Direct it flies and rapid,
Shattering that it may reach, and shattering what it reaches.
Shattering that it may reach, and shattering what it reaches.
Coleridge - Table Talk
[1] His Liberty of
Prophesying is a work of wonderful eloquence and skill; but if we believe
the argument, what do we come to? Why to nothing more or less than this,
that--so much can be said for every opinion and sect,--so impossible is it
to settle any thing by reasoning or authority of Scripture,--we must appeal
to some positive jurisdiction on earth, _ut sit finis controversiarum_. In
fact, the whole book is the precise argument used by the Papists to induce
men to admit the necessity of a supreme and infallible head of the church
on earth. It is one of the works which preeminently gives countenance to
the saying of Charles or James II. , I forget which:--"When you of the
Church of England contend with the Catholics, you use the arguments of the
Puritans; when you contend with the Puritans, you immediately adopt all the
weapons of the Catholics. " Taylor never speaks with the slightest symptom
of affection or respect of Luther, Calvin, or any other of the great
reformers--at least, not in any of his learned works; but he _saints_ every
trumpery monk and friar, down to the very latest canonizations by the
modern popes. I fear you will think me harsh, when I say that I believe
Taylor was, perhaps unconsciously, half a Socinian in heart. Such a strange
inconsistency would not be impossible. The Romish church has produced many
such devout Socinians. The cross of Christ is dimly seen in Taylor's works.
Compare him in this particular with Donne, and you will feel the difference
in a moment. Why are not Donne's volumes of sermons reprinted at Oxford? [2]
[Footnote 1:
Mr. Coleridge placed Jeremy Taylor amongst the four great geniuses of old
English literature. I think he used to reckon Shakspeare and Bacon, Milton
and Taylor, four-square, each against each. In mere eloquence, he thought
the Bishop without any fellow. He called him Chrysostom. Further, he loved
the man, and was anxious to find excuses for some weak parts in his
character. But Mr. Coleridge's assent to Taylor's views of many of the
fundamental positions of Christianity was very limited; and, indeed, he
considered him as the least sound in point of doctrine of any of the old
divines, comprehending, within that designation, the writers to the middle
of Charles II. 's reign. He speaks of Taylor in "The Friend" in the
following terms:--"Among the numerous examples with which I might enforce
this warning, I refer, not without reluctance, to the most eloquent, and
one of the most learned, of our divines; a rigorist, indeed, concerning the
authority of the church, but a latitudinarian in the articles of its faith;
who stretched the latter almost to the advanced posts of Socinianism, and
strained the former to a hazardous conformity with the assumptions of the
Roman hierarchy. " Vol. ii. p. 108. --ED. ]
[Footnote 2:
Why not, indeed! It is really quite unaccountable that the sermons
of this great divine of the English church should be so little known as
they are, even to very literary clergymen of the present day. It might
have been expected, that the sermons of the greatest preacher of his age,
the admired of Ben Jonson, Selden, and all that splendid band of poets
and scholars, would even as curiosities have been reprinted, when works,
which are curious for nothing, are every year sent forth afresh under the
most authoritative auspices. Dr. Donne was educated at both universities,
at Hart Hall, Oxford, first, and afterwards at Cambridge, but at
what college Walton does not mention--ED. ]
* * * * *
In the reign of Edward VI. , the Reformers feared to admit almost any thing
on human authority alone. They had seen and felt the abuses consequent on
the popish theory of Christianity; and I doubt not they wished and intended
to reconstruct the religion and the church, as far as was possible, upon
the plan of the primitive ages? But the Puritans pushed this bias to an
absolute bibliolatry. They would not put on a corn-plaster without scraping
a text over it. Men of learning, however, soon felt that this was wrong in
the other extreme, and indeed united itself to the very abuse it seemed to
shun. They saw that a knowledge of the Fathers, and of early tradition, was
absolutely necessary; and unhappily, in many instances, the excess of the
Puritans drove the men of learning into the old popish extreme of denying
the Scriptures to be capable of affording a rule of faith without the
dogmas of the church. Taylor is a striking instance how far a Protestant
might be driven in this direction.
_June_ 6. 1830.
CATHOLICITY. --GNOSIS. --TERTULLIAN. --ST. JOHN.
In the first century, catholicity was the test of a book or epistle--
whether it were of the Evangelicon or Apostolicon--being canonical. This
catholic spirit was opposed to the gnostic or peculiar spirit,--the humour
of fantastical interpretation of the old Scriptures into Christian
meanings. It is this gnosis, or _knowingness,_ which the Apostle says
puffeth up,--not _knowledge_, as we translate it. The Epistle of Barnabas,
of the genuineness of which I have no sort of doubt, is an example of this
gnostic spirit. The Epistle to the Hebrews is the only instance of gnosis
in the canon: it was written evidently by some apostolical man before the
destruction of the Temple, and probably at Alexandria. For three hundred
years, and more, it was not admitted into the canon, especially not by the
Latin church, on account of this difference in it from the other
Scriptures. But its merit was so great, and the gnosis in it is so kept
within due bounds, that its admirers at last succeeded, especially by
affixing St. Paul's name to it, to have it included in the canon; which was
first done, I think, by the council of Laodicea in the middle of the fourth
century. Fortunately for us it was so.
* * * * *
I beg Tertullian's pardon; but amongst his many _bravuras_, he says
something about St. Paul's autograph. Origen expressly declares the
reverse.
* * * * *
It is delightful to think, that the beloved apostle was born a Plato. To
him was left the almost oracular utterance of the mysteries of the
Christian religion while to St. Paul was committed the task of explanation,
defence, and assertion of all the doctrines, and especially of those
metaphysical ones touching the will and grace;[1] for which purpose his
active mind, his learned education, and his Greek logic, made him
pre-eminently fit.
[Footnote 1:
"The imperative and oracular form of the inspired Scripture is the form of
reason itself, in all things purely rational and moral. "--_Statesman's
Manual_, p. 22. ]
June 7. 1830.
PRINCIPLES OF A REVIEW. --PARTY-SPIRIT.
Notwithstanding what you say, I am persuaded that a review would amply
succeed even now, which should be started upon a published code of
principles, critical, moral, political, and religious; which should
announce what sort of books it would review, namely, works of literature as
contradistinguished from all that offspring of the press, which in the
present age supplies food for the craving caused by the extended ability of
reading without any correspondent education of the mind, and which formerly
was done by conversation, and which should really give a fair account of
what the author intended to do, and in his own words, if possible, and in
addition, afford one or two fair specimens of the execution,--itself never
descending for one moment to any personality. It should also be provided
before the commencement with a dozen powerful articles upon fundamental
topics to appear in succession. You see the great reviewers are now ashamed
of reviewing works in the old style, and have taken up essay writing
instead. Hence arose such publications as the Literary Gazette and others,
which are set up for the purpose--not a useless one--of advertizing new
books of all sorts for the circulating libraries. A mean between the two
extremes still remains to be taken.
* * * * *
Party men always hate a slightly differing friend more than a downright
enemy. I quite calculate on my being one day or other holden in worse
repute by many Christians than the Unitarians and open infidels. It must be
undergone by every one who loves the truth for its own sake beyond all
other things.
* * * * *
Truth is a good dog; but beware of barking too close to the heels of an
error, lest you get your brains kicked out.
_June_ 10. 1830.
SOUTHEY'S LIFE OF BUNYAN. --LAUD. --PURITANS AND CAVALIERS. --PRESBYTERIANS,
INDEPENDENTS, AND BISHOPS.
Southey's Life of Bunyan is beautiful. I wish he had illustrated that mood
of mind which exaggerates, and still more, mistakes, the inward
depravation, as in Bunyan, Nelson, and others, by extracts from Baxter's
Life of himself. What genuine superstition is exemplified in that bandying
of texts and half texts, and demi-semi-texts, just as memory happened to
suggest them, or chance brought them before Bunyan's mind! His tract,
entitled, "Grace abounding to the Chief of Sinners"[1] is a study for a
philosopher.
[Footnote 1:
"Grace abounding to the Chief of Sinners, in a faithful Account of the Life
and Death of John Bunyan, &c. " Is it not, however, an historical error to
call the Puritans dissenters? Before St. Bartholomew's day, they were
essentially a part of the church, and had as determined opinions in favour
of a church establishment as the bishops themselves.
