1 Stow’s Annals, ed. 1615, pp. 570, 575. ↑
2 Burnet, Hist. of the Reformation, ed. Nares, ii, 179; iii, 289; Strype, Memorials of Cranmer, ed. 1848–54, ii, 100. ↑
3 The Marian persecutions undoubtedly did much to stimulate Protestantism. It is not generally realized that many of the burnings of heretics under Mary were quasi-sacrifices on her behalf. On each occasion of her hopes of pregnancy being disappointed, some victims were sent to the stake. See Strype, ed. cited, iii, 196, and Peter Martyr, there cited; Froude, ed. 1870, v, 521 sq., 539 sq. The influence of Spanish ecclesiastics may be inferred. The expulsions of the Jews and the Moriscoes from Spain were by way of averting the wrath of God. Still, a Spanish priest at Court preached in favour of mercy. Lingard, ed. 1855, v, 231. ↑
4 The number slain was certainly not small. It amounted to at least 190, perhaps to 204. Soames, Elizabethan Religious History, 1839, p. 596–98. Under Mary there perished some 288. Durham Dunlop, The Church under the Tudors, 1869, p. 104 and refs. ↑
5 Soames, as cited, pp. 213–18, and refs. ↑
6 Froude, Hist. of England, ed. 1870, x, 545 (ed. 1875, xi, 199), citing MSS. Ireland. ↑
7 Gloss to February in the Shepherd’s Calendar, Globe ed. pp. 451–52. ↑
8 Euphues: The Anatomy of Wit, Arber’s reprint, pp. 140, 153. That the reference was mainly to Oxford is to be inferred from the address “To my verie good friends the Gentlemen Schollers of Oxford,” prefixed to the ed. of 1581. Id. p. 207. ↑
12 Lecky, Rationalism, i, 103–104. Scot’s book (now made accessible by a reprint, 1886) had practically no influence in his own day; and King James, who wrote against it, caused it to be burned by the hangman in the next. Scot inserts the “infidelitie of atheists” in the list of intellectual evils on his title-page; but save for an allusion to “the abhomination of idolatrie” all the others indicted are aspects of the black art. ↑
13 “No woman ever lived who was so totally destitute of the sentiment of religion” (Green, Short History, ch. vii, § 3, p. 369). ↑
14 Cp. Soames, Elizabethan Religious History, 1839, p. 225. Yet when Morris, the attorney of the Duchy of Lancaster, introduced in Parliament a Bill to restrain the power of the ecclesiastical courts, she had him dismissed and imprisoned for life, being determined that the control should remain, through those courts, in her own hands. Heylyn, Hist. of the Reformation, ed. 1849, pref. vol. i, pp. xiv–xv. ↑
15 See above, vol. i, pp. 435, 446, 459. ↑
16 Collier’s Reprint, p. 190. ↑
17 Camden, Annals of Elizabeth, sub. ann. 1580; 3rd ed. 1635, p. 218. Cp. Soames, p. 214. ↑
18 Hooker, Pref. to Ecclesiastical Polity, ch. iii, § 9, ed. 1850. Camden (p. 219) states that the Dutch teacher Henry Nichalai, whose works were translated for the sect, “gave out that he did partake of God, and God of his humanity.” ↑
19 See above, i, 458, as to a much more pronounced heresy in 1549, which also seems to have escaped punishment. Camden tells that the books of the “Family of Love” were burnt in 1580, but mentions no other penalties. Stow records that on October 9, 1580, “proclamation was published at London for the apprehension and severe punishing of all persons suspected to be of the family of love.” Ed. 1615, p. 687. Five of them had been frightened into a public recantation in 1575. Id. p. 679. ↑
20 May 13, 1579. The burning was on the 20th. ↑
21 Stow’s Annals, ed. 1580, pp. 1, 194–95. Ed. 1615, p. 695. ↑
22 Stow, ed. 1615, p. 697; David’s Evidence, by William Burton, Preacher of Reading, 1592 (?), p. 125. ↑
24 Burton, as cited. See below, pp. 7, 12, as to Kett’s writings. ↑
25 Art. Matthew Hamond, in Dict. of Nat. Biog. ↑
26 Art. Francis Kett, in Dict. of Nat. Biog. ↑
