Front Page Titles (by Subject) notes - An Elegant and Learned Discourse of the Light of Nature
The Online Library of Liberty
A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.
Search this Title:
notes - Nathaniel Culverwell, An Elegant and Learned Discourse of the Light of Nature 
An Elegant and Learned Discourse of the Light of Nature, ed. Robert A. Greene and Hugh MacCallum, foreword by Robert A. Greene (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2001).
About Liberty Fund:
Liberty Fund, Inc. is a private, educational foundation established to encourage the study of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.
The copyright to this edition, in both print and electronic forms, is held by Liberty Fund, Inc.
Fair use statement:
This material is put online to further the educational goals of Liberty Fund, Inc. Unless otherwise stated in the Copyright Information section above, this material may be used freely for educational and academic purposes. It may not be used in any way for profit.
In the following notes the expression “quoted in” indicates the editors’ opinion that Culverwell drew the quotation from the secondary source named.
The Epistle Dedicatory
1.Susceptours: godfathers. OED discovers in Dillingham’s use of the term the first example of the metaphoric meaning of supporter or maintainer.
To the Reader
2.See chap. 1, n. 19.
3.1 Sam. 21:9.
4.1 Tim. 6:16.
1.Nathaniel’s younger brother, Richard, one of the first two Campden exhibitioners at St. Paul’s School, followed him to Cambridge, receiving his B.A. in 1638 and his M.A. in 1642. He was ordained deacon in 1642, and priest in 1662. Richard was successively Fellow (1640), Tutor (1643–47), and Junior Dean (1645–46) of Trinity College. Although his medical history of hypochondria (“the ruines of a crazy body”) was sufficiently complicated to be recorded by Dr. Pratt in 1645 (British Library: Sloane MS587, ff. 1–12), he subsequently became rector of Grundisburgh in Suffolk (1648) and survived until 1688.
3.See chap. 8, n. 16. Richard’s letter continually echoes the text of the Discourse; only the more obvious instances have been noted.
4.An allusion to two passages in the New Testament which cite classical authors: Acts 17:28 (Aratus and Epimenides), and 1 Cor. 15:33 (Menander). Cf. chap. 11, n. 75.
7.After the capture of Jerusalem, Pompey is said to have entered the Temple and even the Holy of Holies. See Dion Cassius, Roman History, XXXVII, 15 and Josephus, Jewish Wars, XIV, 4.
8.The “court of the Gentiles” was the area of the temple at Jerusalem more frequently called “the outer court” (Ezek. 40:17). See Acts 17:28 and chap. 11, n. 75. Culverwell uses the expression on p. 188.
10.1 Pet. 1:12.
12.See chap. 17, n. 34.
14.1 Cor. 10:9.
16.Compurgatours: one who testifies to or vindicates another’s innocence, veracity, or accuracy.
1.The Vulgate reads “lucerna Domini spiraculum hominis,” and the AV “the spirit of man is the candle of the Lord.” Culverwell’s use of the term “understanding” is apparently original, for it is not found in any of the chief English translations; however, his version receives support from the Biblia Hebraica Eorundem Latina Interpretatio brought out by Santes Pagninus in 1528: “Lucerna Domini mens hominis.” (Pagninus’ footnote advises that “mens” is “animus.”) Culverwell quotes the Greek of the Septuagint correctly, and then provides the variant readings of subsequent translators of the second century. Aquila was a proselyte to Judaism who lived in the reign of Hadrian (117–38). His translation, which was extremely literal, appears to have been designed to undermine the support which the Septuagint version gave to the views of the Christian church. Theodotion was also a Jewish proselyte, but he produced a free revision of the Septuagint rather than an independent translation. Symmachus reacted against the literalism of Aquila and attempted to express the sense of the Hebrew original rather than provide an exact verbal rendering. The researches of Origen in the following century brought to light three other anonymous translations, and these he added to his scholarly version of the Septuagint, Hexaplorum Quae Supersunt. In its six columns, the Hexapla contained (1) the Hebrew, (2) the Hebrew transliterated, (3) Aquila, (4) Symmachus, (5) the Septuagint and variants from the three minor translators, (6) Theodotion. See H. B. Swete, An Introduction to the Old Testament in Greek, rev. ed., 1914, 31–55, and 59–86. Much of this material was made available in Culverwell’s period in the notes by Peter Morinus to the Roman edition of the Septuagint (Rome, 1587), and in J. Drusius, Veterum Interpretum Graecorum in totum vetus Testamentum Fragmenta (Arnheim, 1622). The relevant entry in Drusius’ edition reads: “נר. A. Sym. Th. λύχνος: lucerna. caeteri. λαμπτήρ: fax sive lucerna.”
2.Bacon, The Advancement of Learning (Works, III, 350): “… out of the contemplation of nature, or ground of human knowledges, to induce any verity or persuasion concerning the points of faith, is in my judgement not safe: Da fidei quae fidei sunt[give unto Faith that which is Faith’s]: … we ought not to attempt to draw down or submit the mysteries of God to our reason; but contrariwise to raise and advance our reason to the divine truth.” See also Bacon, Works, III, 218 and IV, 342.
3.Gen. 27. “If the understanding will not consent to a revelation, until it see a reason of the proposition, it does not obey at all, for it will not submit, till it cannot choose. In these cases Reason and Religion are like Leah and Rachel: Reason is fruitful indeed, and brings forth the first-born, but she is blear-ey’d, and oftentimes knows not the secrets of her Lord; but Rachel produces two children, Faith and Piety, and Obedience is Midwife to them both, and Modesty is the Nurse.” Jeremy Taylor, Ductor Dubitantium (London, 1660), 50. See note 11 below.
5.Rom. 16:16; 1 Cor. 16:20; and elsewhere.
6.Cf. Ps. 85:10, and 169 below.
8.Faustus Socinus (1539–1604) was a Sienese nobleman who settled in Poland and became a spokesman for religious reform throughout Europe. The faith which he and his friends evolved was marked by scripturalism and rationalism in about equal proportions. They held that the Bible was a complete and perfect revelation of the will of God, yet they also insisted that reason was necessary for the comprehension of this revelation. This emphasis on reason led them to deny two of the basic articles of traditional Christianity, the divinity and the atoning sacrifice of Christ. Apart from John Biddle and Paul Best, Socinianism found little militant support in England, but the Socinian literature which filtered into the country throughout the century had a pervasive effect. “Socinianism” became a term of reproach among orthodox divines—it was used against Chillingworth by Francis Cheynell and against Whichcote by Tuckney—and Culverwell wishes to dissociate his defense of reason from the more extreme rationalism of the continental writers. See H. J. McLachlan, Socinianism in Seventeenth-Century England (Oxford, 1951).
11.Gen. 29:17; AV has “tender eyed” but Douay “blear-eyed.”
13.Acts 3:2; Ps. 84:10.
16.Pindar, Olympian Odes, VI, 4, 5.
17.A reference to Samuel Hoard, Gods Love to Mankind (London, 1633), which was answered by Bishop John Davenant, Animadversions … upon a treatise intitled Gods Love to Mankind (London, 1641). John Arrowsmith, Master of St. John’s College and later of Trinity College, in a posthumous work edited by William Dillingham and Thomas Horton, Armilla Catechetica (Cambridge, 1659), 317, recommended Davenant’s book in which “the reader will not onely meet with the doctrine of Predestination modestly handled, but also with ample satisfaction to most of those wicked cavils which flesh and bloud have been wont to suggest against it.”
18.Culverwell is probably thinking of John Eaton’s Honey-comb of free Justification by Christ Alone (London, 1642); Eaton, according to Ephraim Pagitt, Heresiography (London, 1645), 89, was “the first Antinomian among us.” The remaining phrases appear to be merely characteristic slogans from the literature of left-wing Puritanism. Cf. William Prynne, A Fresh Discovery of some Prodigious New Wandring-Blasing-Stars, & Firebrands, Stiling themselves New-Lights, Firing our Church and State into New Combustions (London, 1645), 1: “those New-Lights and Sectaries, sprung up among us, who (being many of them Anabaptists) have all new-christned themselves of late, by the common name of Independents,” and the anonymous pamphlet, A True and Perfect Picture … a Short View of the New-Lights that have Brake forth since Bishops Went Downe (London, 1648).
19.1 Sam. 17:26 and 51; Whichcote employs the story in a similar manner in his second letter to Tuckney: “I deserve as little to be called a Socinian, as David for extorting Goliath’s sword out of his hand, and cutting the master’s head off with it, did deserve to be esteemed a Philistine.” Cf. Richard Hooker, Of the Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity, III, 8, x: “‘The Word of God is a two-edged sword,’ but in the hands of reasonable men; and Reason, as the weapon that slew Goliath, if they be as David was that use it.”
20.Robert Francis Bellarmine (1542–1621) was a Jesuit theologian, writer, and cardinal. He held the chair of controversies at the Roman College, and his most influential work was Disputationes de Controversiis Christianae Fidei, 1586–93. A dispute with James I over the oath of allegiance made him well-known in England; his most serious English opponent in theological matters was William Whitaker.
23.Acts 17:23; Charles Hotham in his Ad Philosophiam Teutonicam Manuductio (London, 1648, tr. 1650), an oration delivered at the commencement at Cambridge in 1647, addresses the members of the university and his fellow-students as “you noble Athenians.”
24.As Dillingham observes in the preface “To the Reader,” Culverwell did not live to complete this plan.
1.1 Sam. 10:23, Septuagint.
3.Eccles. 1:14; AV translates “vexation of spirit” and the Vulgate “afflictio spiritus,” but Culverwell’s version (depastio spiritus) retains the literal sense of the Hebrew: “feeding on wind.”
4.Compare Bacon’s use of this story of Solomon and Prov. 20:27 in the first pages of The Advancement of Learning (Works, III, 265–66).
7.Prov. 20:27: as the English and Latin translations suggest, Culverwell has reversed the order of the Hebrew words, although such a reversal would not give the meaning he indicates.
8.The linking of Prov. 20:27 with Gen. 2:7 is not unusual in Renaissance biblical commentaries; cf., e.g., Cornelius Jansen the Elder, Commentaria in Proverbia Salomonis (London, 1586), and Ralph Baynes, In Proverbia Salomonis (Paris, 1555), although it is rare in English commentaries of the early seventeenth century; but see Henry Ainsworth, Annotations upon Genesis (London, 1621).