* * * * *
Laud was not exactly a Papist to be sure; but he was on the road with the
church with him to a point, where declared popery would have been
inevitable. A wise and vigorous Papist king would very soon, and very
justifiably too, in that case, have effected a reconciliation between the
churches of Rome and England, when the line of demarcation had become so
very faint.
* * * * *
The faults of the Puritans were many; but surely their morality will, in
general, bear comparison with that of the Cavaliers after the Restoration.
* * * * *
The Presbyterians hated the Independents much more than they did the
bishops, which induced them to cooperate in effecting the Restoration.
* * * * *
The conduct of the bishops towards Charles, whilst at Breda, was wise and
constitutional. They knew, however, that when the forms of the constitution
were once restored, all their power would revive again as of course.
June 14. 1830.
STUDY OF THE BIBLE.
Intense study of the Bible will keep any writer from being _vulgar_, in
point of style.
June 15. 1830.
RABELAIS. --SWIFT. --BENTLEY. --SUBNET.
Rabelais is a most wonderful writer. Pantagruel is the Reason; Panurge the
Understanding,--the pollarded man, the man with every faculty except the
reason. I scarcely know an example more illustrative of the distinction
between the two. Rabelais had no mode of speaking the truth in those days
but in such a form as this; as it was, he was indebted to the King's
protection for his life. Some of the commentators talk about his book being
all political; there are contemporary politics in it, of course, but the
real scope is much higher and more philosophical. It is in vain to look
about for a hidden meaning in all that he has written; you will observe
that, after any particularly deep thrust, as the Papimania[1] for example,
Rabelais, as if to break the blow, and to appear unconscious of what he has
done, writes a chapter or two of pure buffoonery.
He, every now and then, flashes you a glimpse of a real face from his magic
lantern, and then buries the whole scene in mist. The morality of the work
is of the most refined and exalted kind; as for the manners, to be sure, I
cannot say much.
Swift was _anima Rabelaisii habitans in sicco_,--the soul of Rabelais
dwelling in a dry place.
Yet Swift was rare. Can any thing beat his remark on King William's motto,
--_Recepit, non rapuit_,--"that the receiver was as bad as the thief? "
[Footnote 1:
B. iv. c. 48. "Comment Pantagruel descendit en l'Isle de Papimanes. " See
the five following chapters, especially c. 50. ; and note also c. 9. of the
fifth book; "Comment nous fut monstre Papegaut a grande difficulte. "--ED. ]
* * * * *
The effect of the Tory wits attacking Bentley with such acrimony has been
to make them appear a set of shallow and incompetent scholars. Neither
Bentley nor Burnet suffered from the hostility of the wits. Burnet's
"History of his own Times" is a truly valuable book. His credulity is
great, but his simplicity is equally great; and he never deceives you for a
moment.
_June_ 25. 1830.
GIOTTO. --PAINTING.
The fresco paintings by Giotto[1] and others, in the cemetery at Pisa,
are most noble. Giotto was a contemporary of Dante: and it is a curious
question, whether the painters borrowed from the poet, or _vice versa_.
Certainly M. Angelo and Raffael fed their imaginations highly with these
grand drawings, especially M. Angelo, who took from them his bold yet
graceful lines.
[Footnote 1:
Giotto, or Angiolotto's birth is fixed by Vasari in 1276, but there is
some reason to think that he was born a little earlier. Dante, who was
his friend, was born in 1265. Giotto was the pupil of Cimabue, whom he
entirely eclipsed, as Dante testifies in the well-known lines in
the Purgatorio:--
"O vana gloria dell'umane posse!
Com' poco verde in su la cima dura,
Se non e giunta dall' etati grosse!
Credette Cirnabue nella pintura
Tener lo campo: ed ora ha Giotto il grido,
Si che la fama di colui oscura. "--C. xi. v. 91.
His six great frescos in the cemetery at Pisa are upon the sufferings and
patience of Job. --ED. ]
* * * * *
People may say what they please about the gradual improvement of the Arts.
It is not true of the substance. The Arts and the Muses both spring forth
in the youth of nations, like Minerva from the front of Jupiter, all armed:
manual dexterity may, indeed, he improved by practice.
* * * * *
Painting went on in power till, in Raffael, it attained the zenith, and in
him too it showed signs of a tendency downwards by another path. The
painter began to think of overcoming difficulties. After this the descent
was rapid, till sculptors began to work inveterate likenesses of perriwigs
in marble,--as see Algarotti's tomb in the cemetery at Pisa,--and painters
did nothing but copy, as well as they could, the external face of nature.
Now, in this age, we have a sort of reviviscence,--not, I fear, of the
power, but of a taste for the power, of the early times.
_June_ 26. 1830.
SENECA.
You may get a motto for every sect in religion, or line of thought in
morals or philosophy, from Seneca; but nothing is ever thought _out_ by
him.
_July_ 2. 1830.
PLATO. --ARISTOTLE.
Every man is born an Aristotelian, or a Platonist. I do not think it
possible that any one born an Aristotelian can become a Platonist; and I am
sure no born Platonist can ever change into an Aristotelian. They are the
two classes of men, beside which it is next to impossible to conceive a
third. The one considers reason a quality, or attribute; the other
considers it a power. I believe that Aristotle never could get to
understand what Plato meant by an idea. There is a passage, indeed, in the
Eudemian Ethics which looks like an exception; but I doubt not of its being
spurious, as that whole work is supposed by some to be. With Plato ideas
are constitutive in themselves. [1]
Aristotle was, and still is, the sovereign lord of the understanding; the
faculty judging by the senses. He was a conceptualist, and never could
raise himself into that higher state, which was natural to Plato, and has
been so to others, in which the understanding is distinctly contemplated,
and, as it were, looked down upon from the throne of actual ideas, or
living, inborn, essential truths.
Yet what a mind was Aristotle's--only not the greatest that ever animated
the human form! --the parent of science, properly so called, the master of
criticism, and the founder or editor of logic! But he confounded science
with philosophy, which is an error. Philosophy is the middle state between
science, or knowledge, and sophia, or wisdom.
[Footnote 1:
Mr. Coleridge said the Eudemian Ethics; but I half suspect he must have
meant the Metaphysics, although I do not know that _all_ the fourteen books
under that title have been considered non-genuine. The [Greek: Aethicha
Eusaemeia] are not Aristotle's. To what passage in particular allusion is
here made, I cannot exactly say; many might be alleged, but not one seems
to express the true Platonic idea, as Mr. Coleridge used to understand it;
and as, I believe, he ultimately considered ideas in his own philosophy.
Fourteen or fifteen years previously, he seems to have been undecided upon
this point. "Whether," he says, "ideas are regulative only, according to
Aristotle and Kant, or likewise _constitutive_, and one with the power and
life of nature, according to Plato and Plotinus [Greek:--eg logo zoae aeg,
chai ae zoae aeg to phos tog agthwpog] is the highest problem of
philosophy, and not part of its nomenclature. " Essay (E) in the Appendix to
the _Statesman's Manual_, 1816. --ED. ]
_July_ 4. 1830.
DUKE OF WELLINGTON. --MONEYED INTEREST. --CANNING.
I sometimes fear the Duke of Wellington is too much disposed to imagine
that he can govern a great nation by word of command, in the same way in
which he governed a highly disciplined army. He seems to be unaccustomed
to, and to despise, the inconsistencies, the weaknesses, the bursts of
heroism followed by prostration and cowardice, which invariably
characterise all popular efforts. He forgets that, after all, it is from
such efforts that all the great and noble institutions of the world have
come; and that, on the other hand, the discipline and organization of
armies have been only like the flight of the cannon-ball, the object of
which is destruction. [1]
[Footnote 1:
Straight forward goes
The lightning's path, and straight the fearful path
Of the cannon-ball.
Direct it flies and rapid,
Shattering that it may reach, and shattering what it reaches.