27 Prof. Storojenko, Life of Greene, Eng. tr. in Grosart’s “Huth Library” ed. of Greene’s Works, i, 42–50. It is quite clear that Malone and the critics who have followed him were wrong in supposing the unnamed instructor to be Francis Kett, who was a devout Unitarian. Prof. Storojenko speaks of Kett as having been made an Arian at Norwich, after his return there in 1585, by the influence of Lewes and Haworth. Query Hamond? ↑
28 In Pierce’s Supererogation, Collier’s ed. p. 85. ↑
29 Rep. of Nashe’s Works in Grosart’s “Huth Library” ed. vol. iv, pp. 172, 173, 178, 182, 183. etc. Ed. McKerrow. 1904, ii, 114–129. ↑
30 MS. Harl. 6853, fol. 320. It is given in full in the appendix to the first issue of the selected plays of Marlowe in the Mermaid Series, edited by Mr. Havelock Ellis: and, with omissions, in the editions of Cunningham, Dyce, and Bullen. ↑
32 Grosart’s ed. in “Temple Dramatists” series, 11. 246–371. There is plenty of “irreligion” in the passage, but not atheism, though there is a denial of a future state (365–70). The lines in question strongly suggest Marlowe’s influence or authorship, which indeed is claimed by Mr. C. Crawford for the whole play. But all the external evidence ascribes the play to Greene. ↑
33 Tamburlaine, Part II, Act II, sc. ii, iii; V, sc. i. ↑
34 Writing as Andrew Philopater. See Dict. of Nat. Biog., art. Robert Parsons, and Storojenko, as cited, i, 36, and note. ↑
35 Translated into Latin by Henri Estienne in 1562. ↑
36 Remains of Sir Walter Raleigh, ed. 1657, p. 123. ↑
40 Art. Raleigh, in Dict. of Nat. Biog., xlvii, 192. ↑
42 Report in 1736 ed. of History of the World, p. ccxlix. “Harpool” seems an error for Harriott. Cp. Edwards, Life of Sir Walter Raleigh, 1868, i, 432, 436. It is after naming “Harpool” that the judge says: “Let not any devil persuade you to think there is no eternity in heaven.” ↑
47 Cp. Gardiner, History of England, 1603–1642, 10-vol. ed. i, 132–35; iii, 150, 152. ↑
49 Title of verses appended to trans. of Achilles Shield, 1598. Chapman spells the name Harriots. ↑
50 Pref. to complete trans. of Iliad. ↑
51 Bk. v, ch. ii, §§ 1–4. Works, ed. 1850, i, 432–36. ↑
52 Exposition upon Nehemiah (1585) in Parker Soc. ed. of Works, 1812, p. 401. ↑
53 Work cited, pp. 8–11, 22. ↑
54 Works, i, 432; ii, 762–63. ↑
55 Eccles. Pol. bk. i, ch. vii; bk. ii, ch. i, vii; bk. iii, ch. viii, § 16; bk. v, ch. viii; bk. vii, ch. xi; bk. viii, § 6 (Works, i, 165, 231, 300, 446; ii, 388, 537). See the citations in Buckle, 3-vol. ed. iii, 341–42; 1-vol. ed. pp. 193–94. ↑
56 Supplication of Travers, in Hooker’s Works, ed. 1850, ii, 662. ↑
57 Answer to Travers, id. p. 693. ↑
58 Some typical attempts of the kind are discussed in the author’s two lectures on The Religion of Shakespeare, 1887 (South Place Institute). ↑
59 Shakespeare Commentaries, Eng. tr. 1863, ii, 618–19. ↑
61 In the last edition I had written to that effect; but I have modified the opinion. ↑
62 The allusion to “popish ceremonies” in Titus Andronicus is probably from his hand. See the author’s work, Did Shakespeare Write “Titus Andronicus”?, where it is argued that the play in question is substantially Peele’s and Greene’s. ↑
63 Shakespeare Soc. rep. 1853, pp. 14, 16–17, 18, 24, 28, etc. ↑
64 This has been shown to be his by Fleay and Mr. Crawford. ↑
65 See his Groatsworth of Wit Bought with a Million of Repentance. ↑
66 Compare the Jane Shore portions of his Edward IV with the close of A Woman Killed with Kindness. Note also the conclusion of The English Traveller. ↑
67 See the poem England’s Elizabeth, 1631. ↑
68 Henslowe’s Diary, ed. Greg, i, fol. 96. ↑
69 E.g., the lines,
The best of men
That e’er wore earth about him, was a sufferer,
