditions for a new form of society which combines scientia nova and the millennium, according to the prophecy of Daniel 12:4 (Hill 1971, 85–130). Science as a social endeavor is seen as a collective project for the improvement of social structures. On the other hand, a strong collective spirit in society may function as a conditio sine qua non for reforming natural philosophy. Bacon's famous argument that it is wise not to confound the Book of Nature with the Book of God comes into focus, since the latter deals with God's will (inscrutable for man) and the former with God's work, the scientific explanation or appreciation of which is a form of Christian divine service. Successful operations in natural philosophy and technology help to improve the human lot in a way which makes the hardships of life after the Fall obsolete. It is important to note that Bacon's idea of a—to a certain extent—Christian society by no means conveys Christian pessimism in the vein of patristic thinkers but rather displays a clear optimism as the result of compounding the problem of truth with the scope of human freedom and sovereignty (Brandt 1979, 21).

With regard to Bacon's Two Books—the Book of God and the Book of Nature—one has to keep in mind that man, when given free access to the Book of Nature, should not content himself with merely reading it. He also has to find out the names by which things are called. If man does so, not only will he be restored to his status a noble and powerful being, but the Book of God will also lose importance, from a traditional point of view, in comparison to the Book of Nature. This is what Blumenberg referred to as the “asymmetry of readability” (Blumenberg 1981, 86–107). But the process of reading is an open-ended activity, so that new knowledge and the expansion of the system of disciplines can no longer be restricted by concepts such as the completeness and eternity of knowledge (Klein 2004a, 73).

According to Bacon, the Book of God refers to his will, the Book of Nature to his works. He never gives a hint in his works that he has concealed any message of unbelief for the sophisticated reader; but he emphasized: (1) that religion and science should be kept separate and, (2) that they were nevertheless complementary to each other. For Bacon, the attack of theologians on human curiosity cannot be founded on a rational basis. His statement that “all knowledge is to be limited by religion, and to be referred to use and action” (Bacon III [1887], 218) does not express a general verdict on theoretical curiosity, but instead provides a normative framework for the tasks of science in a universal sense. Already in the dedicatory letter to James I in his Advancement of Learning , Bacon attacks “the zeal and jealousy of divines” (Bacon III, 264) and in his manuscript Filum Labyrinthi of 1607, he “thought … how great opposition and prejudice natural philosophy had received by superstition, and the immoderate and blind zeal of religion” (Bacon VI [1863], 421). As Calvin had done long before him in the Institutes , Bacon stated that since God created the physical world, it was a legitimate object of man's knowledge, a conviction which he illustrated with the famous example of King Solomon in The Advancement of Learning (Zagorin 1999, 49–50; see also Kocher 1953, 27–8). Bacon praises Solomon's wisdom, which seems to be more like a game than an example of man's God-given thirst for knowledge:

The glory of God is to conceal a thing, but the glory of the king is to find it out; as if, according to the innocent play of children, the Divine Majesty took delight to hide his works, to the end to have them found out; and as if kings could not obtain a greater honour than to be God's playfellows in that game, considering the great commandment of wits and means, whereby nothing needeth to be hidden from them. (Bacon III [1887], 299; Blumenberg, 1973, 196–200)

From this perspective, the punishment of mankind on account of the very first disobedience by Adam and Eve can be seen in a different light from that of theological interpretations. In Bacon's view, this disobedience and its consequences can be remedied in two ways: (1) by religion and moral imperatives, and (2) by advancement in the arts and sciences: “the purpose in advancing arts and sciences is the glory of God and the relief of man's estate” (Wormald 1993, 82).

The two remedies, which are interconnected with the moral dimension, refer to the advancement of learning and religion. All three together (the advancement of learning, religion, and morality) are combined in such a way that they promote each other mutually; consequently, limited outlooks on coping with life and knowledge are ruled out completely in these three fields.

The ethical dimension of Bacon's thought has been underrated by generations of scholars. Time and again a crude utilitarianism has been derived from Book I, Aphorism 1 of the Novum Organum ; this cannot, however, withstand a closer analysis of his thought. Since Bacon's philosophy of science tries to answer the question of how man can overcome the deficiencies of earthly life resulting from the Fall, he enters the realm of ethical reflection. The improvement of mankind's lot by means of philosophy and science does not start from a narrow utilitarian point of view, involving sheer striving for profit and supporting the power or influence of select groups of men, but instead emphasizes the construction of a better world for mankind, which might come into existence through the ascertaining of truths about nature's workings (Bacon III [1887], 242). Thus, the perspective of the universal in Bacon's ethical thought is given predominance. The range of science and technology in their ethical meaning transcends the realm of the application of tools and/or instruments, in so far as the aim is the transformation of whole systems. Since causality and finality can interact on the basis of human will and knowledge, a plurality of worlds becomes feasible (Bacon V [1889], 506–7). Moral philosophy is closely connected to ethical reflections on the relationship between the nature of virtues—habitual or innate?—and their use in life, privately and collectively. Any application of the principles of virtue presupposes for Bacon the education of the mind, so that we learn what is good and what should be attained (Gaukroger 2006, 204–5 and passim):

The main and primitive division of moral knowledge seemeth to be into the Exemplar or Platform of Good, and the Regimen of Culture of the Mind; the one describing the nature of good, the other prescribing rules how to subdue, apply, and accommodate the will of man thereunto (Bacon III [1887], 419).

So, already in his Advancement of Learning Bacon studied the nature of good and distinguished various kinds of good. He insisted on the individual's duty to the public. Private moral self-control and the concomitant obligations are relevant for behavior and action in society. One's ethical persona is connected to morality by reference to acceptable behaviour. Though what we can do may be limited, we have to muster our psychological powers and control our passions when dealing with ourselves and with others. We need to apply self-discipline and rational assessment, as well as restraining our passions, in order to lead an active moral life in society.

Thus, for Bacon, the acquisition of knowledge does not simply coincide with the possibility of exerting power. Scientific knowledge is a condition for the expansion and development of civilization. Therefore, knowledge and charity cannot be kept separate:

I humbly pray … that knowledge being now discharged of that venom which the serpent infused into it, and which makes the mind of man to swell, we may not be wise above measure and sobriety, but cultivate truth in charity…. Lastly, I would address one general admonition to all; that they consider what are the true ends of knowledge, and that they seek it not either for pleasure of the mind, or for contention, or for superiority to others, or for profit, or fame, or power, or any of these inferior things; but for the benefit and use of life; and that they perfect and govern it in charity. For it was from the lust of power that the angels fell, from lust of knowledge that man fell; but of charity there can be no excess, neither did angel or man ever come in danger by it (Bacon IV [1901], 20f.: Instauratio Magna , Preface).

Finally, the view that Bacon's Nova Atlantis “concerns a utopian society that is carefully organized for the purposes of scientific research and virtuous living” (Urbach 1988, 10) holds true for his entire life's work. In Nova Atlantis, social, political, and scholarly life are all organized according to the maxim of efficiency; but the House of Solomon is a separate and highly esteemed institution for research, which nevertheless is closely connected to the overall system of Bensalem. In his utopian state, Bacon presents a thoroughgoing collective life in society and science, both of which are based on revealed religion. Religion—Christian in essence—is not dogmatic, but it instills into the people of Bensalem veneration for the wise and morally exemplary members of society, and—which is of the utmost importance—the strictest sense of discipline (Gaukroger 2001, 128–30). Discipline is indispensable for those involved in the religious life as well as for the researchers, since both must proceed methodically. The isomorphic structures of nature and science, on the one hand, society and religion, on the other, prescribe patterns of political procedure, social processes, and religious attitudes, which overcome any craving for individuality. If religion and scientific research are both shown as truthful in Bensalem, then, according to Bacon, the imagination functions as a means of illustrating scientific revelation: “Bacon's purpose is … to show that scientific research properly pursued is not inconsonant with religious propriety and social stability…” (Bierman 1963, 497). The scientists in Bensalem are sacred searchers for truth: ethics, religion, and science merge. Bacon's parabolic strategy, which we should not separate from the power of the idols, enables him to make much of his trick of introducing new ideas like a smuggler: his colored wares are smuggled into the minds of his readers by being visualized in terms of sacred and highly symbolic rituals (Peltonen 1996, 175). Science and religion are separated in Nova Atlantis, but they are also interrelated through the offices of the society of Bensalem. What Bacon obviously wants to make clear to his readers is that the example of Bensalem should free them from any fear that scientific progress will lead to chaos and upheaval. This crucial point has made by Jürgen Mittelstrass, who understands Bacon's Nova Atlantis as a utopia and regards utopias as

blueprints of practical reason, not of theoretical, that is: they set in exactly there, where the early modern idea of progress appears meagre with regards to the contents: within ethics and political theory. (Mittelstrass 1960, 369)