_Wallenstein_, Part I, act i, sc. 4]
* * * * *
The stock-jobbing and moneyed interest is so strong in this country, that
it has more than once prevailed in our foreign councils over national
honour and national justice. The country gentlemen are not slow to join in
this influence. Canning felt this very keenly, and said he was unable to
contend against the city trained-bands.
_July_ 6, 1830.
BOURRIENNE.
Bourienne is admirable. He is the French Pepys,--a man with right feelings,
but always wishing to participate in what is going on, be it what it may.
He has one remark, when comparing Buonaparte with Charlemagne, the
substance of which I have attempted to express in "The Friend"[1] but which
Bourrienne has condensed into a sentence worthy of Tacitus, or Machiavel,
or Bacon. It is this; that Charlemagne was above his age, whilst Buonaparte
was only above his competitors, but under his age! Bourrienne has done more
than any one else to show Buonaparte to the world as he really was,--always
contemptible, except when acting a part, and that part not his own.
[Footnote 1: Vol. i. Essay 12. p. 133. ]
_July_ 8. 1830.
JEWS.
The other day I was what you would call _floored_ by a Jew. He passed me
several times crying out for old clothes in the most nasal and
extraordinary tone I ever heard. At last I was so provoked, that I said to
him, "Pray, why can't you say 'old clothes' in a plain way as I do now? "
The Jew stopped, and looking very gravely at me, said in a clear and even
fine accent, "Sir, I can say 'old clothes' as well as you can; but if you
had to say so ten times a minute, for an hour together, you would say _Ogh
Clo_ as I do now;" and so he marched off. I was so confounded with the
justice of his retort, that I followed and gave him a shilling, the only
one I had.
* * * * *
I have had a good deal to do with Jews in the course of my life, although I
never borrowed any money of them. Once I sat in a coach opposite a Jew--a
symbol of old clothes' bags--an Isaiah of Hollywell Street. He would close
the window; I opened it. He closed it again; upon which, in a very solemn
tone, I said to him, "Son of Abraham! thou smellest; son of Isaac! thou art
offensive; son of Jacob! thou stinkest foully. See the man in the moon! he
is holding his nose at thee at that distance; dost thou think that I,
sitting here, can endure it any longer? " My Jew was astounded, opened the
window forthwith himself, and said, "he was sorry he did not know before I
was so great a gentleman. "
_July_ 24. 1830.
THE PAPACY AND THE REFORMATION. --LEO X.
During the early part of the middle ages, the papacy was nothing, in fact,
but a confederation of the learned men in the west of Europe against the
barbarism and ignorance of the times. The Pope was chief of this
confederacy; and so long as he retained that character exclusively, his
power was just and irresistible. It was the principal mean of preserving
for us and for our posterity all that we now have of the illumination of
past ages. But as soon as the Pope made a separation between his character
as premier clerk in Christendom and as a secular prince; as soon as he
began to squabble for towns and castles; then he at once broke the charm,
and gave birth to a revolution. From that moment, those who remained firm
to the cause of truth and knowledge became necessary enemies to the Roman
See. The great British schoolmen led the way; then Wicliffe rose, Huss,
Jerome, and others;--in short, every where, but especially throughout the
north of Europe, the breach of feeling and sympathy went on widening,--so
that all Germany, England, Scotland, and other countries started like
giants out of their sleep at the first blast of Luther's trumpet. In
France, one half of the people--and that the most wealthy and enlightened--
embraced the Reformation. The seeds of it were deeply and widely spread in
Spain and in Italy; and as to the latter, if James I. had been an
Elizabeth, I have no doubt at all that Venice would have publicly declared
itself against Rome. It is a profound question to answer, why it is, that
since the middle of the sixteenth century the Reformation has not advanced
one step in Europe.
* * * * *
In the time of Leo X. atheism, or infidelity of some sort, was almost
universal in Italy amongst the high dignitaries of the Romish church.
_July_ 27. 1830.
THELWALL. --SWIFT. --STELLA.
John Thelwall had something very good about him. We were once sitting in a
beautiful recess in the Quantocks, when I said to him, "Citizen John, this
is a fine place to talk treason in! "--"Nay! Citizen Samuel," replied he,
"it is rather a place to make a man forget that there is any necessity for
treason! "
Thelwall thought it very unfair to influence a child's mind by inculcating
any opinions before it should have come to years of discretion, and be able
to choose for itself. I showed him my garden, and told him it was my
botanical garden. "How so? " said he, "it is covered with weeds. "--"Oh," I
replied, "_that_ is only because it has not yet come to its age of
discretion and choice. The weeds, you see, have taken the liberty to grow,
and I thought it unfair in me to prejudice the soil towards roses and
strawberries. "
* * * * *
I think Swift adopted the name of Stella, which is a man's name, with a
feminine termination, to denote the mysterious epicene relation in which
poor Miss Johnston stood to him.
_July_ 28. 1830.
INIQUITOUS LEGISLATION.
That legislation is iniquitous which sets law in conflict with the common
and unsophisticated feelings of our nature. If I were a clergyman in a
smuggling town, I would _not_ preach against smuggling. I would not be made
a sort of clerical revenue officer. Let the government, which by absurd
duties fosters smuggling, prevent it itself, if it can. How could I show my
hearers the immorality of going twenty miles in a boat, and honestly buying
with their money a keg of brandy, except by a long deduction which they
could not understand? But were I in a place where wrecking went on, see if
I would preach on any thing else!
_July_ 29. 1830.
SPURZHEIM AND CRANIOLOOY.
Spurzheim is a good man, and I like him; but he is dense, and the most
ignorant German I ever knew. If he had been content with stating certain
remarkable coincidences between the moral qualities and the configuration
of the skull, it would have been well; but when he began to map out the
cranium dogmatically, he fell into infinite absurdities. You know that
every intellectual act, however you may distinguish it by name in respect
of the originating faculties, is truly the act of the entire man; the
notion of distinct material organs, therefore, in the brain itself, is
plainly absurd. Pressed by this, Spurzheim has, at length, been guilty of
some sheer quackery; and ventures to say that he has actually discovered a
different material in the different parts or organs of the brain, so that
he can tell a piece of benevolence from a bit of destructiveness, and so
forth. Observe, also, that it is constantly found, that so far from there
being a concavity in the interior surface of the cranium answering to the
convexity apparent on the exterior--the interior is convex too. Dr. Baillie
thought there was something in the system, because the notion of the brain
being an extendible net helped to explain those cases where the intellect
remained after the solid substance of the brain was dissolved in water. [1]
That a greater or less development of the forepart of the head is generally
coincidedent with more or less of reasoning power, is certain. The line
across the forehead, also, denoting musical power, is very common.
[Footnote 1:
"The very marked, _positive_ as well as comparative, magnitude and
prominence of the bump, entitled _benevolence_ (see Spurzheim's _map of the
human skull_) on the head of the late Mr. John Thurtell, has woefully
unsettled the faith of many ardent phrenologists, and strengthened the
previous doubts of a still greater number into utter disbelief. On _my_
mind this fact (for a _fact_ it is) produced the directly contrary effect;
and inclined me to suspect, for the first time, that there may be some
truth in the Spurzheimian scheme. Whether future craniologists may not see
cause to _new-name_ this and one or two others of these convex gnomons, is
quite a different question. At present, and according to the present use of
words, any such change would be premature; and we must be content to say,
that Mr. Thurtell's benevolence was insufficiently modified by the
unprotrusive and unindicated convolutes of the brain, that secrete honesty
and common sense. The organ of destructiveness was indirectly _potentiated_
by the absence or imperfect development of the glands of reason and
conscience in this '_unfortunate gentleman. '"--_Aids to Reflection_, p.
143. n. ]
_August_ 20. 1830.
FRENCH REVOLUTION, 1830. --CAPTAIN R. AND THE AMERICANS.
The French must have greatly improved under the influence of a free and
regular government (for such it, in general, has been since the
restoration), to have conducted themselves with so much moderation in
success as they seem to have done, and to be disposed to do.
* * * * *
I must say I cannot see much in Captain B. Hall's account of the Americans,
but weaknesses--some of which make me like the Yankees all the better. How
much more amiable is the American fidgettiness and anxiety about the
opinion of other nations, and especially of the English, than the
sentiments of the rest of the world. [1]
As to what Captain Hall says about the English loyalty to the person of the
King--I can only say, I feel none of it. I respect the man while, and only
while, the king is translucent through him: I reverence the glass case for
the Saint's sake within; except for that it is to me mere glazier's work,--
putty, and glass, and wood.
