THE ESSAYS OF FRANCIS BACON
OF EMPIRE
(1607) Francis Bacon 1
561 - 1626
|
|
Bacon expressed his aspirations and ideals
in New Atlantis. Released in 1627, this was his creation
of an ideal land where "generosity
and
enlightenment, dignity and splendor,
piety
and public spirit" were
the commonly
held qualities of the inhabitants
of Bensalem.
In this work, he portrayed a
vision of the
future of human discovery and
knowledge.
The plan and organization of
his ideal college,
"Solomon's House",
envisioned the
modern research university in
both applied
and pure science.
Francis Bacon was the son
of Nicolas Bacon,
the Lord Keeper of the
Seal of Elisabeth
I. He entered Trinity College
Cambridge at
age 12. Bacon later described
his tutors
as "Men of sharp wits,
shut up in their
cells of a few authors,
chiefly Aristotle,
their Dictator." This
is likely the
beginning of Bacon's rejection
of Aristotelianism
and Scholasticism and the
new Renaissance
Humanism." His father
died when he was
18, and being the youngest
son this left
him virtually penniless.
He turned to the
law and at 23 he was already
in the House
of Commons. His rich relatives
did little
to advance his career and
Elisabeth apparently
distrusted him. It was
not until James I
became King that Bacon's
career advanced.
He rose to become Baron
Verulam, Viscount
St. Albans and Lord Chancellor
of England.
His fall came about in
the course of a struggle
between King and Parliament.
He was accused
of having taken a bribe
while a judge, tried
and found guilty. He thus
lost his personal
honour, his fortune and
his place at court. |
|
Of EMPIRE
(1607) Francis Bacon
1561 - 1626
IT IS a miserable state of mind, to
have
few things to desire, and many things
to
fear; and yet that commonly is the
case of
kings; who, being at the highest, want
matter
of desire, which makes their minds
more languishing;
and have many representations of perils
and
shadows, which makes their minds the
less
clear. And this is one reason also,
of that
effect which the Scripture speaketh
of, That
the king's heart is inscrutable. For
multitude
of jealousies, and lack of some predominant
desire, that should marshal and put
in order
all the rest, maketh any man's heart,
hard
to find or sound. Hence it comes likewise,
that princes many times make themselves
desires,
and set their hearts upon toys; sometimes
upon a building; sometimes upon erecting
of an order; sometimes upon the advancing
of a person; sometimes upon obtaining
excellency
in some art, or feat of the hand; as
Nero
for playing on the harp, Domitian for
certainty
of the hand with the arrow, Commodus
for
playing at fence, Caracalla for driving
chariots,
and the like. This seemeth incredible,
unto
those that know not the principle,
that the
mind of man, is more cheered and refreshed
by profiting in small things, than
by standing
at a stay, in great. We see also that
kings
that have been fortunate conquerors,
in their
first years, it being not possible
for them
to go forward infinitely, but that
they must
have some check, or arrest in their
fortunes,
turn in their latter years to be superstitious,
and melancholy; as did Alexander the
Great;
Diocletian; and in our memory, Charles
the
Fifth; and others: for he that is used
to
go forward, and findeth a stop, falleth
out
of his own favor, and is not the thing
he
was.
To speak now of the true temper of
empire,
it is a thing rare and hard to keep;
for
both temper, and distemper, consist
of contraries.
But it is one thing, to mingle contraries,
another to interchange them. The answer
of
Apollonius to Vespasian, is full of
excellent
instruction. Vespasian asked him, What
was
Nero's overthrow? He answered, Nero
could
touch and tune the harp well; but in
government,
sometimes he used to wind the pins
too high,
sometimes to let them down too low.
And certain
it is, that nothing destroyeth authority
so much, as the unequal and untimely
interchange
of power pressed too far, and relaxed
too
much.
This is true, that the wisdom of all
these
latter times, in princes' affairs,
is rather
fine deliveries, and shiftings of dangers
and mischiefs, when they are near,
than solid
and grounded courses to keep them aloof.
But this is but to try masteries with
fortune.
And let men beware, how they neglect
and
suffer matter of trouble to be prepared;
for no man can forbid the spark, nor
tell
whence it may come. The difficulties
in princes'
business are many and great; but the
greatest
difficulty, is often in their own mind.
For
it is common with princes (saith Tacitus)
to will contradictories, Sunt plerumque
regum
voluntates vehementes, et inter se
contrariae.
For it is the solecism of power, to
think
to command the end, and yet not to
endure
the mean.
Kings have to deal with their neighbors,
their wives, their children, their
prelates
or clergy, their nobles, their second-nobles
or gentlemen, their merchants, their
commons,
and their men of war; and from all
these
arise dangers, if care and circumspection
be not used.