9.This definition is quoted from Santes Pagninus, Thesaurus Linguae Sanctae sive Lexicon Hebraicum (Geneva, 1614), col. 1715. Culverwell relies mainly on this lexicon and its quotations from rabbinical sources in the following discussion of the various meanings of the three Hebrew words for soul: נשמח (neshamah), דוח (ruach), and נפש (nephesch).
10.Pagninus, Thesaurus, col. 1715: a popular false etymology repeated by Ainsworth, Annotations, sig. B4: “The breath here is in Hebrew Neshamah, which hath affinitie with Shamajin heavens: usually it signifieth eyther the breath of God or of men, not of other things: and so it is put for man’s minde, or reasonable soule[Proverbs 20:27]. And this Mind is the Lord’s Candle, searching all the inward roomes of the belly.” Cf. also Edward Leigh, Critica Sacra (London, 1642), s.v.
11.Pagninus, Thesaurus, cols. 1715 and 1658.
12.Acts 17:25, quoted in Pagninus, Thesaurus, col. 1715.
13.1 Cor. 15:44, 45: “It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.” Culverwell closely paraphrases Pagninus, Thesaurus, cols. 1659 and 1715; cf. Ainsworth, Annotations, sig. B4.
14.Culverwell may have discovered the names of the three souls in Valentine Schindler, Lexicon Pentaglotton (Frankfort, 1612), col. 1147.
15.Pagninus, Thesaurus, col. 2654.
16.See Pagninus, Thesaurus, col. 2654, and Schindler, Lexicon, cols. 1709–10: “Per metonymiam …animae affectus, seu motus animi bonus aut malus.” Cf. also Diogenes Laertius, Lives, VIII, 30: “The soul of man, he [Pythagoras] says, is divided into three parts, intelligence [νου̑ς], reason [φρήν], and passion [θυμός].”
17.Pagninus, Thesaurus, col. 1715.
18.2 Cor. 5:17.
19.In Prov. 20:27.
20.See Gen. 2:7 and Pagninus, Thesaurus, col. 1715; cf. n. 8 above.
21.Schindler, Lexicon, col. 1177; Culverwell repeats Schindler’s use of Hebrew characters to express the Arabic phrase for “breath of life.”
22.John Calvin, Commentary on the First Book of Moses called Genesis, tr. John King (Edinburgh, 1847), 112: “Whatever the greater part of the ancients might think, I do not hesitate to subscribe to the opinion of those who explain this passage of the animal life of man; and thus I expound what they call the vital spirit, by the word breath… here mention is made only of the lower faculty of the soul, which imparts breath to the body, and gives it vigour and motion. … Now we know that the powers of the human mind are many and various. Wherefore, there is nothing absurd in supposing that Moses here alludes only to one of them; but omits the intellectual part, of which mention has been made in the first chapter.” Bacon comments on the same passage in De Augmentis Scientiarum (Works, IV, 396): “For touching the first generation of the rational soul, the Scripture says, ‘He hath made man of the dust of the earth, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life’; whereas the generation of the irrational soul, or that of the brutes, was effected by the words, ‘Let the water bring forth, let the earth bring forth.’ Now this soul (as it exists in man) is only the instrument of the rational soul, and has its origin like that of the brutes in the dust of the earth. For it is not said that ‘He made the body of man of the dust of the earth,’ but that ‘He made man’; that is the entire man, excepting only the breath of life.” See also Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 75, art. 6.
1.Thomas Bradwardine (ca. 1290–1359), Archbishop of Canterbury, author of De Causa Dei contra Pelagium, ed. H. Savile (London, 1618); he is appropriately linked here with Saint Augustine as a defender of the Christian doctrine of grace.
2.John Selden (1584–1654), De Jure Naturali (London, 1640); Hugo Grotius (1583–1645), De Jure Belli ac Pacis (Paris, 1625); Claudius Salmasius (1588–1653), Epistola ad Andream Colvium, super Cap. xi primae ad Corinth. Epist. De Caesarie Virorum et Mulierum Coma (Leiden, 1644). The dialogue De Coma was published at Leiden a year later and the two were sometimes bound together, as in the British Library copy.
3.Aristotle, Physics, II, i. Culverwell gives the Latin form of this definition just below: “principium motus & quietis.”
4.Thomas Aquinas, Commentaria in Octo Physicorum Aristotelis Libros (Venice, 1551), 16 (commentary on book II, chap. i).
5.Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 91, art. 2: “Hence the Psalmist … in answer … says: The light of thy countenance, O Lord, is signed upon us thus implying that the light of natural reason, whereby we discern what is good and what is evil, which is the function of the natural law, is nothing else than an imprint on us of the Divine light.”
6.Plutarch, On the Pleasures of Philosophers, 875B.
7.Plutarch, Against Colotes, 1111F.
8.Plato, Laws, X, 888E.
9.Plato, The Sophist, 265C.
10.Plato, Laws, X, 889A.
12.Ibid., 892D ff.
15.Plato, The Sophist, 265C.
17.2 Peter 1:4.
18.Thomas Fowler’s explanation of “natura naturans” in his edition of Bacon’s Novum Organum (Oxford, 1889), 344, is worth repeating: “Natura Naturata is the actual condition of a given object or quality, or of the aggregate of all objects and qualities, the Universe, at any given time; Natura Naturans is the immanent cause of this condition, or aggregate of conditions, and is regarded as producing it by a continuous process. Hence, Natura Naturans is related to Natura Naturata as cause to effect.” See also Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 85, art. 6.
19.Plutarch, On Affection for Offspring, 495C.
20.A central principle of Aristotle’s teleological philosophy; see, e.g., On the Heavens, II, xi.
21.Durandus of Saint-Pourcain (ca. 1270–1332), In Petri Lombardi Sententias Theologicas Commentariorum, II, dist. 1, qu. 5: “Utrum Deus agat immediate in omni actione creaturae.” The metaphors of clock and organ are Culverwell’s.
22.Cf. Sir Thomas Browne, Religio Medici, I, 16, 17; ed. L. C. Martin (Oxford, 1964), 15, 16: “Nor do I so forget God, as to adore the name of Nature; which I define not with the Schooles, the principle of motion and rest, but, that streight and regular line, that setled and constant course the wisdome of God hath ordained the actions of his creatures, according to their severall kinds. … This is the ordinary and open way of his providence … there is another way full of Meanders and Labyrinths, … and that is a more particular and obscure method of his providence, directing the operations of individuals and single Essences; this we call Fortune, that serpentine and crooked line, whereby he drawes those actions his wisdome intends in a more unknowne and secret way.”
23.Plutarch, Symposiacs, 732E.
24.Seneca, De Beneficiis, IV, 8.
25.See, e.g., Galen, Of the Movement of Muscles in Medicorum Graecorum Opera, ed. D. C. G. Kuhn (Leipzig, 1821–30), IV, 452, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xii, 26 (2).
26.Aristotle, Categories, VIII, 9a.
27.Grotius comments on 1 Cor. 11:14 in De Jure, II, xii, 26 (2): “In this passage, and elsewhere at times, the law of nature has been used to designate that which is everywhere the accepted custom. So in the writings of the Apostle Paul nature herself is said to teach that it is disgraceful for a man to wear long hair, though nevertheless this is not repugnant to nature, and has been customary among many nations.”
28.Salmasius, Epistola ad Andream Colvium, 718; 1 Cor. 11:14 is also discussed in De Coma, 51 ff.
1.Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 90, art. 1, quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, I, i, 1.
3.Rom. 7:23; the text is cited by Suárez, De Legibus, I, i, 3.
4.Suárez employs the phrase lex fomitas in De Legibus, I, i, 3, and refers the reader to Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 90, art. 1, and qu. 90, art. 6.
5.This argument appears frequently in Suárez, De Legibus; see I, i, 5; II, xvii, 6; I, iii, 8: “‘Law’ is to be attributed to insensate things, not in its strict sense, but metaphorically. Not even brute animals are capable of law in a strict sense, since they have the use neither of reason nor of liberty; so that it is only by a like metaphor that natural law may be ascribed to them.” For the history of this idea, see E. Zilsel, “Genesis of the Concept of Physical Law,”Philosophical Review, 51 (1942), 245–79.
6.Suárez, De Legibus, I, i, 5.
7.Plato, Laws, II; viewing music both literally and figuratively, Plato in the second book examines its role in education and maintains that “the criterion of music should be pleasure; not, however, the pleasure of any chance person; rather I should regard that music which pleases the best men and the highly educated as about the best, and as quite the best if it pleases the one man who excels all others in virtue and education.”
8.Plato, Minos (also known as De Legibus), 318B.
9.Aristotle, Problems, XIX, 28.
10.Plato, Minos, 313B; the next three Greek quotations are from the following parts of the same source: 313C, 314E, 315A. Compare Cudworth’s discussion of the same source in A Treatise concerning Eternal and Immutable Morality (London, 1731), 285.
11.ὌνὌντων does not occur in Aristotle’s works, nor is it likely to come from any other classical author. The Platonic ὌνὌντως (true being), Phaedrus 247E and The Sophist 266E have probably combined with the biblical trope “king of kings” found in Deut. 10:17; Dan. 2:47; and 1 Tim. 6:15 to produce the idea and the phrase. Robert Burton attributes the Latin equivalent (ens entium) to Aristotle in The Anatomy of Melancholy, pt. III, sect. 4, memb. 1, subsect. 2.
12.Demosthenes, Against Aristogeiton, I, 16.
13.Plato, Minos, 317C.
15.Plutarch, To an Uneducated Ruler, 780E.
16.Suárez, De Legibus, I, i, 6; Suárez provides a free paraphrase of Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 96, art. 4.
17.See Suárez, De Legibus, II, iv, 4, and Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 93, art. 3.
18.See the discussion in Plato, Laws, 662C–663B.
19.The image of the golden chain had its origin in Homer, Iliad, VIII, 18–27, and was given currency by Plato, Theaetetus, 153C. English writers could find it in Chaucer, Knight’s Tale (I-A-2987–93). As a symbol of divine order the golden chain was popular in the seventeenth century, being used by Milton in Prolusion I, Sir Thomas Browne in Religio Medici, I, 18, Drummond of Hawthornden in A Cypress Grove, II, and twice by Bacon in De Augmentis Scientiarum (Works, I, 525, 545, or IV, 322, 342). The first use of the image by Bacon may have been in Culverwell’s mind: “Nor need we wonder if the horns of Pan reach even to the heaven, seeing that the transcendentals of nature, or universal ideas, do in a manner reach up to divinity. And hence the famous chain of Homer (that is, the chain of natural causes) was said to be fastened to the foot of Jupiter’s throne.”