• 1857–74, The Works , edited by J. Spedding, R. L. Ellis, and D. D. Heath, 14 vols. London.
• 1861, The Works , edited by J. Spedding, R. L. Ellis, and D. D. Heath, 15 vols. Boston: Taggard and Thompson.
• 1861–74, The Letters and the Life of Francis Bacon , edited by J. Spedding, 7 vols. London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts.
• 1889–1901, The Works , edited by J. Spedding, R. L. Ellis, and D. D. Heath. Volumes I (1889), II (1887), III (1887), IV (1901), V (1889), VI (1890), VII (1892).
• 1898, Novum Organum or True Suggestions for the Interpretation of Nature , London and New York.
• 1958, Essays , intr. by O. Smeaton. London and New York.
• 1962, The Advancement of Learning , edited by G. W. Kitchin, London and New York: Dent.
• 1982, Neu Atlantis , transl. by G. Bugge, edited by Jürgen Klein, Stuttgart.
• 1996–, The Oxford Francis Bacon [OFB], General Editors: Graham Rees and Lisa Jardine; Brian Vickers; Oxford University Press. In order of publication: Volume VI (1996), Philosophical Studies c. 1611–c. 1619 , edited by G. Rees; Volume IV (2000), The Advancement of Learning , edited by M. Kiernan; Volume XIII (2000), The Instauratio Magna: Last Writings , edited by G. Rees; Volume XV (2000), The Essayes or Counsels, Civill and Morall edited by M. Kiernan; Volume XI (2004), The Instauratio Magna: Part II. Novum Organum , edited by G. Rees and M. Wakely; Volume XII (2007), The Instauratio Magna. Part 3, Historia naturalis et experimentalis, Historia ventorum and Historia vitæ & mortis , edited by G. Rees and M. Wakely; Volume VIII (2011), The Historie of the Raigne of King Henry the Seuenth and Other Works of the 1620s , edited by M. Kiernan.
• 2000, A Critical Edition of the Major Works , edited by Brian Vickers. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
• Anderson, F. H., 1948, The Philosophy of Francis Bacon , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Bierman, J., 1963, “Science and Society in the New Atlantis and other Renaissance Utopias”, PMLA , 78(5): 492–500.
• Blumenberg, H., 1973, Der Prozess der theoretischen Neugierde , Frankfurt am Main.
• Bowen, C. D., 1963 [1993], Francis Bacon. The Temper of a Man , New York: Fordham University Press. First edition 1963, Boston: Little, Brown.
• Brandt, R., 1979, “Francis Bacon, Die Idolenlehre”, in Grundprobleme der großen Philosophen. Philosophie der Neuzeit I , edited by Josef Speck. Göttingen, pp. 9–34.
• Burtt, E. A., 1924 [1932], The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science , London. First Edition, April 1924; Second Edition (revised) January 1932; reprinted 1972.
• Cassirer, E., 1922 [reprint 1994], Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der Neueren Zeit , Darmstadt.
• Clericuzio, A., 2000, Elements, Principles, and Corpuscles , Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Dampier, W. C., 1929 [1948], A History of Science and its relations with Philosophy and Religion , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fourth edition, 1948; reprinted with postscript by I. Bernard Cohen 1966.
• Dijksterhuis, E. J., 1969, The Mechanization of the World Picture , Oxford.
• Farrington, B., 1964, The Philosophy of Francis Bacon , Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
• Fischer, K., 1923, Francis Bacon und seine Schule , Entwicklungsgeschichte der Erfahrungsphilosophie , Heidelberg.
• Gaukroger, S., 2001, Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Early-Modern Philosophy , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• –––, 2006, The Emergence of a Scientific Culture. Science and the Shaping of Modernity 1210–1685 , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Giglioni, G., 2011, Francesco Bacone , Rome.
• Henry, J., 2002, Knowledge is Power. Francis Bacon and the Method of Science , Cambridge: Icon Books.
• Hesse, M. B., 1964, “Francis Bacon's Philosophy of Science”, in A Critical History of Western Philosophy , edited by D. J. O'Connor, New York: Free Press, pp. 141–52.
• Hill, C., 1965, Intellectual Origins of the English Revolution , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Jardine, L., 1974, Francis Bacon. Discovery and the Art of Discourse , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Jardine, L. and A. Stewart, 1999, Hostage to Fortune. The Troubled Life of Francis Bacon 1561–1626 , London: Victor Gollancz.
• Kargon, R. H., 1966, Atomism in England , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Klein, J., 1984, Radikales Denken in England: Neuzeit , Frankfurt, Berne and New York.
• –––, 1987, Francis Bacon oder die Modernisierung Englands , Hildesheim, Zurich and New York.
• –––, 2003a “Bacon's Quarrel with the Aristotelians”, Zeitsprünge , 7: 19–31.
• –––, 2003b, “Francis Bacon (1561–1626)”, in Metzler Philosophen Lexikon , B. Lutz (ed.), Stuttgart.
• –––, 2003c, “Nachwort”, in Francis Bacon, Neu-Atlantis , Stuttgart, 64–9.
• –––, 2004a, “Francis Bacon's The Advancement of Learning . An Early Modern Programme for the Revision of the Systems of Disciplines”, in Scholarly Environments. Centres of Learning and Institutional Contexts 1560–1960 , edited by Alasdair A. MacDonald and Arend H. Huusen. Leuven, Paris, and Dudley, MA, pp. 65–73.
• –––, 2004b, “Francis Bacons Essays von 1597: Der politische Subtext”, in Against the Grain/Gegenden Strich gelesen. Studies in English and American Literature and Literary Theory. Festschrift für Wolfgang Wicht , Peter Drexler and Rainer Schnoor (eds.), Berlin, pp.201–223.
• –––, 2008, “Francis Bacon's Scientia Operativa , The Tradition of the Workshops, and the Secrets of Nature”, in Philosophies of Technology. Francis Bacon and His Contemporaries , Claus Zittel, Gisela Engel, Romano Nanni, and Nicole C. Karafyllis (eds.), Leiden and Boston, pp.21–49.
• –––, 2010, Elisabeth I und ihre Zeit , 2nd ed., Munich.
• Krohn, W., 1987, Francis Bacon , Munich.
• Lange, F. A., 1898, Geschichte des Materialismus , Bd 1. Leipzig.
• Losee, J., 1972, A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Malherbe, M., 1996, “Bacon's Method of Science”, in Peltonen (ed.) 1996, pp. 75–98.
• Martin, J., 1992, Francis Bacon, the State, and the Reform of Natural Philosophy , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Mathews, N., 1996, Francis Bacon. The History of a Character Assassination , New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
• Matthews, S., 2008, Theology and Science in the Thought of Francis Bacon , Aldershot: Ashgate.
• Mittelstrass, J., 1960, Neuzeit und Aufklärung. Studien zur Entstehung der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaft und Philosophie , Berlin and New York.
• Peltonen, M. (ed.), 1996, The Cambridge Companion to Bacon , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Peltonen, M., 2007, “Bacon; Francis, Viscount St Alban (1561–1626)”, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
• Pérez-Ramos, A., 1988, Francis Bacon's Idea of Science and the Maker's Knowledge Tradition , Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Price, B. (ed.), 2002, Francis Bacon's New Atlantis. New Interdisciplinary Essays , Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press.
• Quinton, A., 1980, Francis Bacon , Oxford, Toronto, and Melbourne: Hill and Wang.
• Rees, G., 1975a,b, “Francis Bacon's Semi-Paracelsian Cosmology”, Ambix , XXII: 82–101; 165–73.
• –––, 1977, “Matter Theory: A Unifying factor in Bacon's Natural Philosophy?”, Ambix , XXIV: 110–25.
• –––, 1980, “Atomism and ‘Subtlety’ in Francis Bacon's Philosophy”, Annals of Science , XXXVII: 549–71.
• –––, 1985, “Quantitative Reasoning in Francis Bacon's Natural Philosophy”, Nouvelle de la republique des lettres : 27–48.
• –––, 1986, “Mathematics in Francis Bacon's Natural Philosophy”, Revue internationale de philosophie , 159(4): 399–426.
• –––, 1996, “Bacon's Speculative Philosophy”, in Peltonen (ed.) 1996, pp.121–45.
• –––, 2000, “Francis Bacon (1561–1626)”, in W. Applebaum (ed.), Encyclopedia of the Scientific Revolution From Copernicus to Newton , New York and London, pp. 65– 69.
• –––, 2004, “On Francis Bacon's Originality”, ISIH: Intellectual News , 14: 69–73.
• Rees, G. and C. Upton, 1984, Francis Bacon's Natural Philosophy: A New Source. A transcription of manuscript Hardwick 72A with Translation and Commentary (The British Society for the History of Science Monographs, 5), Chalfont St Giles.
• Rossi, P., 1968, Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science , translated by S. Rabinovitch, London: University of Chicago Press.
• Schäfer, L., 1993, Das Bacon-Programm . Von der Erkenntnis , Nutzung und Schonung der Natur , Frankfurt am Main.
• Schmidt-Biggemann, W., 1983, Topica Universalis. Eine Modellgeschichte humanistischer und barocker Wissenschaft , Hamburg.
• Sessions, W. A. (ed.), 1990, Francis Bacon's Legacy of Texts , New York: AMS Press.
• –––, 1996, Francis Bacon Revisited , New York and London: Twayne Publishers.
• Urbach, P., 1987, Francis Bacon's Philosophy of Science: An Account and a Reappraisal , La Salle, IL: Open Court.
• Vickers, B., 1968a, Francis Bacon and Renaissance Prose , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• ––– (ed.), 1968b, Essential Articles for the Study of Francis Bacon , Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books.
• –––, 1978, Francis Bacon , Harlow: Longman Group.
• Webster, C., 1975, The Great Instauration. Science, Medicine, and Reform 1626–1660 , London: Duckworth.
• Zaller, R., 1971, The Parliament of 1621: A Study in Constitutional Conflict , Berkeley CA: University of California Press.
• Zagorin, P., 1999, Francis Bacon , Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Ayer, A. J., 1973, The Central Questions of Philosophy , London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
• Blumenberg, H., 1981, Die Lesbarkeit der Welt , Frankfurt am Main.
• Carnap, R. and W. Stegmüller, 1959, Induktive Logik und Wahrscheinlichkeit , Vienna.
• Cohen, I. B., 1985, Revolution in Science , Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
• Cohen, J. L., 1970, The Implications of Induction , London: Methuen.
• Curd, M. and J. A. Cover (eds.), 1998, Philosophy of Science. The Central Issues , London and New York: W.W. Norton.
• Dijksterhuis, E. J., 1956, Die Mechanisierung des Weltbildes , Berlin etc.
• Duhem, P., 1904–5, The Aims and Structure of Physical Theory , English translation by Philip P. Wiener, New York, 1954.
• –––, 1998, Ziel und Struktur der physikalischen Theorien , übersetzt von Friedrich Adler, mit einem Vorwort von Ernst Mach, herausgegeben mit einer Einleitung von Lothar Schäfer, Hamburg.
• Foucault, M., 1966 [1970], The Order of Things: The Archaeology of the Human Sciences , London: Tavistock; English translation 1970.
• Gillies, D., 1998, “The Duhem Thesis and the Quine Thesis”, in Curd and Cover 1998, pp. 302–319.
• Godfrey-Smith, P., 2003, Theory and Reality. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science , Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.
• Grant, E., 1994, Planets, Stars, & Orbs. The Medieval Cosmos 1200–1687 , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Haack, S., 1993, Evidence and Inquiry. Towards Reconstruction in Epistemology , Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
• Hacking, I. (ed.), 1981, Scientific Revolutions , Oxford: Oxford Univerity Press.
• Hempel, C. G., 1966, Philosophy of Natural Science , Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
• Huggett, N., 2010, Everywhere and Everywhen. Adventures in Physics and Philosophy , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hylton, P., 2010, “Willard Van Orman Quine”, in: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2010 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/quine/ >.
• Kocher, P. H., 1953, Science and Religion in Elizabethan England , San Marino, CA: Huntington Library.
• Kuhn, Th. S., 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Lakatos, I., 1970, “Falsificationism and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”, in Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge , edited by I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 91–196.
• –––, 1981, “History of Science and Its Rational reconstructions”, in Hacking (ed.) 1981, pp. 107–27.
• Lambert, K. and G. C. Brittan, 1979 [1987], An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science , Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview. Third edition 1987.
• Müller-Jahncke, W. D., 1985, Astrologisch-Magische Theorie in der Heilkunde der Frühen Neuzeit , Stuttgart.
• O'Hear, A., 1995, “Conventionalism”, in Oxford Companion to Philosophy , T. Honderich (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 165.
• Poincaré, H., 1905 [reprint 1952], Science and Hypothesis , translated by W. J. Greenstreet, New York: Dover Publications.
• Popper, K. R., 1969, Logik der Forschung , Tübingen, 3 rd edition.
• Quine, W. V. Q., 1951, “Two Dogmas of Empiricism”, The Philosophical Review 60: 20–43. Reprinted in Quine, 1963, From a Logical Point of View , New York: Harper Torchbook, pp. 20–46.
• Rae, A. I. M., 1986 [2000], Quantum physics: Illusion or Reality? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Fourth Canto edition, 2000.
• Russell, B., 1948, Human Knowledge. Its Scope and its Limits , London: Allen & Unwin.
• Schäfer, L., 1998, “Duhems Bedeutung für die Entwicklung der Wissenschaftstheorie”, in: Duhem (1998), pp. X–XXXIII.
• Shell, H. R., 2004, “Casting Life, Recasting Experience: Bernard Palissy's Occupation between Maker and Nature”, Configurations , 12(1): 1–40.
• Stegmüller, W., 1973, Probleme und Resultate der Wissenschaftstheorie und Analytischen Philosophie, Band II: Theorie und Erfahrung. Zweiter Halbband. Theorienstruktur und Theoriendynamik , Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.
• Swinburne, R. (ed.), 1974, The Justification of Induction , Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Von Weizsäcker, C. F. and J. Juilfs, 1958, Physik der Gegenwart , Göttingen.
• Wright, G. H. von, 1951, A Treatise of Induction and Probability , London: Routledge and K. Pau.
• Zinner, E., 1988, Entstehung und Ausbreitung der copernicanischen Lehre , Munich.

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Francis Bacon , entry by David Simpson in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy .

[Please contact the author with other suggestions.]

Aristotelianism: in the Renaissance | Boyle, Robert | induction: problem of | Whewell, William

Acknowledgments

Some of the passages in this entry are borrowed from Klein 2008.

Copyright © 2012 by Jürgen Klein

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

• Privacy Policy
• Terms and Conditions

Poets and Writers

Short stories, literary essays, india today english lit 1, francis bacon, the father of english essays—his prose style, introduction: .

Bacon is regarded as the father of English essays. The great title is attributed to him on the ground of his great contribution to English essay. But the term father gives the sense of the originator also. In this sense this title seems unjustified, because there was essay even before Bacon. But the form was different. It was a sort of lecture given by a great scholar to display his learning. Under the impression the readers are fools. Bacon gave a new direction to English essay. He made the essay a form to discuss topics of day to day life. It was the period of Renaissance. Therefore, Bacon wrote essays on the problems related to his contemporary society. It is his universality that his thoughts are of great importance even in this computer age.