[Footnote 1:
"There exists in England a _gentlemanly_ character, a _gentlemanly_
feeling, very different even from that which is most like it,--the
character of a well-born Spaniard, and unexampled in the rest of Europe.
This feeling _originated_ in the fortunate circumstance, that the titles of
our English nobility follow the law of their property, and are inherited by
the eldest sons only. From this source, under the influences of our
constitution and of our astonishing trade, it has diffused itself in
different modifications through the whole country. The uniformity of our
dress among all classes above that of the day labourer, while it has
authorized all ranks to assume the appearance of gentlemen, has at the same
time inspired the wish to conform their manners, and still more their
ordinary actions in social intercourse, to their notions of the gentlemanly
the most commonly received attribute of which character is a certain
generosity in trifles. On the other hand, the encroachments of the lower
classes on the higher, occasioned and favoured by this resemblance in
exteriors, by this absence of any cognizable marks of distinction, have
rendered each class more reserved and jealous in their general communion;
and, far more than our climate or natural temper, have caused that
haughtiness and reserve in our outward demeanour, which is so generally
complained of among foreigners. Far be it from me to depreciate the value
of this gentlemanly feeling: I respect it under all its forms and
varieties, from the House of Commons * to the gentleman in the one-shilling
gallery. It is always the ornament of virtue, and oftentimes a support; but
it is a wretched substitute for it. Its _worth_, as a moral good, is by no
means in proportion to its _value_ as a social advantage. These
observations are not irrelevant: for to the want of reflection that this
diffusion of gentlemanly feeling among us is not the growth of our moral
excellence, but the effect of various accidental advantages peculiar to
England; to our not considering that it is unreasonable and uncharitable to
expect the same consequences, where the same causes have not existed to
produce them; and lastly, to our prorieness to regard the absence of this
character (which, as I have before said, does, for the greater part, and in
the common apprehension, consist in a certain frankness and generosity in
the detail of action) as decisive against the sum total of personal or
national worth; we must, I am convinced, attribute a large portion of that
conduct, which in many instances has left the inhabitants of countries
conquered or appropriated by Great Britain doubtful whether the various
solid advantages which they have derived from our protection and just
government were not bought dearly by the wounds inflicted on their feelings
and prejudices, by the contemptuous and insolent demeanour of the English,
as individuals. "--_Friend_, vol. iii. p, 322.
This was written long before the Reform Act. --ED. ]
_September 8. 1830. _
ENGLISH REFORMATION.
The fatal error into which the peculiar character of the English
Reformation threw our Church, has borne bitter fruit ever since,--I mean
that of its clinging to court and state, instead of cultivating the people.
The church ought to be a mediator between the people and the government,
between the poor and the rich. As it is, I fear the Church has let the
hearts of the common people be stolen from it. See how differently the
Church of Rome--wiser in its generation--has always acted in this
particular. For a long time past the Church of England seems to me to have
been blighted with prudence, as it is called. I wish with all my heart we
had a little zealous imprudence.
_September 19. 1830. _
DEMOCRACY. ----IDEA OF A STATE. ----CHURCH.
It has never yet been seen, or clearly announced, that democracy, as such,
is no proper element in the constitution of a state. The idea of a state is
undoubtedly a government [Greek: ek ton aristou]--an aristocracy. Democracy
is the healthful life-blood which circulates through the veins and
arteries, which supports the system, but which ought never to appear
externally, and as the mere blood itself.
A state, in idea, is the opposite of a church. A state regards classes, and
not individuals; and it estimates classes, not by internal merit, but
external accidents, as property, birth, &c. But a church does the reverse
of this, and disregards all external accidents, and looks at men as
individual persons, allowing no gradation of ranks, but such as greater or
less wisdom, learning, and holiness ought to confer. A church is,
therefore, in idea, the only pure democracy. The church, so considered, and
the state, exclusively of the church, constitute together the idea of a
state in its largest sense.
_September_ 20. 1830.
GOVERNMENT. ----FRENCH GEND'ARMERIE.
All temporal government must rest on a compromise of interests and abstract
rights. Who would listen to the county of Bedford, if it were to declare
itself disannexed from the British empire, and to set up for itself?
* * * * *
The most desirable thing that can happen to France, with her immense army
of gensd'armes, is, that the service may at first become very irksome to
the men themselves, and ultimately, by not being called into real service,
fall into general ridicule, like our trained bands. The evil in France, and
throughout Europe, seems now especially to be, the subordination of the
legislative power to the direct physical force of the people. The French
legislature was weak enough before the late revolution; now it is
absolutely powerless, and manifestly depends even for its existence on the
will of a popular commander of an irresistible army. There is now in France
a daily tendency to reduce the legislative body to a mere deputation from
the provinces and towns.
September 21. 1830.
PHILOSOPHY OF YOUNG MEN AT THE PRESENT DAY.
I do not know whether I deceive myself, but it seems to me that the young
men, who were my contemporaries, fixed certain principles in their minds,
and followed them out to their legitimate consequences, in a way which I
rarely witness now. No one seems to have any distinct convictions, right or
wrong; the mind is completely at sea, rolling and pitching on the waves of
facts and personal experiences. Mr. ---- is, I suppose, one of the rising
young men of the day; yet he went on talking, the other evening, and making
remarks with great earnestness, some of which were palpably irreconcilable
with each other. He told me that facts gave birth to, and were the absolute
ground of, principles; to which I said, that unless he had a principle of
selection, he would not have taken notice of those facts upon which he
grounded his principle. You must have a lantern in your hand to give light,
otherwise all the materials in the world are useless, for you cannot find
them; and if you could, you could not arrange them. "But then," said Mr.
----, "_that_ principle of selection came from facts! "--"To be sure! " I
replied; "but there must have been again an antecedent light to see those
antecedent facts. The relapse may be carried in imagination backwards for
ever,--but go back as you may, you cannot come to a man without a previous
aim or principle. " He then asked me what I had to say to Bacon's induction:
I told him I had a good deal to say, if need were; but that it was perhaps
enough for the occasion to remark, that what he was evidently taking for
the Baconian _in_duction was mere _de_duction--a very different thing. [1]
[Footnote 1:
As far as I can judge, the most complete and masterly thing ever done by
Mr. Coleridge in prose, is the analysis and reconcilement of the Platonic
and Baconian methods of philosophy, contained in the third volume of the
Friend, from p. 176 to 216. No edition of the Novum Organum should ever be
published without a transcript of it. --ED. ]
_September_ 22. 1830.
THUCYDIDES AND TACITUS. ----POETRY. ----MODERN METRE.
The object of Thucydides was to show the ills resulting to Greece from the
separation and conflict of the spirits or elements of democracy and
oligarchy. The object of Tacitus was to demonstrate the desperate
consequences of the loss of liberty on the minds and hearts of men.
* * * * *
A poet ought not to pick nature's pocket: let him borrow, and so borrow as
to repay by the very act of borrowing. Examine nature accurately, but write
from recollection; and trust more to your imagination than to your memory.
* * * * *
Really the metre of some of the modern poems I have read, bears about the
same relation to metre properly understood, that dumb bells do to music;
both are for exercise, and pretty severe too, I think.
* * * * *
Nothing ever left a stain on that gentle creature's mind, which looked upon
the degraded men and things around him like moonshine on a dunghill, which
shines and takes no pollution. All things are shadows to him, except those
which move his affections.
September 23. 1830.
LOGIC.
There are two kinds of logic: 1. Syllogistic. 2. Criterional. How any one
can by any spinning make out more than ten or a dozen pages about the
first, is inconceivable to me; all those absurd forms of syllogisms are one
half pure sophisms, and the other half mere forms of rhetoric.
All syllogistic logic is--1. _Se_clusion; 2. _In_clusion; 3. _Con_clusion;
which answer to the understanding, the experience, and the reason. The
first says, this _ought_ to be; the second adds, this _is_; and the last
pronounces, this must be so. The criterional logic, or logic of premisses,
is, of course, much the most important; and it has never yet been treated.