20.This and the following Greek passage are from Plato, Minos, 317B and 316E, respectively.
21.See Plato, Gorgias, 488 ff.
22.Aristotle, Rhetoric to Alexander, I (1420a).
23.Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 90, art. 4, quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, I, xii, 3.
24.Suárez, De Legibus, I, xii, 5.
25.Suárez provides a full discussion of this subject in De Legibus, I, iv, 5, and I, v, 22–25: “strictly speaking … the binding obligation imposed by law is derived from the will of the legislator.”
26.Suárez, De Legibus, I, vii, 8.
27.The passage is from Horace, Satires, I, iii, 98, but Grotius in De Jure, Prolegomena, 16, claims that it expresses the view of Carneades. Culverwell, ignoring the note in which Grotius identifies the source of the words, attributes them to Carneades himself. Cf. Selden, De Jure, I, vi (81).
28.Judg. 9:14, 15.
30.Plutarch, To an Uneducated Ruler, 780F.
32.Plato, Minos, 321C, which cites a phrase used by Homer, Iliad, II, 85, and elsewhere.
34.Ahitophel spun a “web” of evil counsel in an attempt to catch David and Absalom (2 Sam. 16–17); Haman’s “web” was a law for the persecution of the Jews which he persuaded King Ahasuerus to pass (Esther 3:8–15); Herod’s “web” took the form of a plot to destroy the promised Messiah by slaughtering the children (Matt. 2:16).
35.Suetonius, De Vita Caesarum, V, Flavius Domitianus, 3: “In the beginning of his Empire his manner was, to retire himself daily into a secret place for one hour, and there to do nothing else but to catch flies and with the sharp point of a bodkin or writing steel prick them through.” (Trans. Philemon Holland, 1606.)
36.Plato, Laws, I, 628C.
37.Aristotle, Politics, III, xi, 4–5.
38.Ibid., III, xi, 5–6.
39.A fragment by Epicharmus of Syracuse cited by Plutarch, Moralia, 98C, 336B, 961A. The phrase was popular with another Platonist of the period, Peter Sterry, who uses it in a manuscript now at Emmanuel College (MS 295, Pinto vii). The entire fragment reads, “The mind sees and the mind hears; everything else is deaf and blind.”
40.Suárez, De Legibus, I, iv, 6.
41.The hieroglyphic is described by Plutarch, Of Isis and Osiris, 10, and discussed by Macrobius, Saturnalia, I, 12. Erasmus employs the figure in Of the Education of a Christian Prince, ed. L. K. Born (New York, 1965), 186.
42.Homer, Iliad, XVIII, 250: “Then among them wise Polydamus was first to speak, the son of Penthous, for he alone looked at once before and behind.”
43.This and the two following Greek passages are from Plato, Laws, I, 645A.
44.See Suárez, De Legibus, I, vii–viii.
45.See ibid., I, xi, and I, iv, 12: “it is still needful to state that, with respect to the command of one person over another the only necessary requisite, following the act of will on the part of the lawmaker … is that the lawmaker should manifest, indicate or intimate this decree and judgment of his, to the subjects to whom the law itself relates.”
1.Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 91, art. 2, quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, I, iii, 9.
2.Suárez, De Legibus, II, i, 1: “ab aeterno solum fuit Deus.”
3.Job 38:11; quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, I, i, 2; II, ii, 10; and II, iii, 7.
4.Terms drawn from Plato and the neo-Platonists are joined here with newly coined words (Νομοειδει̑ς) and echoes of the New Testament (James 2:8: Royal Law), to summarize an idealist view of law. See, e.g., Plato, Cratylus, 401D, Laws, 777D, and Plotinus, Enneads, III, i, 8, 8 and I, viii, 13, 11, and n. 63 in chap. 17.
8.Suárez, De Legibus, II, i, 3.
9.Cicero, De Legibus, II, iv, 8, quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, II, i, 2, and Selden, De Jure, I, viii (95–96).
10.Plutarch, To an Uneducated Ruler, 781B.
11.Dan. 7:9, 13.
12.Plato, Minos, 319D and 320D; in the second passage the phrase is attributed to Hesiod, although it does not occur in our text of Hesiod and is not quoted by any other writer.
15.Thomas Aquinas, the “Angelic Doctor,” and Bonaventure, the “Seraphic Doctor.”
16.Suárez, De Legibus, II, i, 3.
17.Ibid., II, ii, 5, 9: “God is not subject to it; on the contrary, He remains always exempt from law, so that He is able to act as He wills. …”
18.The idea is found in Suárez, De Legibus, II, ii, 10–12, and II, iv, 1; see also Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 93, art. 5, 6.
19.Augustine, De Civitate Dei, II, xix, quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, II, iii, 6.
20.See Suárez, De Legibus, II, ii, 9 and II, iii, 3, 10: “law consists in a decree of the [divine] will … an idea … resides in the intellect … an idea has only the character of an exemplar in relation to God himself, so that He works in accordance with it, while it serves (so to speak) merely as a concrete pattern for the works of God; whereas the divine law as law has rather a dynamic character, giving rise to an inclination or obligation to action.”
21.Thomas Aquinas, De Veritate, qu. 5, art. 1, ad. 6, as quoted and paraphrased in Suárez, De Legibus, II, iii, 12.
22.Suárez, De Legibus, II, iii, 12.
23.See, e.g., ibid., II, i, 9, and II, iv, 10: “regarded strictly, as being eternal, it [the eternal law] cannot be said actually to bind; but it may be said to have a potentially binding character (if we explain the matter thus), or to suffice of itself for the imposition of a binding obligation. … Thus it also follows that the eternal law never binds through itself and apart from every other law, and that, on the contrary, it must necessarily be united with some other law in order actually to bind.”
1.Culverwell quotes Suárez’s paraphrase (De Legibus, II, xvii, 3) of the Institutes of Justinian, I, ii, and the Digest of Justinian, I, i, 3.
2.Culverwell quotes Selden’s reference to Justinian’s Digest, I, i, 3, 4 and paraphrases Selden’s reflections upon it: Selden, De Jure, I, iv (43).
3.The lawyers’ distinction between the law of nature and the law of nations is discussed in Suárez, De Legibus, II, xvii, 3, and in Selden, De Jure, I, v (60).
6.Aristotle, On the History of Animals, IX, vii.
7.Cicero, De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum, II, 110 (chap. 33).
8.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, X, ii, 1.
9.Suárez, De Legibus, II, xvii, 6, 7.
11.Almost certainly a punning reference to Archbishop Laud, who had been executed January 10, 1645, the previous year.
12.Hesiod, Works and Days, 276–79, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 11 (1).
13.Ovid, Metamorphoses, X, 324–28, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, v (69).
14.Juvenal, Satires, XV, 146–49, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 11 (1), note.
15.Cf. chap. 2, 20 above.
16.Cicero, Pro Milone, iv, 10.
17.Grotius, De Jure, II, xxi, 11 (3), quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, iv (59), where Culverwell found it.
18.Ecloga Basilicorum, II, 131 (126), quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, iv (57).
19.Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 1 (1).
20.Eustathius, On the Odyssey, I, 318 and XII, 382, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, iv (57).
21.See Selden, De Jure, I, iv (50–51).
22.Selden, De Jure, I, iv (53 ff.).
23.Selden, in De Jure, I, iv (56), quotes this passage from Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, III, xl, in which Exod. 21:28, 29 is cited and discussed.
24.Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, IV, 281, paraphrased in Selden, De Jure, I, iv (56); Selden’s interpretation is quoted next.
25.1 Cor. 9:9.
26.Suárez, De Legibus, II, ii, 11.
27.Plato, Gorgias, 486A, and Laws, XI, 934A, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 4 (1) and (3).
28.Seneca, De Ira, I, xix, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 4 (1).
29.“in compensationem … in emendationem … in exemplum”; see Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 6 (1), and Selden, De Jure, I, iv (57).
30.Clement of Alexandria, Tutor, I, viii, 70, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 6 (1).
31.Plutarch, On the Delayed Vengeance of the Deity, IV, xvi, 550A–559F, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 6 (2).
32.Hierocles, On the Golden Verses of Pythagoras, 27–29, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 1 (2).
33.Demosthenes, Orations, lix, 77, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 9 (1).
35.Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 9 (1).
36.Seneca, De Ira, II, 26, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 5 (1).
37.Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 10 (1).
38.St. John Chrysostom, On the Statues, xiii (Migne, XLIX, col. 131). Selden’s quotation of this homily in De Jure, I, viii (100), may well have sent Culverwell to the original text, from which he continues to draw.
39.Chrysostom, On the Statues, xiii (Migne, XLIX, col. 140).
40.Ibid., xii (Migne, XLIX, col. 132).
41.Ibid., xii (Migne, XLIX, col. 132).
43.2 Pet. 2:5.
45.Chrysostom, On the Statues, xii (Migne, XLIX, col. 132).
46.Plutarch uses σφυρήλατος (wrought with a hammer) of friendship in How to Tell a Flatterer from a Friend, 65C; as Culverwell’s remark suggests, he does not apply it directly to law.
47.Philo, That Every Virtuous Man Is Free, vii, 46–47, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 10 (1).
48.I Tim. 3:15.
49.Plutarch, To an Uneducated Ruler, 780C.
50.These lines from Pindar, Frag. 169 (151), are quoted in Plato’s Gorgias, 484B, from which the following discussion is drawn.
51.Plato, Gorgias, 482E; in the next three sentences Culverwell summarizes and paraphrases the discussion in 482E–488E.
52.Plato, Republic, II, 365D.
53.These four quotations are taken from Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric, I, x, 3, and are quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, vi (75).
54.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, X, ix, 12.
55.Aristotle, Politics, III, xi, 6; Culverwell’s reference to the tenth book of De Rep. (Nicomachean Ethics) is incorrect.
56.Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric, I, x, 3.
57.Rom. 2:15 and Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, X, ix, 14.
58.Cicero, Pro Milone, iv, 10.
59.Cicero, De Legibus, II, iv, 10, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, viii (96).