Bacon's Contribution to the English Essay: 

Bacon's contribution to English essay can never be overvalued. Bacon has dedicated his essays to the Duke of Buckingham. There is a long list of Bacon's essays. The most important of these are: Of Truth, Of Death, Of Unity in Religion, Of Revenge, Of Adversity, Of Simulation and Dissimulation. Of Parents and Children, Of Marriage and Single Life, Of Envy, Of Love, Of Great Place, Of Boldness, Of Goodness and Goodness of Nature, Of Nobility, Of Seditions and Troubles, Of Atheism , Of Superstition, Of Travel, Of Empire, Of Counsel, Of Delays, Of Cunning, Of Wisdom for a Man's Self, Of Innovations, Of Dispatch, Of Seeming Wise, Of Friendship, Of Expense, Of the True Greatness of Kingdoms and Estates, Of Regiment of Health, Of Suspicion, Of Discourse, Of Plantations, Of Riches, Of Prophecies, Of Ambition, Of Mosques and Triumphs, Of Nature in Men, Of Custom and Education, Of Fortune, Of Usury, Of Youth and Age, Of Beauty, Of Deformity, Of Building, Of Gardens, Of Negotiating, Of Followers and Friends, Of Suitors, Of Studies, Of Faction, Of Ceremonies and Respects. Of Praise, Of Vain - glory, Of Honour and Reputation, Of Judicature, Of Anger, Of Vicissitude of Things, Of Fame. Bacon's essays seem to justify what Pope says regarding him.

Great Ideas of Practical Wisdom: 

Bacon was a utilitarian. His essays are full of great ideas of practical wisdom. For example, throughout the essay of Studies, Bacon shows his practical wisdom and comprehensiveness. Generally people give importance to either technical knowledge or practical experience but Bacon recognizes importance to both and advises to consult an experienced man if the work is at a small scale, and technically trained or learned man for managing a work at a large scale . Generally people think studies are always useful but Bacon advises to avoid excess of studies. He recognises importance of natural talent, training and practical experience. Generally people think all books are equally important but Bacon advises to study books according to their importance. He recognises importance of original texts and notes. Generally people think that reading is the only way of learning but Bacon advises to give importance to conference and writing also. Bacon shows how different subjects affect our mind also. 

Clarity of Thought and Expression: 

Bacon's belief in clarity of thought and expression is well exposed in this essay when he adopts the device of classification. He classifies purposes of studies in three parts: 

“Studies serve for delight, for ornament, and for ability.”

He brings to light not only advantages of studiers but also its disadvantages that appear when studies are used in excess. Too much study for delight develops idleness; for ornamentation develops artificiality: to take decision wholly by their rules is a bookish approach becomes the whim of a learned man. Studies mature natural talent that is perfected by practical knowledge. Natural talent too requires pruning or trimming. Books express confusing or contradictory ideas that should be limited by experience. Wicked people oppose studies, common or foolish people admire them while wise people use them. 

“Crafty men condemn studies, simple men admire them, and wise men use them.” 

In the same way he classifies followers into two parts: 

1. Followers fit to be disliked 

2. Followers to be liked 

Aphoristic Style: 

Bacon is known for the use of aphoristic style. Of Revenge is an illustration of the compact style of Bacon. Most of the sentences are terse and have that aphoristic quality about them that he is famous for. This essay is a fine illustration of Bacon's style which was unmatchable for pith and pregnancy in the conveyance of his special kind of thought. He in this essay, as elsewhere, has structured out at once a short, crisp, and firmly knit sentence of a type unfamiliar in English pregnant with rich meaning.

Proverbial Style: 

Bacon's proverbial style enables him to make proverbial statements. Here are a few examples of the proverbial style of Bacon taken from Of Revenge: 

1. “For, as for the wrong, it does but offend the law; but the revenge of that kind putteth the law out of office.” 

2. “Therefore, they do but trifle with themselves that labour in past masters.” 

3. “But base and crafty towards are like the arrow that flieth in the dark.”  

4. “This is certain, that a man that studieth revenge, keeps his own wounds green, which otherwise would heal and do well.” 

Bacon's great wisdom enables him to express thoughts of universal importance. When he expresses these thoughts in aphoristic style so many sentences of the novel seem proverbial. It encourages him to make proverbial statements. The essay, ‘Of Studies’ for example opens with a proverbial statement: 

If anybody talks about studies, he refers to this statement necessarily. The essay is full of such statements that express a general thought which is true to all. 

“To spend too much time in studies is sloth. 

For natural abilities are like natural plants, that need pruning by study; 

They perfect nature, and are perfected by experienced. 

Crafty men condemn studies, simple men admire them, and wise men use them. 

Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested.” 

Poetic Style: 

Bacon's prose style so often becomes poetic. It is full of poetic imagery. So often he makes use of myth making and sensuous word pictures. The essay Of Followers and Friends opens with the image of a bird. 

“Costly followers are not to be liked; lest while a man maketh his train longer, he maketh his wings shorter.” 

Bacon borrows his images from common life. Bacon uses game imagery and nature imagery. 

“For lookers - on many times see more than gamesters; and the vale best discovereth the hill.” 

Bacon cites the imagery of a hill to confirm the former imagery of players. It suggests a paradox that sometimes, the players fail in knowing their faults but the spectators who remain watching their movements closely, mark the error. Image of a hill does not require any proof for it is a general truth that: 

“The vale best discovereth the hill.” 

Bacon uses water imagery for notes and guides: 

“Some books also may be read by deputy, and extracts made of arguments, and the meaner sort of books; else distilled books are, like common distilled waters, flashy things.” 

For and Against Arguments: 

It is Bacon's style that he introduces arguments for and against the subject. His arguments are always logical. For example, he points out advantages and disadvantages of treating people equally or differently. 

“It is a matter of practical wisdom that man of same rank must be treated equally. If one man is given preference, he becomes rude and others feel dissatisfied. But the case is somewhat different with an able man. He must be treated with respect. It makes the able man respectful to the master and inspires others to improve their ability.”

Bacon is a practical philosopher who does not believe in imposing his thoughts on others. He gives arguments for and against the subject and leaves it to the reader to conclude according to his requirement. For example, he points out advantages as well as disadvantages of studies and its three purposes. 

“Studies provide amusement; help in improving effectiveness of speech; and improve skill and perfection; their main purpose of giving amusement is when we are alone or taking rest. They give effectiveness to conversation or discussion. They make perfect in deciding or managing things. According to Bacon experienced man perform well in special parts. But suggestions of universal importance, details and management of business are done best by trained persons. But his discussion does not end here for incoming lines he warns against the disadvantages of making excessive use of studies. Bacon points out disadvantages of studies if done unwisely. Too much study for delight develops idleness; for ornamentation develops artificiality; to take decision wholly by their rules is a bookish approach becomes the whim of a learned man. Studies mature natural talent that is perfected by practical knowledge. Natural talent too requires pruning or trimming. Books express confusing or contradictory ideas that should be limited by experience. Wicked people oppose studies, common or foolish people admire them while wise people use them. How to use studies is a more important art that is attained by practical experience. Likewise on the one hand suggests reading of books and on the others pleads for natural talent. He points out advantages as well as disadvantages of experienced man. He suggests to read some books with the help of notes or extracts made by others.”

Use of References, Quotations and Latinism: 

As regards its style, this essay shows the usual qualities that are associated with Bacon. Bacon is fond of allusions, quotations, Latin phrases and expressions, and figures of speech. We have here a reference to Ulysses, a well-known hero of Greek mythology. There is a reference to the cruelty and hard - heartedness of Inquisitors who used to be employed to inflict punishment on heretics. There is a quotation from an ancient Greek philosopher, Thales who said, in reply to the question when a man should marry: “A young man not yet, an elder man not at all.” 

Thus, Bacon is rightly called the father of English essay. His contribution to the development of English essay is great. He gave a new style to English essay.

Saurabh Gupta

You may like these posts, social plugin, popular posts.

Joseph Addison’s Female Orators—Summary and Critical Analysis

Bacon’s Essay Of Regiment of Health: A Critical Study

Walt Whitman’s Poem On the Beach at Night—Summary and Critical Analysis

Joseph Addison’s Essay Popular Superstitions—Summary and Critical Analysis

• Charles Dickens
• Francis Bacon
• Jack London
• Jane Austen
• John Galsworthy
• Joseph Addison
• Walt Whitman
• William Shakespeare
• William Somerset Maugham
• O Captain! My Captain!
• Ode on A Grecian Urn
• On the Beach at Night
• Oliver Twist
• Pride and Prejudice
• The Family Reunion
• The Tempest
• Female Orators
• Popular Superstitions
• To Build A Fire
• Charles Dickens 4
• English Novels 7
• English Plays 12
• English Poetry 5
• English Short Stories 9
• Female Orators 1
• Francis Bacon 3
• Jack London 3
• Jane Austen 3
• John Galsworthy 5
• John Keats 2
• Joseph Addison 4
• Literary Essays 7
• O Captain! My Captain! 1
• Ode on A Grecian Urn 2
• Of Regiment of Health 1
• Of Studies 1
• Oliver Twist 4
• On the Beach at Night 1
• Poets and Writers 32
• Popular Superstitions 1
• Pride and Prejudice 2
• Salvatore 3
• T S Eliot 2
• The Family Reunion 2
• The Tempest 4
• To Build A Fire 3
• Walt Whitman 3
• William Shakespeare 8
• William Somerset Maugham 3

Most Recent

Footer Copyright

Contact form.

Search this blog

English literature.

For students and researchers of English

BACON AS AN ESSAYIST

Post a comment, popular posts, the bangle sellers by sarojini naidu: multiple choice questions with answers, dr. faustus as a spiritual tragedy, national education- mahatma gandhi by m.k. gandhi: multiple choice questions with answers.

'Of Studies' by Francis Bacon

Stock Montage / Getty Images

• An Introduction to Punctuation
• Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
• M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
• B.A., English, State University of New York

Francis Bacon, the first major English essayist , comments forcefully in Of Studies on the value of reading, writing, and learning.

Notice Bacon's reliance on parallel structures (in particular, tricolons ) throughout this concise, aphoristic  essay. Then, compare the essay to Samuel Johnson 's treatment of the same theme more than a century later in On Studies .

The Life of Francis Bacon

Francis Bacon is considered a Renaissance man. He worked as a lawyer and scientist throughout his life (1561-1626.)

Bacon's most valuable work surrounded philosophical and Aristotelian concepts that supported the scientific method. Bacon served as an attorney general as well as lord chancellor of England and received his education from several universities including Trinity College and the University of Cambridge.

Bacon wrote over 50 essays beginning with "Of" in the title and following the concept, such as Of Truth , Of Atheism and Of Discourse .

Bacon Facts

Bacon's uncle was the lord keeper for Queen Elizabeth I. He helped symbolize the approvals for key documents. Additionally:

• Bacon is known as the father of the scientific method which was influenced by his own Baconian method based on reason and observation.
• There are rumors that Bacon was mostly attracted to men, due to his late marriage in life, among other ​theories.

Interpretations of 'Of Studies'

Bacon's essay expresses several comments in Of Studies that can be interpreted as the following:

• Studying is helpful for better understanding and provides a knowledge that develops experience, as well as a character that grows.
• Reading provides delight and fun, ornament and showing off, and the ability for success.
• Bacon expanded upon different fields of study depending on one's goal; for example, to master clarity with language, study poetry.

'Of Studies' Excerpt

"Studies serve for delight, for ornament, and for ability. Their chief use for delight is in privateness and retiring; for ornament, is in discourse; and for ability, is in the judgment and disposition of business. For expert men can execute, and perhaps judge of particulars, one by one; but the general counsels, and the plots and marshalling of affairs, come best from those that are learned. To spend too much time in studies is sloth; to use them too much for ornament, is affectation; to make judgment wholly by their rules, is the humor of a scholar. They perfect nature, and are perfected by experience: for natural abilities are like natural plants, that need pruning, by study; and studies themselves do give forth directions too much at large, except they be bounded in by experience. Crafty men condemn studies, simple men admire them, and wise men use them; for they teach not their own use; but that is a wisdom without them, and above them, won by observation. Read not to contradict and confute; nor to believe and take for granted; nor to find talk and discourse; but to weigh and consider. Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested; that is, some books are to be read only in parts; others to be read, but not curiously; and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention. Some books also may be read by deputy, and extracts made of them by others; but that would be only in the less important arguments, and the meaner sort of books, else distilled books are like common distilled waters, flashy things. Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man. And therefore, if a man write little, he had need have a great memory; if he confer little, he had need have a present wit: and if he read little, he had need have much cunning, to seem to know that he doth not. Histories make men wise; poets witty; the mathematics subtle; natural philosophy deep; moral grave; logic and rhetoric able to contend. Abeunt studia in mores [Studies pass into and influence manners]. Nay, there is no stone or impediment in the wit but may be wrought out by fit studies; like as diseases of the body may have appropriate exercises. Bowling is good for the stone and reins; shooting for the lungs and breast; gentle walking for the stomach; riding for the head; and the like. So if a man’s wit be wandering, let him study the mathematics; for in demonstrations, if his wit be called away never so little, he must begin again. If his wit be not apt to distinguish or find differences, let him study the Schoolmen; for they are cymini sectores [splitters of hairs]. If he be not apt to beat over matters, and to call up one thing to prove and illustrate another, let him study the lawyers’ cases. So every defect of the mind may have a special receipt."