Prophesying is a work of wonderful eloquence and skill; but if we believe
the argument, what do we come to? Why to nothing more or less than this,
that--so much can be said for every opinion and sect,--so impossible is it
to settle any thing by reasoning or authority of Scripture,--we must appeal
to some positive jurisdiction on earth, _ut sit finis controversiarum_. In
fact, the whole book is the precise argument used by the Papists to induce
men to admit the necessity of a supreme and infallible head of the church
on earth. It is one of the works which preeminently gives countenance to
the saying of Charles or James II. , I forget which:--"When you of the
Church of England contend with the Catholics, you use the arguments of the
Puritans; when you contend with the Puritans, you immediately adopt all the
weapons of the Catholics. " Taylor never speaks with the slightest symptom
of affection or respect of Luther, Calvin, or any other of the great
reformers--at least, not in any of his learned works; but he _saints_ every
trumpery monk and friar, down to the very latest canonizations by the
modern popes. I fear you will think me harsh, when I say that I believe
Taylor was, perhaps unconsciously, half a Socinian in heart. Such a strange
inconsistency would not be impossible. The Romish church has produced many
such devout Socinians. The cross of Christ is dimly seen in Taylor's works.
Compare him in this particular with Donne, and you will feel the difference
in a moment. Why are not Donne's volumes of sermons reprinted at Oxford? [2]
[Footnote 1:
Mr. Coleridge placed Jeremy Taylor amongst the four great geniuses of old
English literature. I think he used to reckon Shakspeare and Bacon, Milton
and Taylor, four-square, each against each. In mere eloquence, he thought
the Bishop without any fellow. He called him Chrysostom. Further, he loved
the man, and was anxious to find excuses for some weak parts in his
character. But Mr. Coleridge's assent to Taylor's views of many of the
fundamental positions of Christianity was very limited; and, indeed, he
considered him as the least sound in point of doctrine of any of the old
divines, comprehending, within that designation, the writers to the middle
of Charles II. 's reign. He speaks of Taylor in "The Friend" in the
following terms:--"Among the numerous examples with which I might enforce
this warning, I refer, not without reluctance, to the most eloquent, and
one of the most learned, of our divines; a rigorist, indeed, concerning the
authority of the church, but a latitudinarian in the articles of its faith;
who stretched the latter almost to the advanced posts of Socinianism, and
strained the former to a hazardous conformity with the assumptions of the
Roman hierarchy. " Vol. ii. p. 108. --ED. ]
[Footnote 2:
Why not, indeed! It is really quite unaccountable that the sermons
of this great divine of the English church should be so little known as
they are, even to very literary clergymen of the present day. It might
have been expected, that the sermons of the greatest preacher of his age,
the admired of Ben Jonson, Selden, and all that splendid band of poets
and scholars, would even as curiosities have been reprinted, when works,
which are curious for nothing, are every year sent forth afresh under the
most authoritative auspices. Dr. Donne was educated at both universities,
at Hart Hall, Oxford, first, and afterwards at Cambridge, but at
what college Walton does not mention--ED. ]
* * * * *
In the reign of Edward VI. , the Reformers feared to admit almost any thing
on human authority alone. They had seen and felt the abuses consequent on
the popish theory of Christianity; and I doubt not they wished and intended
to reconstruct the religion and the church, as far as was possible, upon
the plan of the primitive ages? But the Puritans pushed this bias to an
absolute bibliolatry. They would not put on a corn-plaster without scraping
a text over it. Men of learning, however, soon felt that this was wrong in
the other extreme, and indeed united itself to the very abuse it seemed to
shun. They saw that a knowledge of the Fathers, and of early tradition, was
absolutely necessary; and unhappily, in many instances, the excess of the
Puritans drove the men of learning into the old popish extreme of denying
the Scriptures to be capable of affording a rule of faith without the
dogmas of the church. Taylor is a striking instance how far a Protestant
might be driven in this direction.
_June_ 6. 1830.
CATHOLICITY. --GNOSIS. --TERTULLIAN. --ST. JOHN.
In the first century, catholicity was the test of a book or epistle--
whether it were of the Evangelicon or Apostolicon--being canonical. This
catholic spirit was opposed to the gnostic or peculiar spirit,--the humour
of fantastical interpretation of the old Scriptures into Christian
meanings. It is this gnosis, or _knowingness,_ which the Apostle says
puffeth up,--not _knowledge_, as we translate it. The Epistle of Barnabas,
of the genuineness of which I have no sort of doubt, is an example of this
gnostic spirit. The Epistle to the Hebrews is the only instance of gnosis
in the canon: it was written evidently by some apostolical man before the
destruction of the Temple, and probably at Alexandria. For three hundred
years, and more, it was not admitted into the canon, especially not by the
Latin church, on account of this difference in it from the other
Scriptures. But its merit was so great, and the gnosis in it is so kept
within due bounds, that its admirers at last succeeded, especially by
affixing St. Paul's name to it, to have it included in the canon; which was
first done, I think, by the council of Laodicea in the middle of the fourth
century. Fortunately for us it was so.
* * * * *
I beg Tertullian's pardon; but amongst his many _bravuras_, he says
something about St. Paul's autograph. Origen expressly declares the
reverse.
* * * * *
It is delightful to think, that the beloved apostle was born a Plato. To
him was left the almost oracular utterance of the mysteries of the
Christian religion while to St. Paul was committed the task of explanation,
defence, and assertion of all the doctrines, and especially of those
metaphysical ones touching the will and grace;[1] for which purpose his
active mind, his learned education, and his Greek logic, made him
pre-eminently fit.
[Footnote 1:
"The imperative and oracular form of the inspired Scripture is the form of
reason itself, in all things purely rational and moral. "--_Statesman's
Manual_, p. 22. ]
June 7. 1830.
PRINCIPLES OF A REVIEW. --PARTY-SPIRIT.
Notwithstanding what you say, I am persuaded that a review would amply
succeed even now, which should be started upon a published code of
principles, critical, moral, political, and religious; which should
announce what sort of books it would review, namely, works of literature as
contradistinguished from all that offspring of the press, which in the
present age supplies food for the craving caused by the extended ability of
reading without any correspondent education of the mind, and which formerly
was done by conversation, and which should really give a fair account of
what the author intended to do, and in his own words, if possible, and in
addition, afford one or two fair specimens of the execution,--itself never
descending for one moment to any personality. It should also be provided
before the commencement with a dozen powerful articles upon fundamental
topics to appear in succession. You see the great reviewers are now ashamed
of reviewing works in the old style, and have taken up essay writing
instead. Hence arose such publications as the Literary Gazette and others,
which are set up for the purpose--not a useless one--of advertizing new
books of all sorts for the circulating libraries. A mean between the two
extremes still remains to be taken.
* * * * *
Party men always hate a slightly differing friend more than a downright
enemy. I quite calculate on my being one day or other holden in worse
repute by many Christians than the Unitarians and open infidels. It must be
undergone by every one who loves the truth for its own sake beyond all
other things.
* * * * *
Truth is a good dog; but beware of barking too close to the heels of an
error, lest you get your brains kicked out.
_June_ 10. 1830.
SOUTHEY'S LIFE OF BUNYAN. --LAUD. --PURITANS AND CAVALIERS. --PRESBYTERIANS,
INDEPENDENTS, AND BISHOPS.
Southey's Life of Bunyan is beautiful. I wish he had illustrated that mood
of mind which exaggerates, and still more, mistakes, the inward
depravation, as in Bunyan, Nelson, and others, by extracts from Baxter's
Life of himself. What genuine superstition is exemplified in that bandying
of texts and half texts, and demi-semi-texts, just as memory happened to
suggest them, or chance brought them before Bunyan's mind! His tract,
entitled, "Grace abounding to the Chief of Sinners"[1] is a study for a
philosopher.
[Footnote 1:
"Grace abounding to the Chief of Sinners, in a faithful Account of the Life
and Death of John Bunyan, &c. " Is it not, however, an historical error to
call the Puritans dissenters? Before St. Bartholomew's day, they were
essentially a part of the church, and had as determined opinions in favour
of a church establishment as the bishops themselves.