60.Cicero, De Republica, III, 22, quoted in both Selden, De Jure, I, viii (96) and (in part) in Suárez, De Legibus, II, v, 11, and referred to in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 10 (1), note.
64.The Latin phrase is, in fact, that of Suárez (De Legibus, II, v, 4); Culverwell simply repeats Suárez’s summary (De Legibus, II, v, 2) of the argument of the Jesuit Gabriel Vasquez in his commentary (disp. 150, chap. iii) on Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 90.
65.Suárez, De Legibus, II, vi, 3, summarizes Gregory of Rimini, On the Sentences, II, dist. xxxiv, qu. 1, art. 2.
67.Suárez, De Legibus, II, x, 1.
68.Ibid., II, vi, 11.
69.Ibid., II, vi, 11.
70.Rom. 4:15, quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, II, v, 2 and II, vi, 7.
71.Suárez, De Legibus, II, vi, 11.
72.Ibid., II, v, 6: “… consequently, although the rational nature is the foundation of the objective goodness of the moral actions of human beings, it may not for that reason be termed law.”
73.Suárez, De Legibus, II, vi, 23.
74.Ibid., II, vi, 12.
75.Culverwell is probably paraphrasing Suárez, De Legibus, II, ix, 3.
76.Suárez, De Legibus, II, xii, 1.
1.See Timaeus 90A for the Platonic image of the inverted tree and Of the Parts of Animals, IV, 10, for Aristotle’s version. A. B. Chalmers reviews the history of this metaphor in “‘I Was But an Inverted Tree’: Notes towards the History of an Idea,”Studies in the Renaissance, VIII, 291–99. Marvell’s “Upon Appleton House,” LXXI, makes use of the image.
2.These examples of first principles appear to be borrowed from Suárez, De Legibus, II, vii, 2; for the last one see Matt. 7:12.
3.Culverwell probably drew upon Selden’s quotation in De Jure, I, ii (33), of a passage from Epictetus in which προλήψεις occurs and is translated by Selden as “anticipationis.” Seneca’s term for the same concept is found in his Epistulae Morales, 117, 6; the sentence containing it is quoted by Grotius, De Jure, II, xx, 46 (3), note.
6.αἱΣποράδες are the islands off the west coast of Asia Minor; hence the transliterated word “sporades” means small, scattered bodies.
7.The phrase “crop the tops” is an echo of Pindar, Olympian Odes, I, 13; Culverwell quotes it in Greek in chap. 17, 174, and seems to have had it in mind in chap. 2, 19.
8.Edward Herbert, De Veritate (London, 1633), 113, 122. Since one of Culverwell’s later quotations from this work (see chap. 11, n. 24) can be traced directly to the second edition of 1633, page numbers in the notes refer to that edition and not to the first (Paris, 1624).
10.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, X, ix, 22, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, i (3).
11.Culverwell echoes Selden, De Jure, I, i (2).
12.Both sets of examples are quoted from Suárez, De Legibus, II, vii, 5.
13.See Suárez, De Legibus, II, vii, 5. Culverwell substitutes falsehood for the original example of adultery and thus confuses one of Suárez’s distinctions.
14.Herbert, De Veritate, 152–53.
15.This and the two subsequent Latin quotations are from Suárez, De Legibus, II, vii, 7.
16.See ibid., II, ix, 2: “legem naturalem obligare in conscientia.”
17.Herbert, De Veritate, 104–5.
18.Suárez, De Legibus, II, v, 15; the following paragraph is a paraphrased version of this section of Suárez’s work.
19.Ibid., II, x, chapter title.
20.See ibid., II, xii, 5.
21.Ibid., II, xii, 4.
22.See ibid., II, xii, 5.
23.Ibid., II, xvi, chapter title; Suárez uses the phrase “emendatio legis” in sections 9 and 13 of this chapter.
24.Ibid., II, xvi, 16.
25.A paraphrase of Suárez, De Legibus, II, xvii, 1.
26.See ibid., II xx, 7.
27.Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 14 (1).
28.See Suárez, De Legibus, II, xix, 5, 6: “autem jus gentium scriptum non esse.”
29.Dio Chrysostom, Orations, LXXVI, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 14 (2).
30.Justinian, Institutes, I, ii, 2, quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, II, xix, 6.
31.Cicero, De Legibus, II, 4, 9.
32.Culverwell found these Hebrew terms in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 9 (2), where reference is correctly made to Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, III, xxvi.
33.The Apostolical Constitutions, I, 6, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, iii (38).
34.Cf. Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 9 (2).
35.Both Greek terms (ἐντολαί and δικαιώματα) are attributed to “the Hellenists” by Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 9 (2); the Septuagint provides a number of examples of their use: Gen. 26:5; Exod. 15:26; Deut. 4:40.
36.For an example of such usage see Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, V, vii, 7; Grotius, in De Jure, I, i, 9 (2), refers to Aristotle and quotes one of the two phrases.
2.The Schoolmen follow the Vulgate translation of Ps. 4:6, which Culverwell quotes below. See Suárez, De Legibus, I, iii, 9; Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 91, art. 2, and Robert Bellarmine, Explanatio in Psalmos (London, 1611), 21.
3.Culverwell has Selden in mind; cf. De Jure, I, viii (102) and I, ix (116).
5.Ps. 4:6 (Vulgate 4:7).
6.Dionysius of Richel (the Carthusian), 1402–71, in his commentary on Prov. 20:27; Dionysius has been called “the last scholastic.”Enarrationes piae ac eruditae in quinque libros Sapientalis (Cologne, 1539), folio XLIX, v: “De quo lumine fertur in Psalmo: Signatum est super nos lumen vultus tui domine, quia hoc lumen naturale est quoddam signaculum atque impressio increatae lucis in anima. Porro anima appellatur spiraculum, juxta illud Geneseos: Inspiravit in faciem eius spiraculum vitae.”
7.Culverwell quotes from the Greek translations of the OT by Aquila, who completed his version in 140, and Symmachus (late second century). See chap. 1, n. 1, and C. A. Briggs and E. G. Briggs, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Psalms (Edinburgh, 1906), I, 36.
8.This appears to be Culverwell’s imaginative rendering of Ps. 4:7: “Thou has put gladness in my heart, more than in the time that their corn and their wine increased.”
9.A phrase which Culverwell found in Selden, De Jure, sig. a4 (and elsewhere). The discussion of the Jewish view of the light of nature is in Selden, De Jure, I, ix (109–17). Selden’s acceptance of Jewish claims to exclusive knowledge of the light of nature probably led Culverwell to include this chapter of the Discourse.
10.Mal. 3:17, and 1 Pet. 2:9; Selden quotes the Hebrew in De Jure, I, i (10).
11.Rom. 3:1, 2.
12.Gen. 6:5; this expression is commented upon by John Smith in his Select Discourses (London, 1660), 398: “We may say of that Self-will which is lodg’d in the heart of a wicked man, as the Jews speak of the …figmentum malum—so often mention’d in their Writings, that it is … the Prince of death and darkness. … This is the very heart of the old Adam that is within men.”
13.See Rom. 2:15 and Prov. 7:3.
15.Theodoret, Curatio Graecarum Affectionum, 91, 5, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, ii (16).
16.See Selden, De Jure, I, ii (17 ff.), who repeats Numenius’ apothegm (Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel, XI, x): “Quid enim est Plato aliud, quam Moses Attica lingua loquens?”
18.Pythagoras, The Golden Verses, 63, 64.
19.Hierocles, On the Golden Verses of Pythagoras, 64.
20.Selden tells the story in De Jure, I, ii (14).
21.See chap. 4, n. 11.
22.Eusebius (Preparation for the Gospel, IX, x) preserved these lines of Porphyry which Selden quotes in De Jure, I, ii (25).
24.From the anonymous Life of Pythagoras, 22 (66) in Iamblichus, Vita Pythagorica, ed. M. Theophilus Kiessling (Leipzig, 1815–16), II, 120, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, ii (26–27).
25.Sir Thomas Browne, Pseudodoxia Epidemica, VI, i: “So did the Athenians term themselves αὐτόχθονες or Aborigines. … There was therefore never Autochthon or man arising from the earth, but Adam.” See, e.g., Euripides, Ion, 520.
26.Plato, Timaeus, 22B, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, ii (27), and in Bacon, Novum Organum (Works, I, 182).
27.See chap. 6, 48, and n. 41.
1.Pythagoras, The Golden Verses, 14.
2.Hierocles, On the Golden Verses of Pythagoras, 13–16.
3.Pythagoras, The Golden Verses, 29.
4.Hierocles, On the Golden Verses of Pythagoras, 29. Part of this passage is quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, viii (97).
5.Recorded by Epictetus, Enchiridion, 51.
6.Cicero, De Legibus, I, xvi, 44, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, vii (87).
7.Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Meditations, VII, 11: “To a rational creature the same act is at once according to nature and according to reason.” The idea that living according to reason is obeying the gods appears frequently in the Meditations, as in I, 17.
8.Sextus Empiricus (circa a.d. 200) is the main authority for the history and doctrine of the Sceptics. Little is known about his life except that he was a Greek physician who succeeded Herodotus as head of the Sceptic School. His main works are Outlines of Pyrrhonism, Against the Dogmatists, Against the Schoolmasters; Culverwell draws heavily on the first of these books in chap. 14.
9.Selden, De Jure, I, ix (109); the passage expresses a view which Selden rejects.
10.Plerophory: full assurance or certainty. Common in the seventeenth century in theological use, this word finds its Greek original in Heb. 6:11; 10:22, and elsewhere.
11.This phrase is used by Bacon in De Augmentis Scientiarum (Works, I, 664, 839) to identify one of the deficiencies of learning: “it is possible for a man in a greater or less degree to revisit his own knowledge, and trace over again the footsteps both of his cognition and consent; and by that means to transplant it into another mind just as it grew in his own … if you will have the sciences grow, you need not much care about the body of the tree; only look well to this, that the roots be taken up uninjured, and with a little earth adhering to them … which kind of transmission … I note … as deficient, and term it the Handing on of the Lamp, or Method of Delivery to Posterity.” (Works, IV, 449–50.)