Bacon published three editions of his essays (in 1597, 1612, and 1625) and the last two were marked by the addition of more essays. In many cases, they became expanded works from earlier editions. This is the best-known version of the essay Of Studies , taken from the 1625 edition of  Essays or Counsels, Civil and Moral.

Version From the First Edition (1597)

"Studies serve for pastimes, for ornaments, for abilities; their chief use for pastimes is in privateness and retiring; for ornaments in discourse; and for ability in judgment; for expert men can execute, but learned men are more fit to judge and censure. To spend too much time in them is sloth; to use them too much for ornament is affectation; to make judgment wholly by their rules is the humor of a scholar; they perfect nature, and are themselves perfected by experience; crafty men contemn them, wise men use them, simple men admire them; for they teach not their use, but that there is a wisdom without them and above them won by observation. Read not to contradict nor to believe, but to weigh and consider. Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested: that is, some are to be read only in parts, others to be read but curiously, and some few to be read wholly with diligence and attention. Reading maketh a full man, conference a ready, and writing an exact man; therefore, if a man write little, he had need of a great memory; if he confer little, he had need of a present wit; and if he read little, he had need have much cunning to seem to know that he doth not know. Histories make wise men; poets witty; the mathematics subtle; natural philosophy deep; moral grave; logic and rhetoric able to contend."

• Thinking About Reading
• Rhetoric: Definitions and Observations
• Of Discourse by Francis Bacon
• Of Truth, by Francis Bacon
• Quotes About Time
• Of Travel by Francis Bacon
• Francis Bacon on Youth and Age
• Francis Bacon: "Of Parents and Children"
• Definition and Examples of Formal Essays
• On Rhetoric, or the Art of Eloquence, by Francis Bacon
• On Laziness by Christopher Morley
• What is a Familiar Essay in Composition?
• What Are the Different Types and Characteristics of Essays?
• style (rhetoric and composition)
• 5 Themes in the Works of John Ruskin
• What Is Enlightenment Rhetoric?

• liter pretation

Bacon and his Essays

Updated: Aug 1, 2023

Francis Bacon was an English philosopher, statesman, scientist, jurist, orator and author. He served as Lord high chancellor of England and Attorney General of England and Wales under the monarchy of King James I. He was born on 22 January 1561 and died on April 6 1626 . He is known as the Father of English Essay. He created the formal essay using his own simple yet philosophical and complex style

He was also the first writer to publish a collection of essays, which were so unique that its form became a genre in Literature. He belonged to the Renaissance and thus, many of his influential works were vastly impacted by the tenets of the Renaissance period. Bacon wrote prominent essays related to philosophical research, natural science and social status. In short, he has contributed to society by bringing about a clear distinction between Philosophy, Science and religion. He was the one who introduced a new way of writing and thinking.

Bacon's writing style is known for Aphoristic (a sentence formulated with truth and principle). His essays are to be read slowly, because of the compact and condensed thought. These are the number of lines that are read like proverbs, for example in the essay "Of Truth" Bacon says “A lie faces God and shrinks pleasure!” This aphoristic style always depends on the device of balance and antithesis. In the essay “ Of Studies " he says, 'Read not to contradict, nor to believe, but to weigh and consider”. He carefully presents both the advantages and disadvantages of a particular issue. He is also known for his usage of figures of speech. He is a master of simile and metaphor. In "Of Studies" , he says 'Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed and some few to be chewed and digested

He is also a master in using rhetoric and fruitfully expressed sentences. He was the one who set up a new method of prose writing, which was at once easy, simple, graceful, rhetorical, musical and condensed. Examples from "of Friendship" where he says 'For there is no man that importeth his joys to his friend, but he joyeth the more and no man that importeth his griefs to his friend, but he grievath the less' . An aphoristic sentence from "Of Simulation and Dissimulation" that “a habit of secrecy is both political and moral”

All his essay topics were drawn from both public and private life. In each case the essays cover their topics systematically from a number of different angles, weighing one argument against another. Though Bacon considered the Essays as "But as the recreation of my other studies", he was credited as pointing him be the Father of English Essays.

His "Essays" were published in three editions in Bacon's lifetime. Here are the lists of his tremendous works in Essays and the dates of their Publication. Of Truth (1625), Of Death (1612, enlarged 1625), Of Unity in Religion Of Religion (1612, rewritten 1625), Of Simulation and Dissimulation (1625), Of Parents and Children (1612, enlarged 1625), Of Envy (1625), Of Love (1612, rewritten 1625) Of Great Place (1612, Slightly enlarged 1625), Of Boldness (1625), Of Goodness and Goodness of Nature (1612, enlarged in 1625), Of Nobility (1612, rewritten 1625), of Seditions and Troubles (1625), Of Atheism (1612, slightly enlarged 1625), Of Superstition (1612, slightly enlarged 1625) Of Travel (1625). Of Empire (1612. much enlarged 1625). Of Counsels (1612, enlarged 1625), Of Delays (1625), Of Cunning (1612, rewritten 1625). Of Wisdom for a Man's self (1612, enlarged 1625) Of Innovations (1625). Of Dispatch (1612), Of Seeming Wise (1612). Of Friendship (1612, rewritten 1625) Of Expense (1597, enlarged 1612, again enlarged 1625), Of the True Greatness of Kingdoms and Estates (1612, enlarged 1625), Of Regiment of Health (1597, enlarged 1612, again enlarged 1625), Of Suspicion (1625). Of Discourse (1597, slightly enlarged 1612, again enlarged 1625), Of Plantations (1625), Of Riches (1612, much enlarged 1625), Of Prophecies (1625). Of Ambition (1612, enlarged 1625) Of Masques and Triumphs (1625), Of Nature in Men (1612, enlarges 1625), Of Custom and Education (1612, enlarges 1625), Of Usury (1625) Of Youth and Age (1612, slightly enlarged 1625), Of Beauty (1612, slightly enlarged 1625), Of Deformity (1612, somewhat altered 1625), Of Building (1625), Of Gardens (1625), Of Negotiating (1597, enlarged 1612, very slightly enlarged 1625). Of Followers and Friends (1597, slightly enlarged 1625), Of suitors (1597, enlarged 1625). Of faction (1597, much enlarged 1625). Of ceremonies and Respects (1597, enlarged 1625). Of praise (1612, enlarges 1625), Of Vain Glory (1612) Of Honour and reputation (1597, omitted 1612, republished 1625), Of Judicature (1612), Of Anger (1625), Of Vicissitude (1625), Of Fragment of an Essay of Fame, Of the Colours of Good and Evil

From all these topics, we could recognise Bacon as a wise man whose "Essays” are a treasure of World Philosophy. They teach us permanent moral principles that everyone must know obligatory. "Essays" has a list of helpful advice which did not lose its currency till today. His "Essays" are indebted to a number of sources, both literary and otherwise. Bacon was familiar with The Bible and took its teachings seriously. He was also familiar with many of the Greek and Latin classics, and his style was especially influenced by such writers as Seneca and Tacitus (rather than Cicero). Seneca and Tacitus favoured a kind of Writing often called "curt" (rudely brief). Cicero's writing, by contrast, was often long; complicated, and highly patterned. Phrases on the "curt" style were short; grammar was unconventional, and ideas often whizzed by quickly. Bacon liked lists, antithesis, and phrases involving three elements. Yet writers such as Tacitus and Seneca were only two significant influences on his style.

Bacon's wide reading of history allowed him to cite more recent examples to support his arguments. Thematically, Francis Bacon's Essays typically deal with Universal themes announced in their titles "Of Adversity", "Of Death" and "Of Beauty" are a few in which he used an Impersonal style when Philosophizing on these types of themes and avoided referencing his personal experiences. He often expressed his ideas in short, pithy phrases and intentionally avoided Grammar. He was also skilful at crafting a carefully balanced sentence structure using semicolons. His Essays are full of references to the classics.

Bacon has contributed to the development of the English prose when the bulk English prose was full of loose sentences of enormous length; he supplied at once short, crisp and firmly knit sentences of a type unfamiliar in English. He rejected the overcrowded imagery but knew how to light up his thoughts with well-placed figures. These essays are of endless interest and profit: The more one reads them, the more remarkable seem their compactness. According to Hugh Walker, Bacon took one of the longest steps overtaken in the evolution of the English prose style. It should be read slowly and thoughtfully, not for the style but because they are extremely condensed. Conciseness of expression and compactness are the most striking qualities of Bacon's style in his "Essays".

Bacon had a marvelous power of compressing his ideas in few words, which ordinary writers would express in several sentences, thus many of his sentences are like proverbs as mentioned. His “Essays" are full of illustrations, allusions and quotations. Some of these quotations are from Latin sources. He also gives us quotations from "The Bible". These allusions and quotations seem to serve his style more scholarly.

~Literpretation Team for Education

• Literary Criticism

Recent Posts

of Love, Marriage, and Single Life- Essay- Francis Bacon

Work introduction: These essays were taken from the book "The Essays of Francis Bacon". There are many notable topics with nuances. He...

Francis Bacon- Bio

Francis Bacon was born on 22nd January 1561 in London. He was known as ‘Lord Verulam’ who was an English philosopher, a statesman who...

Donate now to help us build a School for the Underprivilaged

Help us build a school for the underprivileged .

• Privacy Policy

Bacon's Contribution To The Development Of English Prose

Question : Essay-type  

Evaluate Bacon's contribution to the development of English Prose.

Introduction

Bacon's Admiration for His Unique Writing-style

Bacon's writing has been admired for various reasons. Some admire his dazzling power of rhetoric, others his grace, yet others find him too stiff and rigid. But all admit that he is one of the greatest writers of English Prose of his age. His essays have become a classic of the English language.

In Bacon we find a style which is distinct and at the same time characteristic of his age. Bacon's contribution to the modern English Prose is clearly brought out by a consideration of the prose of the country during the age. It was Bacon who for the first time set the model of a style consistently simple, clear and suited to everyday uses. His larger and more sustained work suffer from the faults of his contemporaries and predecessors. But his essays are, conspicuously free from such faults. His sentences are short and lucid. His style is remarkable for its simplicity and clarity. There is no obscurity in him. His prose is light and graceful. His prose is dealt with the metaphysical subjects as truth, death, religion, etc.

According to the learned critic, his style has clarity, it has eloquence, and it is interesting. His luxuriant imagination makes his style picturesque and vivid. Bacon's language is free from prolixity, turgidity, circumlocution, conceit and such other vices which made the language obscure and incomprehensible. These were rare qualities at that time, and they fully entitle him to the rank of the father of modern English Prose.

Related Question

👉 All Related Posts

Post a Comment

Top post ad, below post ad.

• Terms and Conditions

Bottom Article Ad

Join our channel.

• Graduate 83
• Higher Secondary 123
• Post Graduate 38
• Project Work 2
• Secondary 76

Search This Blog

Recent updates, popular updates.

A Doll's House As A Problem Play

Footer Copyright

Copyright (c) 2021 EASY ENGLISH POINT All Rights Reserved

Contact form

Francis Bacon: The Father of English Essay- Check out His Major Contributions, Early Life and Career

Francis Bacon is widely regarded as the “father of English essay.” Born in London in 1561, Bacon was a Renaissance figure who made significant contributions to the fields of philosophy, science, and literature. He is particularly remembered for his Essays, a collection of short pieces that he published in 1597 and later revised and expanded. These essays helped to establish the genre of the English essay and had a profound influence on the development of the form.

Bacon’s essays covered a wide range of subjects, including morality, politics, and religion. He wrote about the importance of wisdom, knowledge, and experience, and his writing was characterized by its concise, aphoristic style. He was a master of the one-liner, and his essays are filled with memorable quotes and insights.

One of Bacon’s most important contributions to the English essay was his use of the form to reflect on the human condition. He believed that writing was a way of exploring the world and understanding the human experience. His essays are filled with his thoughts on the nature of truth, the importance of reason, and the value of experience. He used the essay to encourage readers to think critically and to question their own beliefs and assumptions.