First for their neighbors; there can
no general
rule be given (for occasions are so
variable),
save one, which ever holdeth, which
is, that
princes do keep due sentinel, that
none of
their neighbors do ever grow so (by
increase
of territory, by embracing of trade,
by approaches,
or the like), as they become more able
to
annoy them, than they were. And this
is generally
the work of standing counsels, to foresee
and to hinder it. During that triumvirate
of kings, King Henry the Eighth of
England,
Francis the First King of France, and
Charles
the Fifth Emperor, there was such a
watch
kept, that none of the three could
win a
palm of ground, but the other two would
straightways
balance it, either by confederation,
or,
if need were, by a war; and would not
in
any wise take up peace at interest.
And the
like was done by that league (which
Guicciardini
saith was the security of Italy) made
between
Ferdinando King of Naples, Lorenzius
Medici,
and Ludovicus Sforza, potentates, the
one
of Florence, the other of Milan. Neither
is the opinion of some of the Schoolmen,
to be received, that a war cannot justly
be made, but upon a precedent injury
or provocation.
For there is no question, but a just
fear
of an imminent danger, though there
be no
blow given, is a lawful cause of a
war.
For their wives; there are cruel examples
of them. Livia is infamed, for the
poisoning
of her husband; Roxalana, Solyman's
wife,
was the destruction of that renowned
prince,
Sultan Mustapha, and otherwise troubled
his
house and succession; Edward the Second
of
England, his queen, had the principal
hand
in the deposing and murder of her husband.
This kind of danger, is then to be
feared
chiefly, when the wives have plots,
for the
raising of their own children; or else
that
they be advoutresses.
For their children; the tragedies likewise
of dangers from them, have been many.
And
generally, the entering of fathers
into suspicion
of their children, hath been ever unfortunate.
The destruction of Mustapha (that we
named
before) was so fatal to Solyman's line,
as
the succession of the Turks, from Solyman
until this day, is suspected to be
untrue,
and of strange blood; for that Selymus
the
Second, was thought to be suppositious.
The
destruction of Crispus, a young prince
of
rare towardness, by Constantinus the
Great,
his father, was in like manner fatal
to his
house; for both Constantinus and Constance,
his sons, died violent deaths; and
Constantius,
his other son, did little better; who
died
indeed of sickness, but after that
Julianus
had taken arms against him. The destruction
of Demetrius, son to Philip the Second
of
Macedon, turned upon the father, who
died
of repentance. And many like examples
there
are; but few or none, where the fathers
had
good by such distrust; except it were,
where
the sons were up in open arms against
them;
as was Selymus the First against Bajazet;
and the three sons of Henry the Second,
King
of England.
For their prelates; when they are proud
and
great, there is also danger from them;
as
it was in the times of Anselmus, and
Thomas
Becket, Archbishops of Canterbury;
who, with
their croziers, did almost try it with
the
king's sword; and yet they had to deal
with
stout and haughty kings, William Rufus,
Henry
the First, and Henry the Second. The
danger
is not from that state, but where it
hath
a dependence of foreign authority;
or where
the churchmen come in and are elected,
not
by the collation of the king, or particular
patrons, but by the people.
For their nobles; to keep them at a
distance,
it is not amiss; but to depress them,
may
make a king more absolute, but less
safe;
and less able to perform, any thing
that
he desires. I have noted it, in my
History
of King Henry the Seventh of England,
who
depressed bis nobility; whereupon it
came
to pass, that his times were full of
difficulties
and troubles; for the nobility, though
they
continued loyal unto him, yet did they
not
co-operate with him in his business.
So that
in effect, he was fain to do all things
himself.
For their second-nobles; there is not
much
danger from them, being a body dispersed.
They may sometimes discourse high,
but that
doth little hurt; besides, they are
a counterpoise
to the higher nobility, that they grow
not
too potent; and, lastly, being the
most immediate
in authority, with the common people,
they
do best temper popular commotions.
For their merchants; they are vena
porta;
and if they flourish not, a kingdom
may have
good limbs, but will have empty veins,
and
nourish little. Taxes and imposts upon
them,
do seldom good to the king's revenue;
for
that that he wins in the hundred, he
leeseth
in the shire; the particular rates
being
increased, but the total bulk of trading,
rather decreased.
For their commons; there is little
danger
from them, except it be, where they
have
great and potent heads; or where you
meddle
with the point of religion, or their
customs,
or means of life.
For their men of war; it is a dangerous
state,
where they live and remain in a body,
and
are used to donatives; whereof we see
examples
in the janizaries, and pretorian bands
of
Rome; but trainings of men, and arming
them
in several places, and under several
commanders,
and without donatives, are things of
defence,
and no danger.
Princes are like to heavenly bodies,
which
cause good or evil times; and which
have
much veneration, but no rest. All precepts
concerning kings, are in effect comprehended
in those two remembrances: memento
quod es
homo; and memento quod es Deus, or
vice Dei;
the one bridleth their power, and the
other
their will.
|