13.The idea of the intellectus agens was elaborated in Avicenna’s treatise De Anima and in the commentaries of both Avicenna and Averroes on Aristotle’s Metaphysics and his work On the Soul. The Jewish philosopher Maimonides examines the doctrine at length in his Guide of the Perplexed; it is treated by the Schoolmen, particularly Thomas Aquinas in Summa Theologica, I, qu. 79, art. 4 and Summa Contra Gentiles, II, lix, by Bonaventura in Expositio in Quattuor Libros Sententiarum, II, dist. 24, qu. 4, and by Albertus Magnus, Summa de Creaturis, II, “Seu de homine”; Renaissance treatments of the subject can be found in J. C. Scaliger, De Subtilitate, cccviii, Selden, De Jure, I, ix, and Zabarella, De Mente Agente. In 1627 Fortunius Licetus offered an exhaustive survey in his De Intellectu Agente. Culverwell, although acknowledging the Arabians, draws his material largely from Selden, Maimonides, and Scaliger. Modern comment is to be found in Ernest Renan, Averroes et l’Averroisme (1852), 115 ff., and it is considered in the articles under “Avicenna” and “Averroes” in Hastings’ Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. Isaac Husik, in A History of Medieval Jewish Philosophy (1916), provides the following account of the traditional view: “As the influence of the Arab Aristotelians, Alfarbi, Avicenna and especially Averroes, began to make itself felt, the discussions about the Active Intellect and its relation to the higher Intelligences on the one hand and to the human intellect on the other found their way also among the Jews and had their effect on the conception of prophecy. Aristotle’s distinction of an active and a passive intellect in man, and his ideas about the spheral spirits as pure Intelligences endowing the heavenly spheres with their motions, were combined by the Arabian Aristotelians with the Neo-Platonic theory of emanation. The result was that they adopted as Aristotelian the view that from God emanated in succession ten Intelligences and their spheres. … From the Intelligence of the lunar sphere emanated the Active Intellect. … The Intelligences were identified with the angels of Scripture. … The conversion of sense experience into immaterial concepts is accomplished through the aid of the Active Intellect. And at the end of the process a new intellect is produced in man, the Acquired Intellect. This alone is the immortal part in man and theoretical study creates it” (xlvi–xlvii). On the division of the understanding into “agent and patient,” Robert Burton is illuminating: “The agent is that which is called the wit of man, acumen or subtlety, sharpness of invention, when he doth invent of himself without a teacher, or learns anew, which abstracts those intelligible species from the phantasy, and transfers them to passive understanding, ‘because there is nothing in the understanding which was not first in the sense.’ That which the imagination has taken from the sense, this agent judgeth of, whether it be true or false; and being so judged he commits it to the passible to be kept. This agent is a doctor or teacher, the passive a scholar; and his office is to keep and farther judge of such things as are committed to his charge; as a bare and razed table at first, capable of all forms and notions.” (The Anatomy of Melancholy, pt. I, sec. 1, memb. 2, subsec. 10.)
14.Jacobus Zabarella discusses this topic in De Mente Humana, De Speciebus Intelligibus, and De Mente Agente, works which are contained in his De Rebus Naturalibus (1604). See particularly chap. x of De Mente Agente entitled “Confutatio omnium opinionum eorum, qui dicunt intellectum agentum et intellectum patientem esse unam et eandem substantiam.”
15.J. C. Scaliger, Exotericarum Exercitationum Liber XV De Subtilitate Ad Hieronymum Cardanum (Paris, 1557), Exer. cccvii, 14. Although Scaliger’s work was popular at Cambridge, Culverwell may have been led to this exercitation by Selden, who refers to it in De Jure, I, ix (n. 116).
16.Quoted in Scaliger, De Subtilitate, cccvii, 30; the entire section is a refutation of Cardan’s “brutish tenet” concerning the intellectus agens.
17.Scaliger, De Subtilitate, cccvii, 18; Culverwell varies the list, adding “printing” and substituting “Pyxis Nautica” for “navigationis.”
18.No exact source has been found for this view, but it follows logically from Maimonides’ position concerning revelation: “All the prophets prophesied through the instrumentality of an angel; therefore what they saw, they saw in a parable and enigma. Not so our master Moses; for it was said of him, Mouth to mouth will I speak with him.”De Fundamentis Leges (Amsterdam, 1638), VII, 7.
19.Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, II, vi.
20.In De Subtilitate, cccvii, 18. Scaliger cites this phrase from Averroes’s commentary on the Metaphysics of Aristotle.
21.So Selden observes, De Jure, I, ix (116).
22.Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, II, iv, vi, xii; III, lii; see also Selden, De Jure, I, ix (110).
23.Ps. 36:9 (Vulgate 35:9). Maimonides comments on this passage in Guide of the Perplexed, II, xii. For the view of the Schoolmen see Thomas Aquinas, In Psalmos Davidis Expositio Area, Ps. 35, “Tertium est lumen gloriae,”Summa contra Gentiles, III, liii, and Robert Bellarmine, Explanatio in Psalmos. See also chap. 18, n. 31. Selden, too, comments on this subject in De Jure, I, ix (110).
24.See Zabarella, De Mente Agente, xiii–xiv, xvi.
25.Quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, ix (114).
26.See n. 16 above.
27.The theory that the intellectus agens and patiens are aspects of the same soul is argued by Zabarella, De Mente Agente, x; see also Aristotle, On the Soul, III, v–viii.
28.On this vexed subject, see Zabarella, De Speciebus Intelligibus, v.
1.Aristotle, The Art of Rhetoric, I, xiii, 2, and xv, 3, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, vi (75).
2.Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (1).
4.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, V, vii, 2.
5.Aristotle, Physics, II, viii.
6.Hesiod, Works and Days, 763–64, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (2).
7.Seneca, Epistulae Morales, 117, 6, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, vi (76).
8.Cicero, Tusculanarum Disputationum, I, xiii, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, vi (76).
9.Quintilian, Institutionis Oratoriae, V, x, 12, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (2).
10.Aristotle, Eudemian Ethics, I, vi, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (2).
11.Attributed to Heraclitus by Sextus Empiricus, Against the Mathematicians, vii, 34 (bk. IV of Against the Schoolmasters), and quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (2).
12.Tertullian, Prescriptione adversus Haereticos, xxviii, quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (2).
14.Culverwell’s imagery echoes a passage from Andronicus of Rhodes quoted in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (2).
15.Aristotle, Politics, I, i, 8; Topics, V, 2.
16.Philo, On the Ten Commandments, xxv. In Grotius’s notes to De Jure, I, i, 12 (2), however, the passage appears immediately after a citation from Chrysostom, On the Statues, Homily xi; Culverwell has mistakenly attributed the words of the Jewish philospher to the “sacred orator.”
17.The Hebrew term is employed in Selden, De Jure, I, x (119).
19.Selden, De Jure, I, vi (75), chapter heading and opening sentence.
20.Ibid., I, vi (78).
22.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, VII, v, 6, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, vi (79).
23.The idea is found in Grotius, De Jure, I, i, 12 (1); the passage is quoted above, 80.
24.Salmasius, Epistola ad Andream Colvium, 715–16.
26.Aristotle, Politics, VIII, iii, 4, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, vi (79).
1.The Greek phrase occurs in the Nicene creed; see A. E. Burn, An Introduction to the Creeds (London, 1889), 79, 102.
2.The Latin phrase was probably suggested to Culverwell by bk. IX, chap. xvii (175 v) of De Perenni Philosophia (Lyon, 1540), by Augustinus Steuchus (1496–1549), also called Eugubinus. Culverwell drew many of the classical quotations in the present chapter from Steuchus’s work, which was an impressive attempt to reconcile ancient philosophy and Christianity. Page numbers in the notes refer to the Venice edition (1590) of the Opera Omnia, vol. II.
3.Horace, Sermonum, II, ii, 79; although theologians were wary of the implications of the metaphor, this was a favourite quotation in discussions of the soul. Cf., e.g., Alexander Ross, The Philosophicall Touch-stone (London, 1645), 101 and Cornelius a Lapide, Commentaria in Pentateuchum (Antwerp, 1623), 68.
4.Plato, Phaedo, 75D.
6.See Origen, On First Principles, II, x; Thomas Aquinas refers to Origen’s revision of Plato’s theory in Summa contra Gentiles, II, xliv, lxxxiii.
7.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, II, lxxxiii, lvii.
8.Plato, Phaedo, 77B, C; 75C.
9.See chap. 8, n. 9.
10.See n. 65 below.
11.A summarizing phrase (not in Aristotle’s text) for the idea expressed in On the Soul, III, iv: “This would be in the same sense as when we say that a tablet which is empty is potentially written upon; which actually occurs in the case of the mind.” For abrasa tabula see Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 89, art. 1; and John Locke, Essay concerning Human Understanding, II, i, 2.
12.Persius, Satires, III, 1–3.
13.See the epistemological discussion of the active and passive mind in Aristotle, On the Soul, III, v–viii.
14.Culverwell’s argument here parallels that of Thomas Aquinas (Summa contra Gentiles, II, lxxxiii), where the first of these common notions is quoted.
15.By “the Schoolmen” Culverwell probably means Suárez, but the sentence has not been discovered. The second quotation is from St. Jerome, Letters, cxxi, Ad Algasiam (Migne, XXII, col. 1022), quoted in Suárez, De Legibus, II, v, 11.
17.“For the Stoics, Logos was the principle of rationality in the universe, and as such it was identified with God and with the source of all activity. … It had various derivatives, which are better regarded as aspects of itself than separate entities. As active principle it was logos spermaticos, or seminal reason, which worked on passive matter to generate the world, and in plural form, as seminal reasons, it functioned as the universals which Plato and Aristotle had attempted to account for by their respective doctrines of transcendent and immanent Forms.”The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Paul Edwards (New York, 1967), V, 83. See the discussion in E. Zeller, Stoics, Epicureans and Sceptics (London, 1870), 79–80, 162–63.
18.Sir Kenelm Digby, Two Treatises … the Nature of Bodies … the Nature of Mans Soule (Paris, 1644), 355–65.
20.A paraphrase of ibid., 1:20.
22.Herbert, De Veritate (London, 1633), 37.
23.Ibid., 47, 49.
24.Ibid., 46; since “in quovis inarticulato licet & incauto” does not appear in the first edition (1624) of Herbert’s work, it is clear that Culverwell was quoting from the revised second edition of 1633, or from the 1645 reprint of it; page numbers in the notes refer to the second edition.
25.Ibid., 79, 75.
27.Herbert, De Veritate, 52.