Check out: Father of Agriculture

Table of Contents

Life and Career

Major contributions, father of english essay faqs, francis bacon: father of english essay.

Francis Bacon is often referred to as the “father of the English essay,” but this designation is somewhat misleading. While Bacon was a highly influential figure in the development of the English essay, he did not invent the form. Instead, he is credited with popularizing and refining the genre in the late 16th and early 17th centuries.

Bacon’s essays, first published in 1597, were a new type of literary work that blended the qualities of classical rhetoric, reflection, and argumentation. His essays covered a wide range of subjects, including moral and political issues, and were characterized by their concise, aphoristic style and their penetrating insights.

Bacon’s influence on the English essay can be seen in the works of later writers, including Joseph Addison, Richard Steele, and Samuel Johnson, all of whom drew on his example in their own writing. Today, Bacon’s essays continue to be widely read and admired for their elegance and wisdom, and are considered to be a seminal work of English literature.

Francis Bacon was an English philosopher, statesman, and author who lived from 1561 to 1626. He was born in London to a prominent family and was educated at Trinity College, Cambridge. Bacon had a long and varied career, and he made significant contributions to the fields of philosophy, science, and literature.

Bacon’s political career began early, and he served as a member of Parliament for several years. He was later appointed to a series of high-ranking government positions, including Attorney General and Lord Chancellor. During his time in government, Bacon played a key role in the development of the English legal system and was known for his commitment to the rule of law.

Bacon’s philosophical views were heavily influenced by the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries. He believed that knowledge should be grounded in observation and experience, and he was a strong advocate for the importance of reason and logical inquiry. He is considered to be one of the pioneers of the scientific method and made important contributions to the study of natural philosophy.

Bacon’s literary career began in the late 16th century, when he published a collection of short pieces called the Essays. These essays were a new type of literary work that blended classical rhetoric, reflection, and argumentation. They covered a wide range of subjects, including morality, politics, and religion, and were characterized by their concise, aphoristic style. The Essays were highly influential, and Bacon is widely regarded as the “father of the English essay.”

In addition to his essays, Bacon also wrote several other works, including the Novum Organum, a treatise on the scientific method, and the New Atlantis, a utopian novel. He was a prolific writer and was known for his elegant and insightful prose.

Francis Bacon died in 1626 at the age of 65. He left a lasting legacy in the fields of philosophy, science, and literature, and his contributions continue to be studied and admired today. He remains a key figure in the history of English thought and is remembered as one of the greatest minds of the Renaissance.

• The English Essay: Francis Bacon is widely regarded as the “father of the English essay.” He popularized and refined the genre in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, and his essays remain widely read and admired today.
• The Scientific Method: Bacon was a pioneer in the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries and is considered to be one of the pioneers of the scientific method. He believed that knowledge should be grounded in observation and experience, and he was a strong advocate for the importance of reason and logical inquiry.
• Philosophy: Bacon was a key figure in the development of modern philosophy. He believed that knowledge should be grounded in observation and experience, and he was a strong advocate for the importance of reason and logical inquiry. His philosophical views had a lasting impact on later generations of thinkers.
• Legal Reform: Bacon was an important figure in the development of the English legal system. During his time in government, he played a key role in the development of the rule of law, and he is remembered for his commitment to justice and equality.
• Literary Style: Bacon’s essays are characterized by their concise, aphoristic style, and his writing remains widely admired for its elegance and insight. He was a master of the one-liner, and his essays are filled with memorable quotes and insights.
• Scientific Inquiry: Bacon made important contributions to the study of natural philosophy and was particularly interested in the natural world. He helped to lay the foundations of the modern scientific method and was a firm believer in the power of observation and experimentation.
• Political Career: Bacon had a long and varied political career, and he served as a member of Parliament for several years. He was later appointed to a series of high-ranking government positions, including Attorney General and Lord Chancellor.

In conclusion, Francis Bacon was a multi-faceted figure who made important contributions to the fields of philosophy, science, and literature. He remains a key figure in the history of English thought and is remembered as one of the greatest minds of the Renaissance.

Francis Bacon is widely considered the “Father of the English Essay.”

Francis Bacon was a key figure in the development of modern philosophy. He believed that knowledge should be grounded in observation and experience, and he was a strong advocate for the importance of reason and logical inquiry. His philosophical views had a lasting impact on later generations of thinkers.

Francis Bacon was a pioneer in the scientific revolution of the 16th and 17th centuries and is considered to be one of the pioneers of the scientific method. He believed that knowledge should be grounded in observation and experience, and he was a strong advocate for the importance of reason and logical inquiry. He helped to lay the foundations of the modern scientific method and was a firm believer in the power of observation and experimentation.

Francis Bacon’s essays are characterized by their concise, aphoristic style, and his writing remains widely admired for its elegance and insight. He was a master of the one-liner, and his essays are filled with memorable quotes and insights.

Francis Bacon had a long and varied political career, and he served as a member of Parliament for several years. He was later appointed to a series of high-ranking government positions, including Attorney General and Lord Chancellor. He is remembered for his commitment to justice and equality.

GetSetNotes

Francis Bacon as an Essayist

Francis Bacon was a philosopher , essayist and a Father of English Essay. He was heavily influenced by Michel de Montaigne and propagated the Renaissance enlightenment of knowledge. Bacon wrote many influential essays in a precise , lucid and concise manner that reflects his well verse on words and deep understanding of knowledge. He is also considered as the father of Empiricism.

As an essayist, he adopted an aphoristic style of writing. An aphorism is a very short witty clever saying that is intended to highlight the truth. It is used to persuade the audience and invoke reasoning skills. Bacon was talented and used aphorisms in all of his essays by making a general statement. Some of this statements are quoted in everyday lives of the people. ”Of Studies” is an essay where he opens the essay with an aphoristic style of “study serves for delight, for ornament, and for ability.” The three ideas on studies are revealed all together in one go where studies function to serve pleasure , for creativity and for the ability to reason and think. All this ideas are put forth in a simple and lucid statement that is short but witty and clear.

In addition to this, he uses analytical method to give a lengthy ideas on three important facts on studies. He has given literally insights where he shows that “Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested; that is, some books are to be read only in parts; others to be read, but not curiously; and some few to be read wholly, and with diligence and attention. Some books also may be read by deputy, and extracts made of them by others; but that would be only in the less important arguments and the meaner sort of books, else distilled books are like common distilled waters, flashy things”. This lines are compacted with ideas on studies where three ideas on studies go hand in hand. The first idea is that studies are used for delight that occurs in privateness and relaxation. The second idea is that studies offer a discourse which is the ornament for creativity and studies also gives the ability to judge , think and reason the ”disposition of business”.

Francis Bacon’s essays are impersonal in nature. He was able to subtract his own self and personality from the discourse of his essays. He did not give personal opinion about that would arise subjectivity in his essays. He exemplified the use of references to Greek and Latin resources to address his ideas such as Julius Caesar and Brutus as well as Bible in is essays. For instance , in ”Of Studies” he gives readers an insight on the ideas related to studies and Renaissance enlightenment without involving himself and his opinions on certain ideas. The readers only analyse the text and interpret the ideas associated on the subject discourse and the use of aphoristic style adds a heavy ornament of creativity that attracts his thoughts on the subject without including himself.

Bacon also used paradoxes or antithesis in his essays. He was a witty essayist who included both the pros and cons of every subject discourse. For instance , in his essay “Of Marriage and Single Life ” , Bacon states that “He that hath wife and child hath given hostages to fortune; for they are impediments to great enterprises either of virtue or mischief. Bacon has almost weighing the pros and cons of every question that he makes it where he balances both the merits and demerits of a marriage. He tries to give a definite answer to the issue after balancing it with both advantages and disadvantages but readers often make their own conclusions after reading his essay.

Summary of A.G Gardiner On Shaking Hands

Bacon also uses allusions in his essays. He makes references to other classical fables, Greek mythology and Roman writers. It also makes him a man of wisdom. With the help of allusions, he gives his ideas a greater weight and serves to make his point stronger and clear. In the essay ”Of Marriage and Single Life” , he alludes to Ulysses and a quotation from Thales, an ancient Greek philosopher. He elaborates that loving husband should be serious and loyal that gives a strong argument for the essay. Allusions serve in his essay to give a better understanding of the knowledge he wants to give to the world.He used allusion as a reference to Penelope, who is the wife of Ulysses, the King of Ithaca and the Greek hero in the Trojan War. She must have grown middle aged by the time Ulysses returned to her after twenty years, at the end of his wanderings and adventures. The allusion here is to the circumstances of Ulysses refusing to marry and live with the goddess Calypso, though she offered to make him immortal like. This allusion more clearly illustrates the topic to the reader that men of a serious bent of mind usually follow conventions and are steady in their love for their wives.

Critical Analysis of Francis Bacon Of Friendship

click Here to know Francis Bacon Of Truth as an Aphoristic Essay

Click Here to Know Critical Analysis of Francis Bacon Essay Of Studies

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)

Literary Theory and Criticism

Home › Literature › Literary Criticism of John Dryden

Literary Criticism of John Dryden

By NASRULLAH MAMBROL on November 17, 2017 • ( 4 )

John Dryden (1631–1700) occupies a seminal place in English critical history. Samuel Johnson called him “the father of English criticism,” and affirmed of his Essay of Dramatic Poesy (1668) that “modern English prose begins here.” Dryden’s critical work was extensive, treating of various genres such as epic, tragedy, comedy and dramatic theory, satire, the relative virtues of ancient and modern writers, as well as the nature of poetry and translation. In addition to the Essay , he wrote numerous prefaces, reviews, and prologues, which together set the stage for later poetic and critical developments embodied in writers such as Pope , Johnson, Matthew Arnold , and T. S. Eliot .

Dryden was also a consummate poet, dramatist, and translator. His poetic output reflects his shifting religious and political allegiances. Born into a middle-class family just prior to the outbreak of the English Civil War between King Charles I and Parliament, he initially supported the latter, whose leaders, headed by Oliver Cromwell, were Puritans. Indeed, his poem Heroic Stanzas (1659) celebrated the achievements of Cromwell who, after the execution of Charles I by the victorious parliamentarians, ruled England as Lord Protector (1653–1658). However, with the restoration of the dead king’s son, Charles II , to the throne in 1660, Dryden switched sides, celebrating the new monarchy in his poem Astrea Redux ( Justice Restored ). Dryden was appointed poet-laureate in 1668 and thereafter produced several major poems, including the mock-heroic  Mac Flecknoe   (1682), and a political satire Absalom and Achitophel (1681). In addition, he produced two poems that mirror his move from Anglicanism to Catholicism: Religio Laici (1682) defends the Anglican Church while The Hind and the Panther , just five years later, opposes Anglicanism. Dryden’s renowned dramas include the comedy Marriage a la Mode (1671) and the tragedies Aureng-Zebe (1675) and All for Love, or the World Well Lost (1677). His translations include Fables, Ancient and Modern (1700), which includes renderings of Ovid, Boccaccio, and Chaucer.

Dryden’s Essay of Dramatic Poesy is written as a debate on drama conducted by four speakers, Eugenius , Crites , Lisideius , and Neander. These personae have conventionally been identified with four of Dryden’s contemporaries. Eugenius (meaning “well-born”) may be Charles Sackville , who was Lord Buckhurst, a patron of Dryden and a poet himself. Crites (Greek for “judge” or “critic”) perhaps represents Sir Robert Howard, Dryden’s brother-in-law. Lisideius refers to Sir Charles Sedley , and Neander (“new man”) is Dryden himself. The Essay , as Dryden himself was to point out in a later defense of it, was occasioned by a public dispute with Sir Robert Howard (Crites) over the use of rhyme in drama. In a note to the reader prefacing the Essay , he suggests that the chief purpose of his text is “to vindicate the honour of our English writers, from the censure of those who unjustly prefer the French” (27). Yet the scope of the  Essay extends far beyond these two topics, effectively ranging over a number of crucial debates concerning the nature and composition of drama.