A soft, meek, patient, humble, tranquil spirit,
The first true gentleman that ever breathed,
at the close of Part I of The Honest Whore; and the phrase, “Heaven’s great arithmetician,” at the close of Old Fortunatus. ↑
70 Green, Short Hist. ch. vii, § 7 end. Cp. Ruskin, Sesame and Lilies, Lect. iii, § 115. ↑
71 The old work of W. J. Birch, M.A., An Inquiry into the Philosophy and Religion of Shakspere (1848), is an unjudicial ex parte statement of the case for Shakespeare’s unbelief; but it is worth study. ↑
72 The town paid for his bread and wine, no doubt by way of compliment. ↑
73 Cp. the author’s Montaigne and Shakespeare, 2nd ed. sec. viii. ↑
74 A Woorke concerning the trewnesse of the Christian Religion, 1587. Reprinted in 1592, 1604, and 1617. ↑
75 As to the expert analysis of this play, which shows it to be in large part Fletcher’s, see Furnivall, as cited, pp. xciii–xcvi. ↑
76 Cp. Seccombe and Allen, The Age of Shakspere, 1903, ii, 189. ↑
77 Alberti, Briefe betreffende den Zustand der Religion in Gross-Britannien, Hanover, 1752, ii, 429. Alberti reads “God” at the end of the passage; I follow Grosart’s edition. ↑
78 Hallam, Lit. Europe, ii, 371, 376; Pattison, Isaac Casaubon, 2nd ed. p. 286 sq. ↑
79 Pattison, as cited, p. 290; G. W. Johnson, Memoirs of John Selden, 1835, pp. 56–70. ↑
80 Memoirs cited, pp. 60–61. On the whole question see the Review appended by Selden to his History after a few copies had been distributed. ↑
81 Poems of Sir John Davies, ed. Grosart, 1876, i, 82, 83. ↑
82 Essaies Politicke and Morall, by D. T. Gent, 1608, fol. 9. ↑
84 Act i, sc. 1. Jonson himself could have been so indicted on the strength of certain verses. ↑
85 He had been offered professorships of divinity at Saumur and Marburg. ↑
86 Gardiner, History of England, 1603–1642, 4th ed. ii, 128. Cp. Bayle, art. Vorstius, Note N. By his theological opponents and by James, Vorstius was of course called an atheist. He was in reality not a Socinian, but a “strict Arian, who believed that the Son of God was at first created by the Father, and then delegated to create the universe—a sort of inferior deity, who was nevertheless entitled to religious homage” (James Nichols, note to App. P. on Brandt’s Life of Arminius in Works of Arminius, 1825, i, 218). Nichols gives a full survey of the subject, pp. 202–237. Fuller (Ch. Hist. B. x, cent. 17, sec. iv, §§ 1–5) tells the story, and pronounces the opinions of Vorstius “fitter to be remanded to hell than committed to writing.” ↑
87 Bayle (art. cited, Note F) says both Universities, as does Fuller. At the Synod of Dort, however, the British representatives read only, it seems, a decree (dated Sept. 21, 1611) of the Vice-Chancellor of Cambridge, ordering the burning of the book there. (Nichols, Account of the Synod of Dort, in Works of Arminius, i, 497). ↑
88 Gardiner, pp. 129–30. Fuller (as last cited, §§ 6–14) gives a list of Legate’s “damnable tenets.” See it in Mrs. Bradlaugh Bonner’s Penalties upon Opinion, pp. 12–14. ↑
89 Gardiner, as cited. Fuller is cheerfully acquiescent, though he notes the private demurs, which he denounces. “God,” he says, “may seem well pleased with this seasonable severity.” ↑
90 In 1580 Stow records how one Randall was put on trial for “conjuring to know where treasure was hid in the earth and goods feloniously taken were become”; and four others were tried “for being present.” Four were found guilty and sentenced to be hanged. Randall was executed, and the others reprieved. (Ed. 1615, p. 688.) ↑
91 Fuller actually alleges that “there was none ever after that openly avowed these heretical doctrines”—an unintelligible figment. ↑