28.Robert Greville, Lord Brooke, The Nature of Truth (London, 1640), 46: “And therefore I wholly subscribe to the Platonists, who make all scientia nothing but reminiscentia.” Greville was answered by the mathematician John Wallis, Culverwell’s contemporary at Emmanuel, in Truth Tried (London, 1643), 45: “The understanding is not as a Table.… But rather as a Glasse which is able to Receive and Reflect whatsoever Colours fall upon it, though (before) it had none of them.” This passage from Truth Tried is echoed at the end of the present paragraph.
30.See Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, II, lxxxv: “Quod anima non est de substantia Dei,” and Ross, The Philosophicall Touchstone, 101: “[the] heresie which held the soule to be a part of the Divine Essence: such as were Carpocrates, Cerdon, the Gnosticks, Manichees, and Priscillianists.”
31.Simplicius, Commentary on the Enchiridion of Epictetus (Leiden, 1640), 187.
32.Claudius Salmasius, Notae et Animadversiones in Epictetum et Simplicium (Leiden, 1640).
33.The following discussion of Stoic teaching is drawn from Salmasius (Notae, 161, 184–85, 191, 244 ff.) and repeats his quotation of terms from Porphyry and Nemesius.
34.Tertullian, De Anima, xiv, as summarized in Salmasius, Notae, 186.
35.Salmasius, Notae, 257.
36.Tertullian, De Anima, xiv, as summarized in Salmasius, Notae, 188.
37.Salmasius, Notae, 178, 311.
38.Ibid., 272, 176.
39.R[ichard] O[verton], Mans Mortalitie; or, a treatise wherein ’tis proved both theologically and phylosophically, that whole man, as a rationall creature, is a compound wholly mortall, contrary to that common distinction of soule and body: and that the present going of the soule into Heaven or Hell is a meer fiction: and that at the Resurrection is the beginning of our immortality (Amsterdam [London], 1644), 8. Overton’s tract created a considerable stir and was responsible for the growth of a sect called “soul sleepers.” See the DNB and David Masson’s Life of Milton (London, 1859–80), III, 156, 164, and n. 73 in the present chapter.
40.Epictetus, Discourses, I, ix (chapter title), and Seneca, Ad Helviam Matrem de Consolatione, xi.
41.Epictetus, Discourses, I, xiv, 6, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xvii (176 v).
42.Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, V, 27, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, ix (112).
43.Pythagoras, The Golden Verses, 62.
44.Seneca, Epistulae Morales, 31, 11.
45.1 Tim. 3:16.
46.Seneca, Epistulae Morales, 66, 12, quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, ix (112), and in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xiii (173).
47.Selden argues so in De Jure, I, ix (111–12).
48.See n. 42 above.
49.Philo, Concerning Noah’s Work as a Planter, II, 5 (18).
50.John of Damascus, Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, II, xii (Migne, XCIV, col. 924).
51.Gregory of Nyssa, On the Words, Let us Make Man in our Image, I (Migne, XLIV, col. 268).
52.Salmasius, Notae, 170.
53.Cf. Epictetus’ use of these terms in his Discourses, I, iii.
54.Hermes Trismegistus, Poimandres, XII, 1, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, viii (169), and IX, xvii (176 v). This phrase, like many to follow in this section, is also quoted by Zanchius in De Operibus Dei, pt. III, II, V (Hanover, 1597, 772.)
55.See the discussions in Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, II, xvi, and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 773.
57.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, I, xvii, and I, xxvi, xxvii.
59.See Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, lxv, and I, xl, xli.
60.Carpocrates was a gnostic teacher of the second century.
63.Sir Thomas Browne (Religio Medici, I, 36) and Milton (De Doctrina Christiana, I, vii) favour traducianism. For a survey of Renaissance discussions of the soul’s origin see D. C. Allen, Doubt’s Boundless Sea (Baltimore, 1964), v. This topic was debated publicly in the Schools at Cambridge on March 3, 1647, probably the year after Culverwell delivered his Discourse. See Charles Hotham, Ad Philosophiam Teutonicam Manuductio (London, 1648).
64.Galen, That the Nature of the Soul Accords with the Temper of the Body, in Medicorum Graecorum Opera, ed. D. C. G. Kuhn (Leipzig, 1821–30), IV, 766, quoted in Salmasius, Notae, 164.
65.The anecdote and the phrase come from Cicero, Tusculanarum Disputationum, I, x, and are quoted by Bacon in The Advancement of Learning (Works, III, 293).
66.Tertullian developed his view of traducianism in De Origine Anima, xxiii–xli. Nemesius is one of the authorities for the doctrine of Apollinaris; see The Nature of Man, ii, 5.
67.See chap. 9, n. 11.
68.Jerome, Apologia adversus Libros Rufini, III, 557 (Migne, XXIII, col. 478) and Epistulae, 126 (82) (Migne, XXII, col. 1086); the actual source of Culverwell’s statement, however, was probably Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 769.
69.Augustine, De Origine Animae Hominis Liber (Migne, XXXIII, cols. 724–25); Culverwell paraphrases Augustine’s argument.
70.See, e.g., Peter Lombard, Sentences, II, dist. xvii, and Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 118.
71.William Pemble, De Formarum Origine (London, 1629), 68–74; Pemble concludes his discussion of traducianism and the tract thus: “Res est non levis difficultatis, in qua, dum audiatur Doctorum judicium, ἀπέχω.” Pemble employs the technical Sceptic term for suspension of judgment; see chap. 14, 137 and n. 5.
72.Sir Kenelm Digby, Two Treatises … the Nature of Bodies … the Nature of Mans Soul (Paris, 1644), 451. Digby was attacked by the relentless Alexander Ross in The Philosophicall Touchstone (London, 1645), 95–101, where the twenty arguments Culverwell mentions are to be found.
73.Cf. n. 39 above. Richard Overton’s book was answered pseudonymously by Guy Holland (John Sergeant) in The Prerogative of Man (Oxford, 1645), 26: “It followeth then, that the soule neither generates a soule, nor againe is generated by any, and for this cause must be incorruptible, and by the principles of Nature, immortall.” See F. Madan, Oxford Books (Oxford, 1895–1931), II, 417, and G. Williamson, “Milton and the Mortalist Heresy,” in Seventeenth-Century Contexts (London, 1960).
74.Pythagoras, The Golden Verses, 63, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xxi (178 v), and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 771.
75.Acts 17:28, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xxi (178 v) and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 771. In 1634–37(?) John Sherman commonplaced on this text in Trinity College and published his remarks as A Greek in the Temple (Cambridge, 1641).
76.De Oraculis Chaldaicis, ed. W. Kroll (Hildesheim, 1962), 46, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, v (166).
77.Oracula Magica Zoroastris cum Scholiis Plethonis et Pselli, ed. J. Opsopoeus (Paris, 1607), 17, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, vii (168 v), and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 772.
78.The following three quotations from Hermes Trismegistus come from Poimandres, I, 12, and V, 7; they are all quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, iii (165).
79.Epictetus, The Discourses, I, ix, 1, 6, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xvii (176), and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 771–72.
80.Homer, Odyssey, I, 58.
81.Cicero, Tusculanarum Disputationum, V, xxxvii, and Diogenes Laertius, Lives, VI, 63; also Epictetus, The Discourses, 1, ix, 1.
82.Cf. Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xiv (174), xxviii (185 v).
83.Heb. 1:3. Philo, On the Creation, 146 (51), quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xvii (176 v).
84.Plotinus, Enneads, IV, iv, 28, quoted and discussed in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xxiii (180).
85.Plato, Timaeus, 41C, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xix (177 v).
86.Epictetus, The Discourses, I, xvi, 14, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xviii (177).
87.Oracula Magica, 93, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xviii (177 v).
88.Gen. 1:27, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, I, vii (6).
89.Steuchus in De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xix (177 v) attributes this remark to Thales, but it is not included in modern collections of fragments.
90.Oracula Magica, 18, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xv (175). The following phrase is contained in Pletho’s commentary on the oracles.
91.See n. 2 above.
92.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, X, viii, 13.
93.Aristotle, Generation of Animals, II, iii, quoted in Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 772.
94.Seneca, Epistulae Morales, 20, 15, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xiii (173).
95.Simplicius, Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics, ed. H. Diels (Berlin, 1882), I, 186, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xv (175 v), and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 772.
96.The preceding six definitions Culverwell quotes from Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia: Michael Psellus (Oracula Magica, 101), IX, viii (168 v); Plato (Timaeus, xliii, 90A), IX, xiv (174 v); the Sibyls (Oracula Magica, 18), IX, xv (175); “some others,” i.e., Plutarch (One Cannot Live Pleasurably in Accordance with the Doctrine of Epicurus, 1107B), IX, xv (175 v); the Chaldaic oracle, IX, xxiii (180 v); Seneca the elder (Suasoriae, vi, 6), IX, xiii (172 v); Cicero (Tusculanarum Disputationum, V, xiii), IX, viii (168 v).
97.1 Sam. 25:29.
98.Cicero, Tusculanarum Disputationum, I, xxvii; the first words of this passage appear in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xii (171 v), and the entire paragraph is quoted in Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 772–73.
99.The point is made by Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, xiv (174).
100.Virgil, Aeneid, VI, 730, quoted in Bacon, The Advancement of Learning (Works, III, 426).
101.Ovid, Ars Amatoria, III, 550, quoted in Steuchus, De Perenni Philosophia, IX, x (170 v), and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 772.
102.See, e.g., Homer, Iliad, IV, 68.
103.Virgil, Aeneid, I, 256.
104.Gregory, Epistolae, IX, ii, 52 (Migne, LXXVII, 970), quoted in Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, 770.
105.Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, IV, 14, 21; VI, 24.
106.This line from Epicharmus occurs in Eusebius, The Preparation for the Gospel, XIII, xiii (682b) and is quoted in Selden, De Jure, I, ix (112).
109.1 Cor. 15:52.
110.Culverwell follows Thomas Aquinas’s account of God’s knowledge in Summa contra Gentiles, I, xlvi, xlviii–liv.
112.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, I, xlv.
113.See ibid., I, liii, liv.
114.Ibid., I, liv.
115.Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 103, art. 4, and Summa contra Gentiles, III, xix–xi.
116.Cf. Sir Edward Coke, The Second Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England (London, 1642), 56: “The law is called rectum, because it discovereth, that which is tort, crooked, or wrong, for as right signifieth law, so tort, crooked, or wrong, signifieth injurie, and injuria est contra jus, against right: recta linea est index sui, et obliqui.”