The first of these debates is that between ancients and moderns, a debate that had intermittently surfaced for centuries in literature and criticism, and which acquired a new and topical intensity in European letters after the Renaissance, in the late seventeenth century. Traditionalists such as Jonathan Swift , in his controversial Battle of the Books (1704), bemoaned the modern “corruption” of religion and learning, and saw in the ancients the archetypal standards of literature. The moderns, inspired by various forms of progress through the Renaissance, sought to adapt or even abandon classical ideals in favor of the requirements of a changed world and a modern audience. Dryden’s Essay is an important intervention in this debate, perhaps marking a distinction between Renaissance and neoclassical values. Like Torquato Tasso and Pierre Corneille , he attempted to strike a compromise between the claims of ancient authority and the exigencies of the modern writer.

In Dryden’s text, this compromise subsumes a number of debates: one of these concerns the classical “unities” of time, place, and action; another focuses on the rigid classical distinction between various genres, such as tragedy and comedy; there was also the issue of classical decorum and propriety, as well as the use of rhyme in drama. All of these elements underlie the nature of drama. In addition, Dryden undertakes an influential assessment of the English dramatic tradition, comparing writers within this tradition itself as well as with their counterparts in French drama.

Dryden’s Essay is skillfully wrought in terms of its own dramatic structure, its setting up of certain expectations (the authority of classical precepts), its climaxing in the reversal of these, and its denouement in the comparative assessment of French and English drama. What starts out, through the voice of Crites, as promising to lull the reader into complacent subordination to classical values ends up by deploying those very values against the ancients themselves and by undermining or redefining those values.

Lisideius offers the following definition of a play: “ A just and lively image of human nature, representing its passions and humours, and the changes of fortune to which it is subject, for the delight and instruction of mankind ” (36). Even a casual glance at the definition shows it to be very different from Aristotle’s: the latter had defined tragedy not as the representation of “human nature” but as the imitation of a serious and complete action; moreover, while Aristotle had indeed cited a reversal in fortune as a component of tragedy, he had said nothing about “passions and humours”; and, while he accorded to literature in general a moral and intellectual function, he had said nothing about “delighting” the audience. The definition of drama used in Dryden’s Essay embodies a history of progressive divergence from classical models; indeed, it is a definition already weighted in favor of modern drama, and it is a little surprising that Crites agrees to abide by it at all. Crites, described in Dryden’s text as “a person of sharp judgment, and somewhat too delicate a taste in wit” (29), is, after all, the voice of classical conservatism.

Crites notes that poetry is now held in lower esteem, in an atmosphere of “few good poets, and so many severe judges” (37–38). His essential argument is that the ancients were “faithful imitators and wise observers of that Nature which is so torn and ill represented in our plays; they have handed down to us a perfect resemblance of her; which we, like ill copiers, neglecting to look on, have rendered monstrous, and disfigured.” He reminds his companions that all the rules for drama – concerning the plot, the ornaments, descriptions, and narrations – were formulated by Aristotle, Horace, or their predecessors. As for us modern writers, he remarks, “we have added nothing of our own, except we have the confidence to say our wit is better” (38).

The most fundamental of these classical rules are the three unities, of time, place, and action. Crites claims that the ancients observed these rules in most of their plays (38–39). The unity of action, Crites urges, stipulates that the “poet is to aim at one great and complete action,” to which all other things in the play “are to be subservient.” The reason behind this, he explains, is that if there were two major actions, this would destroy the unity of the play (41). Crites cites a further reason from Corneille: the unity of action “leaves the mind of the audience in a full repose”; but such a unity must be engineered by the subordinate actions which will “hold the audience in a delightful suspense of what will be” (41). Most modern plays, says Crites, fail to endure the test imposed by these unities, and we must therefore acknowledge the superiority of the ancient authors (43).

This, then, is the presentation of classical authority in Dryden’s text. It is Eugenius who first defends the moderns, saying that they have not restricted themselves to “dull imitation” of the ancients; they did not “draw after their lines, but those of Nature; and having the life before us, besides the experience of all they knew, it is no wonder if we hit some airs and features which they have missed” (44). This is an interesting and important argument which seems to have been subsequently overlooked by Alexander Pope , who in other respects followed Dryden’s prescriptions for following the rules of “nature.” In his Essay on Criticism , Pope had urged that to copy nature is to copy the ancient writers. Dryden, through the mouth of his persona Eugenius, completely topples this complacent equation: Eugenius effectively turns against Crites the latter’s own observation that the arts and sciences have made huge advances since the time of Aristotle. Not only do we have the collective experience and wisdom of the ancients to draw upon, but also we have our own experience of the world, a world understood far better in scientific terms than in ages past: “if natural causes be more known now than in the time of Aristotle . . . it follows that poesy and other arts may, with the same pains, arrive still nearer to perfection” (44).

Turning to the unities, Eugenius points out (after Corneille) that by the time of Horace, the division of a play into five acts was firmly established, but this distinction was unknown to the Greeks. Indeed, the Greeks did not even confine themselves to a regular number of acts (44–46). Again, their plots were usually based on “some tale derived from Thebes or Troy,” a plot “worn so threadbare . . . that before it came upon the stage, it was already known to all the audience.” Since the pleasure in novelty was thereby dissolved, asserts Eugenius, “one main end of Dramatic Poesy in its definition, which was to cause delight, was of consequence destroyed” (47). These are strong words, threatening to undermine a long tradition of reverence for the classics. But Eugenius has hardly finished: not only do the ancients fail to fulfill one of the essential obligations of drama, that of delighting; they also fall short in the other requirement, that of instructing. Eugenius berates the narrow characterization by Greek and Roman dramatists, as well as their imperfect linking of scenes. He cites instances of their own violation of the unities. Even more acerbic is his observation, following Corneille, that when the classical authors such as Euripides and Terence do observe the unities, they are forced into absurdities (48–49). As for the unity of place, he points out, this is nowhere to be found in Aristotle or Horace; it was made a precept of the stage in our own age by the French dramatists (48). Moreover, instead of “punishing vice and rewarding virtue,” the ancients “have often shown a prosperous wickedness, and an unhappy piety” (50).

Eugenius also berates the ancients for not dealing sufficiently with love, but rather with “lust, cruelty, revenge, ambition . . . which were more capable of raising horror than compassion in an audience” (54). Hence, in Dryden’s text, not only is Aristotle’s definition of tragedy violently displaced by a formulation that will accommodate modern poets, but also the ancient philosopher’s definition itself is made to appear starkly unrealistic and problematic for ancient dramatists, who persistently violated its essential features.

The next point of debate is the relative quality of French and English writers; it is Lisideius who extols the virtues of the French while Neander (Dryden himself) undertakes to defend his compatriots. Lisideius argues that the current French theatre surpasses all Europe, observing the unities of time, place, and action, and is not strewn with the cumbrous underplots that litter the English stage. Moreover, the French provide variety of emotion without sinking to the absurd genre of tragicomedy, which is a uniquely English invention (56–57). Lisideius also points out that the French are proficient at proportioning the time devoted to dialogue and action on the one hand, and narration on the other. There are certain actions, such as duels, battles, and deathscenes, that “can never be imitated to a just height”; they cannot be represented with decorum or with credibility and thus must be narrated rather than acted out on stage (62–63).

Neander’s response takes us by surprise. He does not at all refute the claims made by Lisideius. He concedes that “the French contrive their plots more regularly, and observe the laws of comedy, and decorum of the stage . . . with more exactness than the English” (67). Neander effectively argues that the very “faults” of the English are actually virtues, virtues that take English drama far beyond the pale of its classical heritage. What Neander or Dryden takes as a valid presupposition is that a play should present a “lively imitation of Nature” (68). The beauties of French drama, he points out, are “the beauties of a statue, but not of a man, because not animated with the soul of Poesy, which is imitation of humour and passions” (68).

Indeed, in justifying the genre of tragicomedy, Neander states that the contrast between mirth and compassion will throw the important scenes into sharper relief (69). He urges that it is “to the honour of our nation, that we have invented, increased, and perfected a more pleasant way of writing for the stage, than was ever known to the ancients or moderns of any nation, which is tragi-comedy” (70). This exaltation of tragicomedy effectively overturns nearly all of the ancient prescriptions concerning purity of genre, decorum, and unity of plot. Neander poignantly repeats Corneille’s observation that anyone with actual experience of the stage will see how constraining the classical rules are (76).

Neander now undertakes a brief assessment of the recent English dramatic tradition. Of all modern and perhaps ancient poets, he says, Shakespeare “had the largest and most comprehensive soul.” He was “naturally learn’d,” not through books but by the reading of nature and all her images: “he looked inwards, and found her there” (79–80). Again, the implication is that, in order to express nature, Shakespeare did not need to look outwards, toward the classics, but rather into his own humanity. Beaumont and Fletcher had both the precedent of Shakespeare’s wit and natural gifts which they improved by study; what they excelled at was expressing “the conversation of gentlemen,” and the representation of the passions, especially of love (80–81). Ben Jonson he regards as the “most learned and judicious writer which any theatre ever had,” and his peculiar gift was the representation of humors (81–82). Neander defines “humour” as “some extravagant habit, passion, or affection” which defines the individuality of a person (84–85). In an important statement he affirms that “Shakespeare was the Homer, or father of our dramatic poets; Johnson was the Vergil, the pattern of elaborate writing” (82). What Neander – or Dryden – effectively does here is to stake out an independent tradition for English drama, with new archetypes displacing those of the classical tradition.

The final debate concerns the use of rhyme in drama. Crites argues that “rhyme is unnatural in a play” (91). Following Aristotle, Crites insists that the most natural verse form for the stage is blank verse, since ordinary speech follows an iambic pattern (91). Neander’s reply is ambivalent (Dryden himself was later to change his mind on this issue): he does not deny that blank verse may be used; but he asserts that “in serious plays, where the subject and characters are great . . . rhyme is there as natural and more effectual than blank verse” (94). Moreover, in everyday life, people do not speak in blank verse, any more than they do in rhyme. He also observes that rhyme and accent are a modern substitute for the use of quantity as syllabic measure in classical verse (96–97).

Underlying Neander’s argument in favor of rhyme is an observation fundamental to the very nature of drama. He insists that, while all drama represents nature, a distinction should be made between comedy, “which is the imitation of common persons and ordinary speaking,” and tragedy, which “is indeed the representation of Nature, but ’tis Nature wrought up to an higher pitch. The plot, the characters, the wit, the passions, the descriptions, are all exalted above the level of common converse, as high as the imagination of the poet can carry them, with proportion to verisimility” (100–101). And while the use of verse and rhyme helps the poet control an otherwise “lawless imagination,” it is nonetheless a great help to his “luxuriant fancy” (107). This concluding argument, which suggests that the poet use “imagination” to transcend nature, underlines Neander’s (and Dryden’s) departure from classical convention. If Dryden is neoclassical, it is in the sense that he acknowledges the classics as having furnished archetypes for drama; but modern writers are at liberty to create their own archetypes and their own literary traditions. Again, he might be called classical in view of the unquestioned persistence of certain presuppositions that are shared by all four speakers in this text: that the unity of a play, however conceived, is a paramount requirement; that a play present, through its use of plot and characterization, events and actions which are probable and express truth or at least a resemblance to truth; that the laws of “nature” be followed, if not through imitation of the ancients, then through looking inward at our own profoundest constitution; and finally, that every aspect of a play be contrived with the projected response of the audience in mind. But given Dryden’s equal emphasis on the poet’s wit, invention, and imagination, his text might be viewed as expressing a status of transition between neoclassicism and Romanticism.

Dryden’s other essays and prefaces would seem to confirm the foregoing comments, and reveal important insights into his vision of the poet’s craft. In his 1666 preface to Annus Mirabilis , he states that the “composition of all poems is, or ought to be, of wit; and wit . . . is no other than the faculty of imagination in the writer” (14). He subsequently offers a more comprehensive definition: “the first happiness of the poet’s imagination is properly invention, or finding of the thought; the second is fancy, or the variation, deriving, or moulding, of that thought, as the judgment represents it proper to the subject; the third is elocution, or the art of clothing or adorning that thought, so found and varied, in apt, significant, and sounding words: the quickness of the imagination is seen in the invention, the fertility in the fancy, and the accuracy in the expression” (15). Again, the emphasis here is on wit, imagination, and invention rather than exclusively on the classical precept of imitation.