92 All reprinted in 1816 for the Hanserd Knollys Society, with histor. introd. by E. B. Underhill, in the vol. Tracts on Liberty of Conscience and Persecution, 1614–1661. They do not speak of Legate or Wightman. ↑
93 Atheomastix, 1622, pref. Sig. B. 3, verso. The work was posthumous and incomplete. ↑
95 In the Advancement of Learning, bk. i (Routledge ed. p. 54), he himself notes how, long before his time, the new learning had in part discredited the schoolmen. ↑
96 Filum Labyrinthi—an English version of the Cogitata et Visa—§ 7. ↑
97 Cp. Huarte, cited above, p. 471. ↑
98 Nov. Org. bk. i. Aph. 62 (Works, Routledge ed. p. 271). ↑
100 Id. ib. Cp. the Advancement of Learning, bk. ii, and the De Augmentis, bk. ix, near end. (Ed. cited, pp. 173, 634.) ↑
101 Nov. Org. Aph. 89. Cp. Aph. 46, 49, 96; the Valerius Terminus, ch. xxv; the English Filum Labyrinthi, § 7; and the De Principiis atque Originibus (ed. cited, p. 650). ↑
102 Valerius Terminus, cap. i. (Ed. cited, p. 188.) ↑
103 Id. p. 187; Filum Labyrinthi, p. 209. ↑
104 Bk. ix, ch. i. (Ed. cited, p. 631.) Compare Valerius Terminus, ch. i (p. 186), and De Aug. bk. iii, ch. ii (p. 456), as to the impossibility of knowing the will and character of God from Nature, though (De Aug. last cit.) it reveals his power and glory. ↑
105 Advancement, bk. i (ed. cited, p. 45). Cp. Valerius Terminus, ch. i (p. 187). ↑
106 Advancement, bk. ii; De Augmentis, bk. iii, chs. iv and v; Valerius Terminus, ch. xxv; Novum Organum, bk. i, Aph. 48; bk. ii, Aph. 2. (Ed. cited, pp. 96, 205, 266, 302, 471, 473.) ↑
107 De Principiis atque Originibus. (Ed. cited, pp. 649–50.) Elsewhere (De Aug. bk. iii, ch. iv, p. 471) he expressly puts it that the system of Democritus, which “removed God and mind from the structure of things,” was more favourable to true science than the teleology and theology of Plato and Aristotle. ↑
110 De Augmentis, bk. iii, ch. ii; bk. iv, ch. ii. (Ed. cited, pp. 456, 482.) ↑
111 Id. bk. ii, ch. i. (Ed. cited, p. 428.) ↑
112 De Augmentis, ed. cited, p. 73. ↑
113 No. xviii, Diomedes. Ed. cited, p. 841. ↑
114 De Principiis atque Originibus, p. 664. ↑
115 Nov. Org. i. 89; Filum Labyrinthi, § 7; Essay 16. ↑
116 Francis Osborn, pref. to his “Miscellany,” in Works, 7th ed. 1673. ↑
117 Cp. Valerius Terminus, ch. i. ↑
118 This is noted by Glassford in his tr. of the Novum Organum (1844, p. 26); and by Ellis in his and Spedding’s edition of the Works. (Routledge ed. pp. 32, 473, note.) ↑
119 De Augmentis, bk. iii, ch. iv, end. ↑
121 Valerius Terminus, ch. xxv. ↑
122 De Principiis, ed. cited, pp. 648–49. Cp. pp. 612–43. ↑
124 Valerius Terminus, ch. ii; De Augmentis, bk. v, ch. iv. Ed. cited, pp. 199, 517. ↑
125 Cp. Brewster, Life of Newton, 1855, ii, 400–404; Draper, Intel. Devel. of Europe, ed. 1875, ii, 258–60; Dean Church, Bacon, pp. 180–201; Fowler, Bacon, ch. vi; Lodge, Pioneers of Science, pp. 145–51; Lange, Gesch. d. Materialismus, i, 197 sq. (Eng. tr. i, 236–37), and cit. from Liebig—as to whom, however, see Fowler, pp. 133, 157. ↑
126 Novum Organum, ii, 46 and 48, § 17; De Aug. iii, 4; Thema Coeli. Ed. cited, pp. 364, 375, 461, 705, 709. Whewell (Hist. of Induct. Sciences, 3rd ed. i, 296, 298) ignores the second and third of these passages in denying Hume’s assertion that Bacon rejected the Copernican theory with “disdain.” It is true, however, that Bacon had vacillated. The facts are fairly faced by Prof. Fowler in his Bacon, 1881, pp. 151–52, and his ed. of Novum Organum, Introd. pp. 30–36. See also the summing-up of Ellis in notes to passages above cited, and at p. 675. ↑
127 Aubrey, Lives of Eminent Persons, ed. 1813, vol. ii, pt. ii, p. 383. ↑
128 See notes in ed. cited, pp. 50, 53, 61, 63, 68, 75, 76, 84, 110. ↑
129 Fowler, ed. of Nov. Org. § 14, pp. 101–104. ↑
130 Id. § 14, p. 108; Ellis in ed. cited, p. 643. ↑