117.A commonplace (see Bacon, Novum Organum, II, ii, Works, IV, 119) which had its origin in Aristotle, Posterior Analytics, I, 2.
118.See Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, I, lv, lvii, and chap. XVIII, n. 37, 38.
119.Ibid., I, lv, lvii.
120.Ibid., I, lv.
121.Ibid., I, lv, lvi.
122.Ibid., I, lxxxvi, lxxxvii (chapter titles).
123.Perhaps a paraphrase of a sentence in Summa contra Gentiles, I, lxxxi: “Bonum intellectum sit proprium objectum voluntatis.”
124.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, I, xlvii, lxxiv, lxxv.
125.Ibid., I, lxxxvi.
127.See chap. 4, n. 41.
128.This double definition of providence comes from Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 22, art. 1. The first definition Thomas quotes from Boethius (De Consolatione, IV, 6); he then proceeds to analyze the relation between human prudence and divine providence.
129.1 Cor. 2:10.
130.Unwillingness; this is the first cited occurrence of the word in the OED.
131.Zeno, as reported in Epictetus, The Discourses, I, xx, 15; see also Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, X, 11, and XII, 31.
132.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, xix (title).
1.Alluding to Job 38:11.
4.Prov. 20:27 and Gen. 2:7; see chap. 2, n. 8.
5.See Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 94, art. 1.
6.Ibid., I, qu. 94, arts. 1, 2.
7.The idea is a commonplace in scholastic treatments of the subject; see Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 94, art. 3, and Suárez, De Opere Sex Dierum, III, ix, 14. Suárez’s account contains a survey of the views of other scholastic writers.
8.John Davenant, Determinationes Quaestionum Quarundam Theologicarum (Cambridge, 1634), 75; the Latin passage is the title of question xvi. John Davenant was educated at Queen’s College, Cambridge, where he was first Fellow and then master before leaving to become bishop of Salisbury. Culverwell draws frequently from Davenant’s Praelectiones in chap. 15.
9.This and the subsequent Latin quotation are from Robert Bellarmine, De Gratia Primi Homini, I, v–vii, in De Controversiis, IV (1619, 21–40), paraphrased in Davenant, Determinationes, 76.
10.Based on a passage by Hugh of St. Victor which Davenant quotes in Determinationes, 77: “nec fraeno, nec calcaribus instructum.”
11.Davenant, Determinationes, 76. Culverwell continues to follow Davenant’s argument, taking from p. 78 the idea of the regno rationis.
12.Thus Zanchius, for example, cites the opinion “Corpus quod corrumpiter, aggravat animam” in De Operibus Dei, pt. III, III, iii, thesis (Hanover, 1597, 890).
13.The proper object of the passions is discussed in Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 95, art. 2, and Suárez, De Opere Sex Dierum, III, xii.
14.Cicero, Epistularum ad Familiares, VII, xxx; the narrative is treated freely.
15.Ps. 49:12. Alexander Gill (see chap. 16, 167, and n. 12) cites the same passage in a similar manner and context, The Sacred Philosophie of the Holy Scripture (London, 1635), 113.
16.Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 94, art. 4. Culverwell omits the cautious qualifications.
17.Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, pt. III, III, iv, sec. 2, quaestio 3 (Hanover, 1597, 905): “Adamum non pecasse eo modo quo Angeli mali: ex mera malitia, et simplici voluntate: sed aliqua ex parte fuisse deceptum. …”
18.Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, pt. III, III, iv, sec. 2, quaestio 3 (Hanover, 1597, 905–6).
19.Davenant, Determinationes, 77.
20.See Plato, Gorgias, 525A.
21.Plato, Timaeus, 52B.
22.Plato, Phaedrus, 246C.
23.See chap. 11, n. 13.
24.Ibid., n. 11.
25.“We may say with Aristotle, at the brink of Euripus, not being able to give an account of the ebbes and flowes, if I can’t comprehend thee, thou shalt me.” Richard Culverwell, “Courteous Reader,” 6 above. According to the legend, Aristotle then threw himself into the water.
26.The Stoa was the cloister at Athens in which Zeno and his successors taught.
27.Epictetus, Enchiridion, 42: “Everything has two handles, by one of which it ought to be carried and by the other not.”
28.Although the passage has not been located, a particularly full discussion of divine knowledge can be found in his Ordinis Minorum, Opere Omnia (1639), vols. X, XI.
29.Ephraim Pagitt explained that “Antinomians are so called because they would have the law abolished” (OED Antinomians, B). They insisted that the whole Mosaic law (the moral parts as well as the ceremonial and judicial) had been abrogated by Christ, but most also urged (like Milton) that the outward commandments had been replaced by an inner law of love. The Seekers were forerunners of the Quakers: “Many,” wrote Pagitt, “go under the name of Expecters and Seekers and doe deny that there is any true Church, or any true Minister, or any Ordinances: some of them assume the Church to be in the wildernesse, and they are seeking it there: others say it is in the smoke of the Temple, and that they are groping for it there.” (OED Seeker 1, b) “Seraphic” appears to be a term used to mock those sects which placed a strong emphasis on evangelical love. John Saltmarsh mentions “Seraphinisme” in his Groans for Liberty (London, 1646), 27.
1.See Sir Edward Coke, The First Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England (London, 1628), 56: “But against the king there shall be no occupant, because nullum tempus occurrit regis. And therefore no man shall gain the king’s land by priority of entry.” The Nullum Tempus Act of 1769 limited to sixty years the ancient royal prerogative to sue for land or property without limitation of time.
2.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, I, lxvii. The idea is a commonplace; see Suárez, Opusculum, pt. II, I, vii.
3.See, e.g., Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 14, art. 13; Suárez, De Angelorum Natura, II, x, 3. Thomas points to the source in Aristotle, Of Interpretation, IX.
4.This argument is found in Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 14, art. 13, and in Summa contra Gentiles, I, lxvii.
5.The idea is elaborated in slightly different language in Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 14, arts. 7, 13.
6.The preceding discussion of knowledge owes its ideas and much of its phrasing to Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, I, lxvi–lxvii.
7.Horace, Carmina, II, i, 6.
8.Suárez, De Angelorum Natura, II, x, 8. Suárez’s discussion of the angels’ knowledge of the future is contained in chaps. ix–xi of bk. II.
9.This view is perhaps most fully stated by Suárez, De Angelis, II, x–xi, especially xi, 16–18; see also Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 57, art. 3, and Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, pt. I, III, x (Hanover, 1597, 158).
10.See On the Cessation of Oracles and On the Pythian Oracle.
11.The following survey of methods of predicting the future is probably drawn from Francesco Pico della Mirandola, De Rerum Praenotione, VI, ii (“Adversus Cheiromantium”), iv (“Adversus Augria et Auspicia”), and vii (“Adversus Superstitiosa Somnia”). Culverwell quotes directly from Pico’s book below.
12.Homer, Odyssey, XIX, 562–64; Virgil, Aeneid, VI, 893–95; Bacon cites the passage from the Aeneid and adds the following gloss: “Insignis sane magnificentia portae eburneae; tamen somnia vera per corneam commeant.”De Augmentis Scientiarum (Works, I, 743).
13.Suetonius, De Vita Caesarum, I, Divus Julius, xxxii.
14.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, cvi.
15.Francesco Pico della Mirandola, De Rerum Praenotione, I, viii (Opera Omnia, Basle, 1601, II, 264).
17.Bacon, History of Henry VII (Works, VI, 31).
18.Anacreon, Odes, xv, 9–10.
19.Horace, Carmina, I, ix, 13.
20.Virgil, Aeneid, X, 501.
21.Francesco Pico della Mirandola, De Rerum Praenotione, III, vi (“De Praenotionibus Pastoris et Nautae”), and vii (“De Praenotionibus Medicorum”).
22.Roman historians record that Caligula sought divine honours by impersonating the gods and assuming their dress and attributes. He was particularly fond of the role of Jupiter; “He also consecrated himself to his own service and appointed his horse a fellow-priest; and dainty and expensive birds were sacrificed to him daily. He had a contrivance by which he gave answering peals when it thundered and sent return flashes when it lightened.” Dion Cassius, Roman History, LIX, 28, 6.
23.The merriment of Democritus at the expense of the world is related by Hippocrates in his Epistle to Demagetus; the story was given currency by Juvenal, Satires, x, 33 (“Democritus his nimble lungs would tyre / With constant laughter,” as Henry Vaughan translated the passage in 1646); both Milton (Prolusion vi) and Burton (Preface to The Anatomy of Melancholy) refer to the story.
25.See Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II, –II, qu. 172, art. 1; De Veritate, qu. xii, art. 3; Summa contra Gentiles, I, lxxxv.
26.Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, De Astrologia Disputationum, II, v (Opera Omnia, Basle, 1601, I, 297).
27.2 Pet. 1:19.
29.Homer, Iliad, I, 70.
30.Virgil, Georgics, IV, 392–93.
31.See Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 171, art. 2, and qu. 172, art. 1.
32.Maimonides, Guide of the Perplexed, II, xxxii (285). This work was translated as ’Doctor Perplexorum, and the page numbers in parentheses refer to the Latin edition published at Basle in 1629. Maimonides’ discussion of prophecy is found in II, xxxii–xlviii.
33.The following account of the views of Maimonides is a medley of summary and quotation drawn from chaps. xxxii, xxxvi, and xxxvii of bk. II (285–97).
34.It is worth noting that the terrae filii at Oxford were appointed by the procters and engaged in mock-serious and frequently scurrilous debate during the inceptors’ disputations at the Vesperiae and Comitia; the same office at Cambridge was filled by the prevaricators.
1.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism, I, xxvi, 201.
2.Lucian, Philosophies for Sale, 27.
3.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, i, 3, and elsewhere.
4.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xiv, 126; I, xxvi, 201; I, xxix, 212.
5.The Sceptic term for suspension of judgment; see Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xxii, 196.
6.The ten modes or tropes described in Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xiv, and Diogenes Laertius, Lives, IX, ii.
7.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, iii, 7.
8.Ibid., I, xxiv, 198.
9.Ibid., I, xxvii, 204.
10.See ibid., I, xxvii, 202.
11.Lucian, Philosophies for Sale, 27.
12.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xix, and Diogenes Laertius, Lives, IX, 74.