In fact, Dryden was later to write “Defence of An Essay on Dramatic Poesy ,” defending his earlier text against Sir Robert Howard ’s attack on Dryden’s advocacy of rhyme in drama. Here, Dryden’s defense of rhyme undergoes a shift of emphasis, revealing further his modification of classical prescriptions. He now argues that what most commends rhyme is the delight it produces: “for delight is the chief, if not the only, end of poesy: instruction can be admitted but in the second place, for poesy only instructs as it delights” (113). And Dryden states: “I confess my chief endeavours are to delight the age in which I live” (116). We have come a long way from Aristotle, and even from Sidney, who both regarded poetry as having primarily a moral or ethical purpose. To suggest that poetry’s chief or only aim is to delight is to take a large step toward the later modern notion of literary autonomy. Dryden goes on to suggest that while a poet’s task is to “imitate well,” he must also “affect the soul, and excite the passions” as well as cause “admiration” or wonder. To this end, “bare imitation will not serve.” Imitation must be “heightened with all the arts and ornaments of poesy” (113).

If, in such statements, Dryden appears to anticipate certain Romantic predispositions, these comments are counterbalanced by other positions which are deeply entrenched in a classical heritage. Later in the “Defence” he insists that “they cannot be good poets, who are not accustomed to argue well . . . for moral truth is the mistress of the poet as much as of the philosopher; Poesy must resemble natural truth, but it must be ethical. Indeed, the poet dresses truth, and adorns nature, but does not alter them” (121). Hence, notwithstanding the importance that he attaches to wit and imagination, Dryden still regards poetry as essentially a rational activity, with an ethical and epistemological responsibility. If the poet rises above nature and truth, this is merely by way of ornamentation; it does not displace or remold the truths of nature, but merely heightens them. Dryden states that imagination “is supposed to participate of Reason,” and that when imagination creates fictions, reason allows itself to be temporarily deceived but will never be persuaded “of those things which are most remote from probability . . . Fancy and Reason go hand in hand; the first cannot leave the last behind” (127–128). These formulations differ from subsequent Romantic views of the primacy of imagination over reason. Imagination can indeed outrun reason, but only within the limits of classical probability. Dryden’s entire poetic and critical enterprise might be summed up in his own words: he views all poetry, both ancient and modern, as based on “the imitation of Nature.” Where he differs from the classics is the means with which he undertakes this poetic project (123). Following intimations in Plato’s Timaeus and Aristotle’s Poetics , he suggests in his Parallel of Poetry and Painting  (1695) that what the poet (and painter) should imitate are not individual instances of nature but the archetypal ideas behind natural forms. While adhering to this classical position, he also suggests that, in imitating nature, modern writers should “vary the customs, according to the time and the country where the scene of the action lies; for this is still to imitate Nature, which is always the same, though in a different dress” ( Essays , II, 139). This stance effectively embodies both Dryden’s classicism and the nature of his departure from its strict boundaries.

Share this:

Categories: Literature

Tags: Absalom and Achitophel , Alexander Pope , All for Love , An Essay of Dramatic Poesy , An Essay on Criticism , Annus Mirabilis , Astræa Redux , Aureng-Zebe , Charles Sackville , Crites , Eugenius , Heroic Stanzas on the Death of Oliver Cromwell , John Dryden , Jonathan Swift , Lisideius , Literary Criticism , Literary Theory , Mac Flecknoe , Marriage a la Mode , Matthew Arnold , Neander , Parallel of Poetry and Painting , Pierre Corneille , Poetics , Poetry , Religio Laici , Sir Charles Sedley , Sir Robert Howard , The Battle of the Books , The Hind and the Panther , Timaeus , Torquato Tasso , TS Eliot

Related Articles

• Literary Criticism of Alexander Pope – Literary Theory and Criticism Notes
• Literary Criticism of Nicolas Boileau-Despréaux – Literary Theory and Criticism Notes
• Literary Criticism of Joseph Addison – Literary Theory and Criticism Notes
• Tragedy: An Introduction – Literary Theory and Criticism Notes

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

You are here

Geoffrey chaucer: the father of modern english.

Touted as the father of modern English by his contemporaries and later (even modern) critics, Geoffrey Chaucer (1343-1400) remains one of the essential medieval writers that still has prevalence in our literary culture today. Most well known as a poet, Chaucer worked as a bureaucrat, courtier, and diplomat, which exposed him to the courtly style of life that he explores, questions, and mocks in his works. Most notably, Chaucer wrote in his vernacular English, as opposed to Latin or French, and also translated many important Continental works, such as Boccacio's The Decameron and Boethius's Consolation of Philosophy into English . The popularity of Chaucer's works written in the London dialect of Middle English gave rise to this dialect's prominence and eventual status as modern English's predecessor.

In his lifetime, Chaucer's best known and most well-received work was Troilus and Criseyde , a story of two star-crossed lovers in Troy that fall upon misfortune through the insufficiency of language to convey their love for one another. Modern audiences, however, know Chaucer best for his unfinished poem The Canterbury Tales , which chronicles a group of pilgrims journeying to Canterbury Cathedral. The pilgrims agree to entertain themselves along the journey by telling each other tales; each agrees to tell two tales on both legs of the journey. Unfortunately, Chaucer completed only 24 tales before his untimely death. The 24 Tales with which we are left, however, are exemplary in their discussion of genre, authorship, reader-response, and concern with dissemination of written material. Within each of the tales, Chaucer explores a variety of issues and constructs the tales in ways that are influenced by various Continental authors, specifically Dante, Boccacio, and French romantic poets. Although other English poets from the medieval period are integral to the study of English literature, Chaucer stands as a beacon of cross-cultural literary identity, and his works and translations are an integral moment in the rise of the English literary tradition.

If reusing this resource please attribute as follows: Geoffrey Chaucer: The Father of Modern English? at http://writersinspire.org/content/geoffrey-chaucer-father-modern-english by Colleen Curran, licensed as Creative Commons BY-NC-SA (2.0 UK).

Father of English Literature, Prose, Poetry, Novel, and Drama: Pioneers of English Literary Forms

We are getting queries regarding Father of English Literature, Prose, Poetry, Novel, Drama etc. We are trying to accumulate all those information together in this article.

English literature has a rich and diverse history, stretching back to the middle ages. Its progression and development have been influenced by several iconic figures, many of whom have earned the title “Father” of their specific literary form. This article will delve into the works and influence of these remarkable individuals who are considered the Fathers of English Literature, Prose, Poetry, Novel, and Drama.

Table of Contents

Father of English Literature – Geoffrey Chaucer

When we talk about the “Father of English Literature,” the first name that comes to mind is Geoffrey Chaucer. Born around 1343, he stands as a literary bridge between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. His most famous work, “The Canterbury Tales,” has been celebrated as one of the earliest and most significant contributions to English literature.

Written in Middle English, Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales” is a collection of 24 stories, presented as part of a story-telling contest by a group of pilgrims. It provides an excellent insight into various aspects of English life and thought during the 14th Century. The vivid characterizations, diverse stories, and mixture of humor, tragedy, and instruction in his writing are the foundation of what we now recognize as English Literature.

Father of English Poetry – Geoffrey Chaucer

Geoffrey Chaucer also bears the title of “Father of English Poetry”. Before Chaucer, Latin and French were the dominant languages for literary expression in England. Chaucer was the first to demonstrate that English could be a vibrant, expressive, and respectable literary language.

In “The Canterbury Tales,” he uses iambic pentameter, a metrical form that became a standard in English poetry. He also innovated in his use of the heroic couplet, two lines of rhymed iambic pentameter, a form that was later perfected by poets like Alexander Pope and John Dryden. The beauty, wit, and wisdom expressed in his verses played a pivotal role in elevating the status of English poetry.

He was the first writer to be buried in Westminster Abbey, what has since come to be called Poets’ Corner. Chaucer also gained fame as a philosopher and astronomer, composing the scientific A Treatise for his 10-year-old son Lewis. He maintained a career in the civil service as a bureaucrat, courtier, diplomat, and member of parliament.

Original Text:

This frere bosteth that he knoweth helle, And God it woot, that it is litel wonder; Freres and feendes been but lyte asonder.

For, pardee, ye han ofte tyme herd telle How that a frere ravyshed was to helle In spirit ones by a visioun; And as an angel ladde hym up and doun, To shewen hym the peynes that the were, In al the place saugh he nat a frere; Of oother folk he saugh ynowe in wo.

Unto this angel spak the frere tho: Now, sire, quod he, han freres swich a grace That noon of hem shal come to this place?

Yis, quod this aungel, many a millioun! And unto sathanas he ladde hym doun. –And now hath sathanas, –seith he, –a tayl Brodder than of a carryk is the sayl.

Hold up thy tayl, thou sathanas!–quod he; –shewe forth thyn ers, and lat the frere se Where is the nest of freres in this place!– And er that half a furlong wey of space, Right so as bees out swarmen from an hyve, Out of the develes ers ther gonne dryve Twenty thousand freres on a route, And thurghout helle swarmed al aboute, And comen agayn as faste as they may gon, And in his ers they crepten everychon. He clapte his tayl agayn and lay ful stille.

Modern Translation:

This friar boasts that he knows hell, And God knows that it is little wonder; Friars and fiends are seldom far apart.

For, by God, you have ofttimes heard tell How a friar was taken to hell In spirit, once by a vision; And as an angel led him up and down, To show him the pains that were there, In all the place he saw not a friar; Of other folk he saw enough in woe.

Unto this angel spoke the friar thus: “Now sir”, said he, “Have friars such a grace That none of them come to this place?” “Yes”, said the angel, “many a million!” And unto Satan the angel led him down. “And now Satan has”, he said, “a tail, Broader than a galleon’s sail.

Hold up your tail, Satan!” said he. “Show forth your arse, and let the friar see Where the nest of friars is in this place!” And before half a furlong of space, Just as bees swarm out from a hive, Out of the devil’s arse there were driven Twenty thousand friars on a rout, And throughout hell swarmed all about, And came again as fast as they could go, And every one crept into his arse. He shut his tail again and lay very still.

Geoffrey Chaucer, The Canterbury Tales

General Prologue, l. 1-12:

Whan that Aprill with his shoures soote The droghte of March hath perced to the roote, And bathed every veyne in swych licour Of which vertu engendred is the flour; Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth Inspired hath in every holt and heeth The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne Hath in the Ram his halve cours yronne, And smale foweles maken melodye, That slepen al the nyght with open ye (So priketh hem nature in hir corages); Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages.

Chaucer’s works, especially “The Canterbury Tales,” continue to be a major topic of study in English literature courses worldwide. They have been translated into numerous languages, bringing the vivid world of 14th-century England to readers around the globe.

Chaucer’s understanding of human nature, his humor and satirical insight, and his masterful storytelling continue to engage readers. The tales, varied in style and subject, present a microcosm of medieval society, covering a range of social classes, professions, and characters. They offer valuable insights into the social, political, and religious dynamics of the time.

His skill in poetic form and narrative structure, his innovative use of the heroic couplet, and his mastery of character development have influenced countless poets and writers who followed him. Chaucer’s works remain a touchstone for anyone interested in the evolution of the English language and the development of English literature.

Father of English Drama: William Shakespeare

English literature would be complete without mentioning the “Father of English Drama,” William Shakespeare. Born in 1564, Shakespeare’s work transformed English theatre and left an indelible mark on the world literature.

Known for his profound understanding of human nature, Shakespeare wrote 39 plays, including timeless works such as “Romeo and Juliet,” “Hamlet,” “Macbeth,” “Othello,” and “A Midsummer Night’s Dream.” His ability to combine character development, psychological complexity, poetic beauty, and dramatic intensity set him apart as a playwright.

Shakespeare’s plays, written primarily in blank verse, demonstrated the potential of the English language in drama, both in its poetic capacity and its ability to capture the full range of human emotions and experiences. His genius lies not only in his memorable characters and stories but also in his mastery of the language, his innovation in dramatic structure, and his profound insight into the human condition.

Father of English Modern Drama:

Henrik Johan Ibsen or Henrik Ibsen was a Norwegian playwright and theatre director. He was born in 20 March 1828 and died 23 May 1906. Henrik Ibsen is famously known as the Father of Modern Drama, and it is worth recognizing how literal an assessment that is.

As one of the founders of modernism in theatre, Ibsen is often referred to as “the father of realism” and one of the most influential playwrights of his time. His major works include Brand, Peer Gynt, An Enemy of the People, Emperor and Galilean, A Doll’s House, Hedda Gabler, Ghosts, The Wild Duck, When We Dead Awaken, Rosmersholm, and The Master Builder. Ibsen is the most frequently performed dramatist in the world after Shakespeare, and A Doll’s House was the world’s most performed play in 2006.