131 Rawley’s Life, in ed. cited, p. 9; Osborn, as above cited; Fowler, ed. of Nov. Org. Introd. § 14; T. Martin, Character of Bacon, 1835, pp. 216, 227, 222–23. ↑
132 Cp. Fowler, Bacon, pp. 139–41; Mill, Logic, bk. vi, ch. v, § 5; Jevons, Princ. of Science, 1-vol. ed. p. 576; Tyndall, Scientific Use of the Imagination, 3rd ed. pp. 4, 8–9, 42–43; T. Martin, as cited, pp. 210–38; Bagehot, Postulates of Eng. Polit. Econ. ed. 1885, pp. 18–19; Ellis and Spedding, in ed. cited, pp. x, xii, 22, 389. The notion of a dialectic method which should mechanically enable any man to make discoveries is an irredeemable fallacy, and must be abandoned. Bacon’s own remarkable anticipation of modern scientific thought in the formula that heat is a mode of motion (Nov. Org. ii, 20) is not mechanically yielded by his own process, noteworthy and suggestive though that is. ↑
134 Works, ed. Dublin. 1766, p. 159; ed. 1910, p. 344. ↑
135 Kohlrausch, Hist. of Germany, Eng. tr. p. 385. ↑
136 Moritz Ritter, Geschichte der deutschen Union, 1867–73, ii, 55. ↑
137 Menzel, Geschichte der Deutschen, 3te Aufl. Cap. 416. ↑
138 Cp. Gardiner, Thirty Years’ War, pp. 12–13; Kohlrausch, p. 438; Pusey, Histor. Enq. into Ger. Rationalism, pp. 9–25; Henderson, Short Hist. of Germany, i, ch. xvi. ↑
139 Kohlrausch, p. 439. A specially strong reaction set in about 1573. Ritter, Geschichte der deutschen Union, i, 19. Cp. Menzel, Cap. 433. ↑
140 Cp. Gardiner, Thirty Years’ War, pp. 16, 18, 21; Kohlrausch, p. 370. ↑
141 As to this see Moritz Ritter, as cited, i, 9, 27; ii, 122 sq.; Dunham, Hist. of the Germanic Empire, iii, 186; Henderson, i, 411 sq. ↑
142 Freytag, Bilder aus d. deutschen Vergangenheit, Bd. ii, 1883, p. 381; Bd. iii, ad init. ↑
143 Cp. Lecky, Rationalism in Europe, i, 53–83. ↑
144 Freytag, Bilder, Bd. ii, Abth. ii, p. 378. ↑
145 The Pope and the Council, Eng. tr. p. 260; French tr. p. 285. ↑
146 De Praestigiis Daemonum, 1563. See it described by Lecky, Rationalism, i, 85–87; Hallam, Lit. of Europe, ii, 76. ↑
147 By Dutch historians Wier is claimed as a Dutchman. He was born at Grave, in North Brabant, but studied medicine at Paris and Orleans, and after practising physic at Arnheim in the Netherlands was called to Düsseldorf as physician to the Duke of Jülich, to whom he dedicated his treatise. His ideas are probably traceable to his studies in France. ↑
148 His collected works (1632) amount to nearly 7,000 folio pages. J. Ten Brink, Kleine Geschiedenis der Nederlandsche Letteren, 1882, p. 91. ↑
149 Ten Brink, p. 86. Jonckbloet (Beknopte Geschiedenis der Nederl. Letterkunde, ed. 1880, p. 148) is less specific. ↑
151 Hallam, Lit. of Europe, ii, 83. ↑
153 Jonckbloet, Beknopte Geschiedenis, p. 149; Ten Brink, p. 91; Bayle, Dictionnaire, art. Koornhert; Pünjer, Hist. of the Chr. Philos. of Religion, Eng. tr. p. 269; Dr. E. Gosse, art. on Dutch Literature in Encyc. Brit. 9th ed. xii, 93. ↑
156 De Jure Belli et Pacis, proleg. §§ 11, 16. ↑
158 Schlegel’s note on Mosheim, Reid’s ed. p. 862. ↑
159 Nelson, Life of Bishop Bull, 2nd ed. 1714, p. 392. ↑
160 Nicéron, Mémoires pour servir, etc., xiv (1731), 340 sq. One of the replies is the Justa Detestatio sceleratissimi libelli Adriani Beverlandi De Peccato Originali, by Leonard Ryssen, 1680. A very free version of Beverland’s book appeared in French in 1714 under the title Etat de l’Homme dans le Peché Originel. It reached a sixth edition in 1741. ↑
161 Nelson, Life of Bishop Bull, as cited, p. 280. ↑
162 Krasinski, Ref. in Poland, 1840, ii, 363; Mosheim, 16 Cent. sec. iii, pt. ii, ch. iv, § 22. Budny translated the Bible, with rationalistic notes. ↑
164 Mosheim, last cit. § 23, note 4. ↑
165 Krasinski, p. 367; Wallace, Antitrin. Biog. 1850, ii, 320. ↑