* * * * *
Laud was not exactly a Papist to be sure; but he was on the road with the
church with him to a point, where declared popery would have been
inevitable. A wise and vigorous Papist king would very soon, and very
justifiably too, in that case, have effected a reconciliation between the
churches of Rome and England, when the line of demarcation had become so
very faint.
* * * * *
The faults of the Puritans were many; but surely their morality will, in
general, bear comparison with that of the Cavaliers after the Restoration.
* * * * *
The Presbyterians hated the Independents much more than they did the
bishops, which induced them to cooperate in effecting the Restoration.
* * * * *
The conduct of the bishops towards Charles, whilst at Breda, was wise and
constitutional. They knew, however, that when the forms of the constitution
were once restored, all their power would revive again as of course.
June 14. 1830.
STUDY OF THE BIBLE.
Intense study of the Bible will keep any writer from being _vulgar_, in
point of style.
June 15. 1830.
RABELAIS. --SWIFT. --BENTLEY. --SUBNET.
Rabelais is a most wonderful writer. Pantagruel is the Reason; Panurge the
Understanding,--the pollarded man, the man with every faculty except the
reason. I scarcely know an example more illustrative of the distinction
between the two. Rabelais had no mode of speaking the truth in those days
but in such a form as this; as it was, he was indebted to the King's
protection for his life. Some of the commentators talk about his book being
all political; there are contemporary politics in it, of course, but the
real scope is much higher and more philosophical. It is in vain to look
about for a hidden meaning in all that he has written; you will observe
that, after any particularly deep thrust, as the Papimania[1] for example,
Rabelais, as if to break the blow, and to appear unconscious of what he has
done, writes a chapter or two of pure buffoonery.
He, every now and then, flashes you a glimpse of a real face from his magic
lantern, and then buries the whole scene in mist. The morality of the work
is of the most refined and exalted kind; as for the manners, to be sure, I
cannot say much.
Swift was _anima Rabelaisii habitans in sicco_,--the soul of Rabelais
dwelling in a dry place.
Yet Swift was rare. Can any thing beat his remark on King William's motto,
--_Recepit, non rapuit_,--"that the receiver was as bad as the thief? "
[Footnote 1:
B. iv. c. 48. "Comment Pantagruel descendit en l'Isle de Papimanes. " See
the five following chapters, especially c. 50. ; and note also c. 9. of the
fifth book; "Comment nous fut monstre Papegaut a grande difficulte. "--ED. ]
* * * * *
The effect of the Tory wits attacking Bentley with such acrimony has been
to make them appear a set of shallow and incompetent scholars. Neither
Bentley nor Burnet suffered from the hostility of the wits. Burnet's
"History of his own Times" is a truly valuable book. His credulity is
great, but his simplicity is equally great; and he never deceives you for a
moment.
_June_ 25. 1830.
GIOTTO. --PAINTING.
The fresco paintings by Giotto[1] and others, in the cemetery at Pisa,
are most noble. Giotto was a contemporary of Dante: and it is a curious
question, whether the painters borrowed from the poet, or _vice versa_.
Certainly M. Angelo and Raffael fed their imaginations highly with these
grand drawings, especially M. Angelo, who took from them his bold yet
graceful lines.
[Footnote 1:
Giotto, or Angiolotto's birth is fixed by Vasari in 1276, but there is
some reason to think that he was born a little earlier. Dante, who was
his friend, was born in 1265. Giotto was the pupil of Cimabue, whom he
entirely eclipsed, as Dante testifies in the well-known lines in
the Purgatorio:--
"O vana gloria dell'umane posse!
Com' poco verde in su la cima dura,
Se non e giunta dall' etati grosse!
Credette Cirnabue nella pintura
Tener lo campo: ed ora ha Giotto il grido,
Si che la fama di colui oscura. "--C. xi. v. 91.
His six great frescos in the cemetery at Pisa are upon the sufferings and
patience of Job. --ED. ]
* * * * *
People may say what they please about the gradual improvement of the Arts.
It is not true of the substance. The Arts and the Muses both spring forth
in the youth of nations, like Minerva from the front of Jupiter, all armed:
manual dexterity may, indeed, he improved by practice.
* * * * *
Painting went on in power till, in Raffael, it attained the zenith, and in
him too it showed signs of a tendency downwards by another path. The
painter began to think of overcoming difficulties. After this the descent
was rapid, till sculptors began to work inveterate likenesses of perriwigs
in marble,--as see Algarotti's tomb in the cemetery at Pisa,--and painters
did nothing but copy, as well as they could, the external face of nature.
Now, in this age, we have a sort of reviviscence,--not, I fear, of the
power, but of a taste for the power, of the early times.
_June_ 26. 1830.
SENECA.
You may get a motto for every sect in religion, or line of thought in
morals or philosophy, from Seneca; but nothing is ever thought _out_ by
him.
_July_ 2. 1830.
PLATO. --ARISTOTLE.
Every man is born an Aristotelian, or a Platonist. I do not think it
possible that any one born an Aristotelian can become a Platonist; and I am
sure no born Platonist can ever change into an Aristotelian. They are the
two classes of men, beside which it is next to impossible to conceive a
third. The one considers reason a quality, or attribute; the other
considers it a power. I believe that Aristotle never could get to
understand what Plato meant by an idea. There is a passage, indeed, in the
Eudemian Ethics which looks like an exception; but I doubt not of its being
spurious, as that whole work is supposed by some to be. With Plato ideas
are constitutive in themselves. [1]
Aristotle was, and still is, the sovereign lord of the understanding; the
faculty judging by the senses. He was a conceptualist, and never could
raise himself into that higher state, which was natural to Plato, and has
been so to others, in which the understanding is distinctly contemplated,
and, as it were, looked down upon from the throne of actual ideas, or
living, inborn, essential truths.
Yet what a mind was Aristotle's--only not the greatest that ever animated
the human form! --the parent of science, properly so called, the master of
criticism, and the founder or editor of logic! But he confounded science
with philosophy, which is an error. Philosophy is the middle state between
science, or knowledge, and sophia, or wisdom.
[Footnote 1:
Mr. Coleridge said the Eudemian Ethics; but I half suspect he must have
meant the Metaphysics, although I do not know that _all_ the fourteen books
under that title have been considered non-genuine. The [Greek: Aethicha
Eusaemeia] are not Aristotle's. To what passage in particular allusion is
here made, I cannot exactly say; many might be alleged, but not one seems
to express the true Platonic idea, as Mr. Coleridge used to understand it;
and as, I believe, he ultimately considered ideas in his own philosophy.
Fourteen or fifteen years previously, he seems to have been undecided upon
this point. "Whether," he says, "ideas are regulative only, according to
Aristotle and Kant, or likewise _constitutive_, and one with the power and
life of nature, according to Plato and Plotinus [Greek:--eg logo zoae aeg,
chai ae zoae aeg to phos tog agthwpog] is the highest problem of
philosophy, and not part of its nomenclature. " Essay (E) in the Appendix to
the _Statesman's Manual_, 1816. --ED. ]
_July_ 4. 1830.
DUKE OF WELLINGTON. --MONEYED INTEREST. --CANNING.
I sometimes fear the Duke of Wellington is too much disposed to imagine
that he can govern a great nation by word of command, in the same way in
which he governed a highly disciplined army. He seems to be unaccustomed
to, and to despise, the inconsistencies, the weaknesses, the bursts of
heroism followed by prostration and cowardice, which invariably
characterise all popular efforts. He forgets that, after all, it is from
such efforts that all the great and noble institutions of the world have
come; and that, on the other hand, the discipline and organization of
armies have been only like the flight of the cannon-ball, the object of
which is destruction. [1]
[Footnote 1:
Straight forward goes
The lightning's path, and straight the fearful path
Of the cannon-ball.
Direct it flies and rapid,
Shattering that it may reach, and shattering what it reaches.
_Wallenstein_, Part I, act i, sc. 4]
* * * * *
The stock-jobbing and moneyed interest is so strong in this country, that
it has more than once prevailed in our foreign councils over national
honour and national justice. The country gentlemen are not slow to join in
this influence. Canning felt this very keenly, and said he was unable to
contend against the city trained-bands.