The Norwegian playwright was not merely one of a wave of new writers to experiment with dramatic form, nor did he make small improvements that were built upon by successors. Rather, Ibsen himself conceived of how the theatre should evolve, and, against great adversity, fulfilled his vision.

“The standing of the theater in the 1850s was at its lowest, in both Europe and the United States,”

supplies Ibsen scholar Brian Johnston.

“In Britain, for example, the last new play of any significance to appear until the arrival of A Doll’s House in London in 1889 was Richard Brinsley Sheridan’s The School for Scandal (1777). During one of the most prolific periods of English-speaking literature, which saw the full flowering of the Romantic movement in poetry and the arts and the rise of the realistic novel as a major literary genre, not a single drama of major significance appeared. It was the period, in fiction, of Austen, the Brontës, Dickens, George Eliot, Hawthorne, Melville, James, Wharton; in poetry, of Blake, Wordsworth, Coleridge, Byron, Shelley, Keats, Tennyson, Browning, Whitman. No other period has been at once so rich in literature and so barren in drama.”

Adding to the obstacles was the fact that Ibsen hailed from Norway, a country with almost no dramatic tradition of its own. Because Denmark had ruled Norway for the previous 500 years, most theatre was performed in Danish, by Danish companies.

Father of the English Novel:

Daniel defoe:.

Daniel Defoe is recognized as the “Father of the English Novel”. Born in 1660, Defoe was a versatile writer, producing works of journalism, political pamphlets, and conduct manuals. However, his most enduring contributions were his novels.

Defoe’s “Robinson Crusoe,” published in 1719, is often considered the first English novel. It tells the story of a man stranded on a desert island, employing realistic detail, psychological insight, and social observation. The prose style of Defoe, simple and straightforward, yet highly expressive and dramatic, set a new trend in English literature. It paved the way for the development of the novel as a dominant literary form in the 18th Century and beyond.

Henry Fielding:

Henry Fielding is considered as “Father of English Novel”. He was an English novelist, irony writer and dramatist known for earthy humour and satire. He was born at Sharpham Park, Glastonbury, Somerset, South West England, UK. He studied at Leyden, and began to write theatrical comedies, becoming author/manager of the Little Theatre in the Haymarket (1736). However, the sharpness of his burlesques led to the Licensing Act (1737), which closed his theatre.

In search of an alternative career, he was called to the bar (1740), but his interests lay in journalism and fiction. On Richardson’s publication of Pamela (1740), he wrote his famous parody, Joseph Andrews (1742). Several other works followed, notably The History of Tom Jones, A Foundling (1749), which established his reputation as a founder of the English novel. As a reward for his government journalism, he was made justice of the peace to Westminster, where he helped to form the Bow Street Runners within the police force.

Fielding married his first wife, Charlotte Craddock, in 1734. She died in 1744. In 1747 he married his wife’s former maid, Mary Daniel. She was pregnant at the time of their marriage. Mary bore five children, three of whom died young.

Fielding’s ardent commitment to the cause of justice as a great humanitarian in the 1750s (for instance, his support of Elizabeth Canning) coincided with a rapid deterioration in his health. This continued to such an extent that he went abroad to Portugal in 1754 in search of a cure. Gout, asthma and other afflictions made him use crutches. He died in Lisbon two months later. His tomb is located inside the city’s English Cemetery (Cemitério Inglês).

Father of English Prose:

There is a lot of debate on this issue.

Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626):

The “Father of English Prose” is a title bestowed upon the English author and statesman Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626). Bacon was a pioneer of the English language and a significant figure in the development of English prose. He was also a philosopher, scientist, lawyer, and statesman, who served as Attorney General and Lord Chancellor of England.

Bacon is best known for his philosophical works, including “Novum Organum” and “The Advancement of Learning,” in which he laid the groundwork for the scientific method and argued for the importance of empirical observation and experimentation. He believed that knowledge should be based on observation and experimentation rather than on mere speculation or tradition.

Bacon’s writing style was characterized by clarity, concision, and a focus on the practical rather than the abstract. He rejected the ornate and convoluted style that was common in his time, and instead wrote in a plain and direct manner that was accessible to a wide audience. This approach to writing had a profound influence on the development of English prose and helped establish it as a powerful medium of communication.

Bacon’s impact on the English language extended beyond his own writing. He was a driving force behind the translation of the King James Bible, which is considered a masterpiece of English prose. He also played a significant role in the development of the English essay, a form of writing that was popularized by his friend and contemporary, the writer and philosopher Michel de Montaigne.

In recognition of his contributions to English prose and his impact on the language, Bacon has been widely regarded as the “Father of English Prose.” His influence can be seen in the work of countless writers who followed in his footsteps, from John Locke to Thomas Jefferson to Charles Darwin.

In conclusion, Sir Francis Bacon’s contributions to English prose and language cannot be overstated. His focus on clarity, directness, and practicality revolutionized English writing, and helped establish it as a powerful and influential medium of communication. His works continue to be studied and appreciated today, and his legacy as the “Father of English Prose” remains secure.

John de Mandeville:

Some people say John de Mandeville “has been called the “Father of English Prose.

William Tyndale may be regarded as the father of English prose as a whole, but when only Anglo-Saxon period is considered, there is no such conclusive answer. Some consider Alfred the Great to be the father of English prose. Following is an excerpt from the Wikipedia article “Old English Literature”:

The most widely known secular author of Old English was King Alfred the Great (849–899), who translated several books, many of them religious, from Latin into Old English. Alfred, wanting to restore English culture, lamented the poor state of Latin education:

So general was [educational] decay in England that there were very few on this side of the Humber who could…translate a letter from Latin into English; and I believe there were not many beyond the Humber

— Pastoral Care, introduction

Alfred proposed that students be educated in Old English, and those who excelled should go on to learn Latin.

• National Heritage in Bangladesh and How to Preserve It | Essay Writing

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Who is the father of English essay?

Francis Bacon (1561-1626) was the first really major English essayist,

Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592) French Jurist, served 1582-1585 on the Parliament of Bordeaux.

The modern essay writer are more intelligent and take care about the students for their career. If the writers are most important person for every college students.

Sir Francis Bacon is considered the father of English essays. He developed the scientific method.

Father of modern essay --francis bacon

sir William Shakespeare

Charles Baudelaire, a french poet.

who is the father of formal essay

Nasreen Balouch ∙

Francis bacon

Michel De Montaigne

Add your answer:

What is the tone of Lake's essay An Indian Father's Plea?

serious apex

How do you write a conclusion for an English essay?

to help cut off what you are talking about in your essay. the conclusion should tie-up your whole argument which you talked about when writing the essay.

Who is the father of English epic?

William Carey is considered by many to be the father of the English epic. This was a style of story writing in England.

Who is the father of English drama?

William Shakespeare is the father of English drama.

How is superstition or the supernatural used in Julius Caesar the play?

ha trying to write an English essay for smc I see

Who is the father of essay?

francis bacon

Who is the father of American essay?

Francis Bacon

Can you write an essay about George Bush and his father?

no, can you?

Who is the father of writing?

the father of essay writing is said to be Joseph P. Hynes

What is the English translation of sanaysay?

Essay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What does ensayo mean in English?

it means "essay".

Is essay a french word?

The word essay derives from the Frenchinfinitive essayer, "to try" or "to attempt". In English essay first meant "a trial" or "an attempt"

Who is known as the father of modern essays?

The "father of the modern essay" is recognized as Michel de Montaigne. He popularized the essay and assisted in it's recognition as a literary genre.

How do you set out an A2-level English essay?

check on coursework.info be warned you have to pay to see the full essay

What is the name of An essay that presents facts and emplains them in detail?

English language as a tool in mass communication essay?

How i get some English essay for class 10th?

from the web

An essay about your father in Hindi?

If you know Hindi, you can write out the essay in the right language. Using a translation service can be helpful if you do not know the language.

Top Categories

Essay on Father of English

Students are often asked to write an essay on Father of English in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Father of English

Introduction.

The title ‘Father of English’ typically refers to Geoffrey Chaucer. He was a renowned author during the Middle Ages, known for his significant contributions to English literature.

Chaucer’s Contribution

Chaucer, born in the 14th century, is best known for his masterpiece ‘The Canterbury Tales’. His works were written in Middle English, making them accessible to the common people.

Impact on English Language

Chaucer’s works greatly influenced the English language. He introduced new words and expressions, and his writings played a crucial role in standardizing the English language.

Geoffrey Chaucer, due to his extensive influence and significant contributions, is rightly called the ‘Father of English’.

250 Words Essay on Father of English

The genesis of english: geoffrey chaucer.

Geoffrey Chaucer, born in the 14th century, is universally celebrated as the ‘Father of English Literature.’ His seminal contributions to English literature, particularly through his magnum opus, ‘The Canterbury Tales,’ have earned him this title.

Chaucer’s Influence on English Language

Chaucer’s influence on the English language is profound. He was the first writer to use English in a time when Latin was the standard for literature. His decision to write in English was a bold move that eventually led to the language’s acceptance and growth. Chaucer’s English, known as Middle English, was a precursor to the Modern English we use today.

Chaucer’s Contributions to Literature

In ‘The Canterbury Tales,’ Chaucer employed a narrative framework, a technique that was innovative for his time. He introduced a diverse cast of characters, each with their own stories, which provided a panoramic view of the 14th-century English society. His characters were vivid, relatable, and diverse, a testament to his keen observation and understanding of human nature.

Chaucer’s Legacy

Chaucer’s legacy is not only in his literary works but also in his pioneering role in establishing English as a legitimate language for literature. His writings have shaped the English language and its literature, influencing countless authors and readers over the centuries.

In conclusion, Geoffrey Chaucer’s contributions to the English language and literature are immeasurable. His works have transcended time, and his influence is still palpable in the realm of literature. Chaucer, the Father of English, has left an indelible mark on the literary world.

500 Words Essay on Father of English

The English language, with its rich tapestry of dialects, accents, and vocabulary, owes much of its evolution to Geoffrey Chaucer. Often referred to as the ‘Father of English’, Chaucer’s contributions to the English language and literature have been monumental, making him an iconic figure in literary history.

Chaucer’s Influence on the English Language

Born in the 14th century, Chaucer’s influence on the English language is as profound as it is enduring. At a time when Latin and French were predominantly used in literature, Chaucer chose to write in Middle English, the language of the common people. His decision was groundbreaking, as it not only validated English as a literary language but also made literature accessible to a wider audience.

Chaucer’s most famous work, ‘The Canterbury Tales’, is a testament to his linguistic prowess. He employed a wide range of dialects, from courtly to colloquial, demonstrating the versatility and richness of the English language. His innovative use of vocabulary, syntax, and meter in his writings significantly expanded the linguistic capabilities of English.

Chaucer’s Impact on English Literature

Chaucer’s influence extends beyond language to the very fabric of English literature. He pioneered the use of storytelling techniques such as characterization, humor, and irony, which are now fundamental elements of English literature.

In ‘The Canterbury Tales’, Chaucer used a frame narrative, a technique that was revolutionary at the time. This allowed him to weave together a collection of diverse stories, each told by a different character, showcasing varying perspectives and experiences.

Chaucer’s characters were not just narrative devices; they were vividly realized individuals, each with their distinct voice and personality. This level of characterization was unprecedented and set a new standard in literature.

Chaucer’s Lasting Legacy

Chaucer’s legacy is not just confined to his own era. His works continue to be studied, appreciated, and adapted, centuries after his death. His influence can be seen in the works of countless writers who followed, from Shakespeare to contemporary authors.

Chaucer’s decision to write in English paved the way for the language’s development and acceptance as a literary medium. His innovative storytelling techniques have become fundamental to the craft of writing.

In conclusion, Geoffrey Chaucer’s contributions to the English language and literature are immeasurable. His bold decision to write in the vernacular, his innovative narrative techniques, and his vivid characterization have all left an indelible mark on English literature. By championing the English language and pushing the boundaries of its use, Chaucer has rightly earned the title ‘Father of English’. His works serve as a reminder of the power of language and the enduring impact of literature.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Virat Kohli
• Essay on Punjab
• Essay on Use of Mobile Phones in Education

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.