_July_ 6, 1830.
BOURRIENNE.
Bourienne is admirable. He is the French Pepys,--a man with right feelings,
but always wishing to participate in what is going on, be it what it may.
He has one remark, when comparing Buonaparte with Charlemagne, the
substance of which I have attempted to express in "The Friend"[1] but which
Bourrienne has condensed into a sentence worthy of Tacitus, or Machiavel,
or Bacon. It is this; that Charlemagne was above his age, whilst Buonaparte
was only above his competitors, but under his age! Bourrienne has done more
than any one else to show Buonaparte to the world as he really was,--always
contemptible, except when acting a part, and that part not his own.
[Footnote 1: Vol. i. Essay 12. p. 133. ]
_July_ 8. 1830.
JEWS.
The other day I was what you would call _floored_ by a Jew. He passed me
several times crying out for old clothes in the most nasal and
extraordinary tone I ever heard. At last I was so provoked, that I said to
him, "Pray, why can't you say 'old clothes' in a plain way as I do now? "
The Jew stopped, and looking very gravely at me, said in a clear and even
fine accent, "Sir, I can say 'old clothes' as well as you can; but if you
had to say so ten times a minute, for an hour together, you would say _Ogh
Clo_ as I do now;" and so he marched off. I was so confounded with the
justice of his retort, that I followed and gave him a shilling, the only
one I had.
* * * * *
I have had a good deal to do with Jews in the course of my life, although I
never borrowed any money of them. Once I sat in a coach opposite a Jew--a
symbol of old clothes' bags--an Isaiah of Hollywell Street. He would close
the window; I opened it. He closed it again; upon which, in a very solemn
tone, I said to him, "Son of Abraham! thou smellest; son of Isaac! thou art
offensive; son of Jacob! thou stinkest foully. See the man in the moon! he
is holding his nose at thee at that distance; dost thou think that I,
sitting here, can endure it any longer? " My Jew was astounded, opened the
window forthwith himself, and said, "he was sorry he did not know before I
was so great a gentleman. "
_July_ 24. 1830.
THE PAPACY AND THE REFORMATION. --LEO X.
During the early part of the middle ages, the papacy was nothing, in fact,
but a confederation of the learned men in the west of Europe against the
barbarism and ignorance of the times. The Pope was chief of this
confederacy; and so long as he retained that character exclusively, his
power was just and irresistible. It was the principal mean of preserving
for us and for our posterity all that we now have of the illumination of
past ages. But as soon as the Pope made a separation between his character
as premier clerk in Christendom and as a secular prince; as soon as he
began to squabble for towns and castles; then he at once broke the charm,
and gave birth to a revolution. From that moment, those who remained firm
to the cause of truth and knowledge became necessary enemies to the Roman
See. The great British schoolmen led the way; then Wicliffe rose, Huss,
Jerome, and others;--in short, every where, but especially throughout the
north of Europe, the breach of feeling and sympathy went on widening,--so
that all Germany, England, Scotland, and other countries started like
giants out of their sleep at the first blast of Luther's trumpet. In
France, one half of the people--and that the most wealthy and enlightened--
embraced the Reformation. The seeds of it were deeply and widely spread in
Spain and in Italy; and as to the latter, if James I. had been an
Elizabeth, I have no doubt at all that Venice would have publicly declared
itself against Rome. It is a profound question to answer, why it is, that
since the middle of the sixteenth century the Reformation has not advanced
one step in Europe.
* * * * *
In the time of Leo X. atheism, or infidelity of some sort, was almost
universal in Italy amongst the high dignitaries of the Romish church.
_July_ 27. 1830.
THELWALL. --SWIFT. --STELLA.
John Thelwall had something very good about him. We were once sitting in a
beautiful recess in the Quantocks, when I said to him, "Citizen John, this
is a fine place to talk treason in! "--"Nay! Citizen Samuel," replied he,
"it is rather a place to make a man forget that there is any necessity for
treason! "
Thelwall thought it very unfair to influence a child's mind by inculcating
any opinions before it should have come to years of discretion, and be able
to choose for itself. I showed him my garden, and told him it was my
botanical garden. "How so? " said he, "it is covered with weeds. "--"Oh," I
replied, "_that_ is only because it has not yet come to its age of
discretion and choice. The weeds, you see, have taken the liberty to grow,
and I thought it unfair in me to prejudice the soil towards roses and
strawberries. "
* * * * *
I think Swift adopted the name of Stella, which is a man's name, with a
feminine termination, to denote the mysterious epicene relation in which
poor Miss Johnston stood to him.
_July_ 28. 1830.
INIQUITOUS LEGISLATION.
That legislation is iniquitous which sets law in conflict with the common
and unsophisticated feelings of our nature. If I were a clergyman in a
smuggling town, I would _not_ preach against smuggling. I would not be made
a sort of clerical revenue officer. Let the government, which by absurd
duties fosters smuggling, prevent it itself, if it can. How could I show my
hearers the immorality of going twenty miles in a boat, and honestly buying
with their money a keg of brandy, except by a long deduction which they
could not understand? But were I in a place where wrecking went on, see if
I would preach on any thing else!
_July_ 29. 1830.
SPURZHEIM AND CRANIOLOOY.
Spurzheim is a good man, and I like him; but he is dense, and the most
ignorant German I ever knew. If he had been content with stating certain
remarkable coincidences between the moral qualities and the configuration
of the skull, it would have been well; but when he began to map out the
cranium dogmatically, he fell into infinite absurdities. You know that
every intellectual act, however you may distinguish it by name in respect
of the originating faculties, is truly the act of the entire man; the
notion of distinct material organs, therefore, in the brain itself, is
plainly absurd. Pressed by this, Spurzheim has, at length, been guilty of
some sheer quackery; and ventures to say that he has actually discovered a
different material in the different parts or organs of the brain, so that
he can tell a piece of benevolence from a bit of destructiveness, and so
forth. Observe, also, that it is constantly found, that so far from there
being a concavity in the interior surface of the cranium answering to the
convexity apparent on the exterior--the interior is convex too. Dr. Baillie
thought there was something in the system, because the notion of the brain
being an extendible net helped to explain those cases where the intellect
remained after the solid substance of the brain was dissolved in water. [1]
That a greater or less development of the forepart of the head is generally
coincidedent with more or less of reasoning power, is certain. The line
across the forehead, also, denoting musical power, is very common.
[Footnote 1:
"The very marked, _positive_ as well as comparative, magnitude and
prominence of the bump, entitled _benevolence_ (see Spurzheim's _map of the
human skull_) on the head of the late Mr. John Thurtell, has woefully
unsettled the faith of many ardent phrenologists, and strengthened the
previous doubts of a still greater number into utter disbelief. On _my_
mind this fact (for a _fact_ it is) produced the directly contrary effect;
and inclined me to suspect, for the first time, that there may be some
truth in the Spurzheimian scheme. Whether future craniologists may not see
cause to _new-name_ this and one or two others of these convex gnomons, is
quite a different question. At present, and according to the present use of
words, any such change would be premature; and we must be content to say,
that Mr. Thurtell's benevolence was insufficiently modified by the
unprotrusive and unindicated convolutes of the brain, that secrete honesty
and common sense. The organ of destructiveness was indirectly _potentiated_
by the absence or imperfect development of the glands of reason and
conscience in this '_unfortunate gentleman. '"--_Aids to Reflection_, p.
143. n. ]
_August_ 20. 1830.
FRENCH REVOLUTION, 1830. --CAPTAIN R. AND THE AMERICANS.
The French must have greatly improved under the influence of a free and
regular government (for such it, in general, has been since the
restoration), to have conducted themselves with so much moderation in
success as they seem to have done, and to be disposed to do.
* * * * *
I must say I cannot see much in Captain B. Hall's account of the Americans,
but weaknesses--some of which make me like the Yankees all the better. How
much more amiable is the American fidgettiness and anxiety about the
opinion of other nations, and especially of the English, than the
sentiments of the rest of the world. [1]
As to what Captain Hall says about the English loyalty to the person of the
King--I can only say, I feel none of it. I respect the man while, and only
while, the king is translucent through him: I reverence the glass case for
the Saint's sake within; except for that it is to me mere glazier's work,--
putty, and glass, and wood.
[Footnote 1:
"There exists in England a _gentlemanly_ character, a _gentlemanly_
feeling, very different even from that which is most like it,--the
character of a well-born Spaniard, and unexampled in the rest of Europe.
This feeling _originated_ in the fortunate circumstance, that the titles of
our English nobility follow the law of their property, and are inherited by
the eldest sons only. From this source, under the influences of our
constitution and of our astonishing trade, it has diffused itself in
different modifications through the whole country. The uniformity of our
dress among all classes above that of the day labourer, while it has
authorized all ranks to assume the appearance of gentlemen, has at the same
time inspired the wish to conform their manners, and still more their
ordinary actions in social intercourse, to their notions of the gentlemanly
the most commonly received attribute of which character is a certain
generosity in trifles. On the other hand, the encroachments of the lower
classes on the higher, occasioned and favoured by this resemblance in
exteriors, by this absence of any cognizable marks of distinction, have
rendered each class more reserved and jealous in their general communion;
and, far more than our climate or natural temper, have caused that
haughtiness and reserve in our outward demeanour, which is so generally
complained of among foreigners. Far be it from me to depreciate the value
of this gentlemanly feeling: I respect it under all its forms and
varieties, from the House of Commons * to the gentleman in the one-shilling
gallery. It is always the ornament of virtue, and oftentimes a support; but
it is a wretched substitute for it. Its _worth_, as a moral good, is by no
means in proportion to its _value_ as a social advantage. These
observations are not irrelevant: for to the want of reflection that this
diffusion of gentlemanly feeling among us is not the growth of our moral
excellence, but the effect of various accidental advantages peculiar to
England; to our not considering that it is unreasonable and uncharitable to
expect the same consequences, where the same causes have not existed to
produce them; and lastly, to our prorieness to regard the absence of this
character (which, as I have before said, does, for the greater part, and in
the common apprehension, consist in a certain frankness and generosity in
the detail of action) as decisive against the sum total of personal or
national worth; we must, I am convinced, attribute a large portion of that
conduct, which in many instances has left the inhabitants of countries
conquered or appropriated by Great Britain doubtful whether the various
solid advantages which they have derived from our protection and just
government were not bought dearly by the wounds inflicted on their feelings
and prejudices, by the contemptuous and insolent demeanour of the English,
as individuals. "--_Friend_, vol. iii. p, 322.
This was written long before the Reform Act. --ED. ]
_September 8. 1830. _
ENGLISH REFORMATION.
The fatal error into which the peculiar character of the English
Reformation threw our Church, has borne bitter fruit ever since,--I mean
that of its clinging to court and state, instead of cultivating the people.
The church ought to be a mediator between the people and the government,
between the poor and the rich. As it is, I fear the Church has let the
hearts of the common people be stolen from it. See how differently the
Church of Rome--wiser in its generation--has always acted in this
particular. For a long time past the Church of England seems to me to have
been blighted with prudence, as it is called. I wish with all my heart we
had a little zealous imprudence.
_September 19. 1830. _
DEMOCRACY. ----IDEA OF A STATE. ----CHURCH.
It has never yet been seen, or clearly announced, that democracy, as such,
is no proper element in the constitution of a state. The idea of a state is
undoubtedly a government [Greek: ek ton aristou]--an aristocracy. Democracy
is the healthful life-blood which circulates through the veins and
arteries, which supports the system, but which ought never to appear
externally, and as the mere blood itself.
A state, in idea, is the opposite of a church. A state regards classes, and
not individuals; and it estimates classes, not by internal merit, but
external accidents, as property, birth, &c. But a church does the reverse
of this, and disregards all external accidents, and looks at men as
individual persons, allowing no gradation of ranks, but such as greater or
less wisdom, learning, and holiness ought to confer. A church is,
therefore, in idea, the only pure democracy. The church, so considered, and
the state, exclusively of the church, constitute together the idea of a
state in its largest sense.
_September_ 20. 1830.
GOVERNMENT. ----FRENCH GEND'ARMERIE.
All temporal government must rest on a compromise of interests and abstract
rights. Who would listen to the county of Bedford, if it were to declare
itself disannexed from the British empire, and to set up for itself?
* * * * *
The most desirable thing that can happen to France, with her immense army
of gensd'armes, is, that the service may at first become very irksome to
the men themselves, and ultimately, by not being called into real service,
fall into general ridicule, like our trained bands. The evil in France, and
throughout Europe, seems now especially to be, the subordination of the
legislative power to the direct physical force of the people. The French
legislature was weak enough before the late revolution; now it is
absolutely powerless, and manifestly depends even for its existence on the
will of a popular commander of an irresistible army. There is now in France
a daily tendency to reduce the legislative body to a mere deputation from
the provinces and towns.
September 21. 1830.
PHILOSOPHY OF YOUNG MEN AT THE PRESENT DAY.
I do not know whether I deceive myself, but it seems to me that the young
men, who were my contemporaries, fixed certain principles in their minds,
and followed them out to their legitimate consequences, in a way which I
rarely witness now. No one seems to have any distinct convictions, right or
wrong; the mind is completely at sea, rolling and pitching on the waves of
facts and personal experiences. Mr. ---- is, I suppose, one of the rising
young men of the day; yet he went on talking, the other evening, and making
remarks with great earnestness, some of which were palpably irreconcilable
with each other. He told me that facts gave birth to, and were the absolute
ground of, principles; to which I said, that unless he had a principle of
selection, he would not have taken notice of those facts upon which he
grounded his principle. You must have a lantern in your hand to give light,
otherwise all the materials in the world are useless, for you cannot find
them; and if you could, you could not arrange them. "But then," said Mr.
----, "_that_ principle of selection came from facts! "--"To be sure! " I
replied; "but there must have been again an antecedent light to see those
antecedent facts. The relapse may be carried in imagination backwards for
ever,--but go back as you may, you cannot come to a man without a previous
aim or principle. " He then asked me what I had to say to Bacon's induction:
I told him I had a good deal to say, if need were; but that it was perhaps
enough for the occasion to remark, that what he was evidently taking for
the Baconian _in_duction was mere _de_duction--a very different thing. [1]
[Footnote 1:
As far as I can judge, the most complete and masterly thing ever done by
Mr. Coleridge in prose, is the analysis and reconcilement of the Platonic
and Baconian methods of philosophy, contained in the third volume of the
Friend, from p. 176 to 216. No edition of the Novum Organum should ever be
published without a transcript of it. --ED. ]
_September_ 22. 1830.
THUCYDIDES AND TACITUS. ----POETRY. ----MODERN METRE.
The object of Thucydides was to show the ills resulting to Greece from the
separation and conflict of the spirits or elements of democracy and
oligarchy. The object of Tacitus was to demonstrate the desperate
consequences of the loss of liberty on the minds and hearts of men.
* * * * *
A poet ought not to pick nature's pocket: let him borrow, and so borrow as
to repay by the very act of borrowing. Examine nature accurately, but write
from recollection; and trust more to your imagination than to your memory.
* * * * *
Really the metre of some of the modern poems I have read, bears about the
same relation to metre properly understood, that dumb bells do to music;
both are for exercise, and pretty severe too, I think.
* * * * *
Nothing ever left a stain on that gentle creature's mind, which looked upon
the degraded men and things around him like moonshine on a dunghill, which
shines and takes no pollution. All things are shadows to him, except those
which move his affections.
September 23. 1830.
LOGIC.
There are two kinds of logic: 1. Syllogistic. 2. Criterional. How any one
can by any spinning make out more than ten or a dozen pages about the
first, is inconceivable to me; all those absurd forms of syllogisms are one
half pure sophisms, and the other half mere forms of rhetoric.
All syllogistic logic is--1. _Se_clusion; 2. _In_clusion; 3. _Con_clusion;
which answer to the understanding, the experience, and the reason. The
first says, this _ought_ to be; the second adds, this _is_; and the last
pronounces, this must be so. The criterional logic, or logic of premisses,
is, of course, much the most important; and it has never yet been treated.