13.1 Pet. 1:17.
14.The Sceptic arguments for relativity in ethics are presented in Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xiv, 145 ff.; III, xxiv, 188 ff.; Against the Ethicists, iii, 42.
15.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xxi, 194.
16.Ibid., I, iv, 10.
17.This fragment by Timo Phliasius appears in Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel, xiv, and elsewhere.
18.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xvi, 179.
19.Diogenes Laertius, Lives, IX, ii, 66.
20.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, x, 19.
21.Ibid., I, xi, 24.
22.Ibid., I, x.
23.Ibid., I, x, 20.
24.Cf. chap. 11, n. 65.
25.Ben Jonson employs this Latin phrase in Discoveries, 2418 (Works, eds. Hereford and Simpson, Oxford, 1947, VII, 637), and attributes the saying to Aristotle. The ultimate source is probably the discussion of madness in Aristotle, Problems, 30, 1.
26.Francesco Pico della Mirandola, Examen Vanitatis Doctrinae Gentium, et Veritatis Christianae Disciplinae, II, v (Opera Omnia, Basle, 1601, II, 543–44).
27.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xxxii, 219.
28.Ibid., I, xxxii, 216.
29.The Greek phrase is not found in Aristotle, but it summarizes the attack which he directs against Protagoras in Metaphysics XI, vi, in a passage which identifies κριτήριον and μέτρον; “Protagoras … said that man is the measure of all things whereby he meant no more than that there really is what seems to any man to be. But if this is the case it follows that the same thing both is and is not, or is bad and good, and so with what is said in all other opposite statements; because what appears to each man is the measure, and things often appear to be beautiful to some and contrary to others.”
30.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xiii, 33.
31.See the arguments for relativism in ibid., I, iv.
32.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xii, 25–26, 30.
33.On the seventeenth-century sect known as “Seekers,” see chap. 12, n. 29.
34.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xiv, 152; III, xx, 177.
35.See ibid., II, i, 9; III, v, 22.
36.Plato uses the expression frequently; see, e.g., Phaedrus, 247E and The Sophist, 266E.
37.See chap. 4, n. 39.
38.Quoted in Sextus Empiricus, Against the Logicians, I, 126.
39.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xxxiii, 225 ff.
40.Culverwell criticizes the position which Descartes developed in Discours de la methode, IV (1637), and Meditation II (1638); his reference to this central theory is one of the earliest in England. Marjorie Nicolson, in “The Early Stage of Cartesianism in England,”SP, 26 (1929), 356–74, does not mention Culverwell, but finds traces of Cartesianism in the work of John Hall of St. John’s College, Cambridge, who published Horae Vacivae in 1646 and An Humble Motion … Concerning the Advancement of Learning and Reformation of the University in 1649. Henry More, who was to become chief spokesman for and critic of Cartesianism in England, first definitely refers to Descartes in his Infinitie of Worlds, 1647.
41.See chap. 9, n. 10.
42.Robert Greville, Lord Brooke, The Nature of Truth (London, 1640): “I fully conclude with Aristotles Adversaries Anaxagoras, Democritus, etc. That Contradictions may be simul et semel in the same Subject, same Instant, same notion (not onely in two distinct respects, or notions, as one thing may be causa et effectus, Pater et Filius, respectu diversi; but even in the same respect, under one and the same notion). For, Non ens is nothing; and so, the Being which it hath, may subsist with that which contradicts it. … Sin is onely a Privation, a Non-Entity: But, a Privation, a Non-Entity may subsist (according to the subsistence it hath) with Being. Such a co-existence of Entity and Non-Entity, was in his faith, who cried, Lord, I beleeve, help my unbelief” (100–101). This monism is central to Greville’s argument; see 26, 164.
43.Sextus Empiricus, Outlines, I, xxii, 196; xx, 192; xxiv, 198.
2.The authoritative part of the soul, reason, especially in Stoic philosophy. See Whichcote, Aphorisms, XI, 1042: “All objects affect; and all Faculties incline: God and Nature have appointed a directing Principle [τὸἡγεμονικόν] that there might be, in Multiplicity, a reduction to Unity; Harmony and Uniformity, in Variety.”
3.Musaeus, Hero and Leander, 219.
4.The phrase appears in a story about Demosthenes which Bacon, drawing upon Plutarch’s Life of Demosthenes, relates in De Augmentis Scientiarum (Works, I, 441).
6.1 Pet. 2:2.
8.Plato, Republic, VII, 528B, 535D, and elsewhere.
9.Jerome, Epistolam ad Galatas, Proemio, quoted in John Davenant, Praelectiones de duobus in theologia controversis capitibus (Cambridge, 1631), 169. Davenant’s Praelectiones is a major source in the present chapter. On Davenant, see chap. 12, n. 8.
11.Bacon, The Advancement of Learning (Works, III, 284): “Then did Car of Cambridge, and Ascham, with their lectures and writings, almost deify Cicero and Demosthenes. …”
12.See chap. 4, n. 11.
13.See chap. 9, n. 13.
14.See chap. 12, n. 25.
15.Culverwell is in error in attributing this remark to Aristotle; it is found in Aelius Aristides, Oratio Platonica, Prima pro Rhetorica, in Opera Omnia, ed. Samuel Jebb (Oxford, 1722–30), II, 4.
16.Bacon, De Augmentis Scientiarum (Works, I, 457).
18.Herbert, De Veritate, 221–22: “such, then, are the Common Notions of which the true Catholic universal church is built. For the church which is built of clay or stone or living rock or even of marble cannot be claimed to be the infallible church. The true Catholic church is not supported on the inextricable confusion of oral and written tradition to which men have given their allegiance. Still less is it that which fights beneath any one particular standard, or is comprised in one organization so as to embrace only a restricted portion of the earth, or a single period of history. The only Catholic and uniform church is the doctrine of Common Notions which comprehends all places and all men.” (M. H. Carré’s translation)
19.Cf. Bacon, Novum Organum (Works, I, 191; IV, 82): “For rightly is truth called the daughter of time, not of authority.”
21.2 Tim. 3:16.
22.Aristotle, Politics, IV, iv, 7, quoted in Davenant, Praelectiones, 4.
23.The running title of bk. I of Davenant’s Praelectiones.
24.This threefold distinction is drawn from Davenant, Praelectiones, I, iii, 3.
25.Davenant, Praelectiones, I, xxvi, 152.
26.Ibid., I, xxvii, 163.
27.Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, “De libertate credendi disputatio,” in Apologia (Opera Omnia, Basle, 1601, I, 148); quoted by Davenant, Praelectiones, I, xxvii, 163.
28.Davenant, Praelectiones, I, xxvi, 149.
29.Persius, Prologue, 13–14.
30.This Latin tag from Plautus, Poenulus, 332, was apparently used in an animal fable.
32.Virgil, Aeneid, III, 26, quoted in Davenant, Praelectiones, xxxi, 190.
33.So Davenant observes, Praelectiones, I, xxiii, 141.
34.Edmund Bonner was Bishop of London during the Marian persecutions. OED lists Bonnering as “Burning for heresy,” and cites Bishop Hall: “No Bonnering or butchering of God’s Saints.”
1.Diogenes Laertius, Lives, VII, 110; the preceding Greek sentence is almost certainly Culverwell’s invention, and not a quotation.
2.Cicero, Tusculanarum Disputationum, IV, vi; this is Cicero’s translation of Zeno’s definition of passion just quoted by Culverwell.
4.Herbert, De Veritate, 225.
7.“Anti-Scripturists” is a derogatory term applied by orthodox Presbyterians to their more evangelical brethren. The catalogues of heresy which appeared in the mid-forties frequently employed the term, and it is found among the sixteen forms of heresy examined by Thomas Edwards in the first part of his famous Gangraena (London, 1646). The errors listed by Edwards as “Of the Scriptures” include the following: “That the Scriptures cannot be said to be the Word of God; there is no Word but Christ, the Scriptures are a dead letter; and no more to be credited then the writings of men, not divine, but humane invention; That the Scriptures are unsufficient and uncertain, there is no certainty to build any Doctrine upon them, they are not an infallible foundation of faith” (18).
9.Francesco Pico della Mirandola, De Fide et Ordine Credendi, theorem III (Opera Omnia, Basle, 1601, II, 173). Both the Latin phrase and the suggestion of movement to a centre are to be found in Pico’s De Fide. Culverwell echoes Pico’s Latin in the terms “inclination” and “propension.”
10.Cf. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II, –II, qu. 2, art. 3: “Whether it is necessary for salvation to believe anything above the natural reason,” and II, –II, qu. 8, art. 2: “Whether the gift of understanding is compatible with faith.” For a summary of the Thomistic synthesis of reason and faith see Etienne Gilson, The Christian Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas, trans. L. K. Shook (London, 1957), 15–25.
11.1 Cor. 5:12.
12.Alexander Gill, The Sacred Philosophie of the Holy Scripture (London, 1635), preface. Gill (1564–1635) was Milton’s teacher at St. Paul’s School and probably Culverwell’s also. All four editions of the Discourse print “light” for the correct word “sight” in this quotation. The following sentence is based upon one from Gill’s preface also.
15.1 Cor. 2:10.
16.The “solid Author” here has not been identified.
17.The story of Mahomet’s loadstone is told by Sir Thomas Browne in his Pseudodoxia Epidemica (London, 1646), II, iii: “For the relation concerning Mahomet, it is generally believed his tomb, at Medina Talnabi, in Arabia, without any visible supporters, hangeth in the air between two loadstones artificially contrived both above and below; which conceit is fabulous and evidently false. …”
18.See n. 16 above.
19.1 Cor. 13:12.
20.Heb. 12:18–22: “For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest. … But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. …”
22.Matt. 6:28, 29.
23.1 Pet. 1:12: “Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.”
24.A paraphrase of John 1:27.
25.Ps. 85:10: “Mercy and truth are met together: righteousness and peace have kissed each other.”
2.Sir Kenelm Digby, Two Treatises … the Nature of Bodies … the Nature of Mans Soul (Paris, 1644), 44–45.
5.Plutarch, One Cannot Live Pleasurably in Accordance with the Doctrine of Epicurus, 1099D.
6.The common Greek phrase appears in Homer, Iliad, XXIV, 491, and elsewhere; the Latin phrase appears in Cicero, Tusculanarum Disputationum, III, xxi.
7.Diogenes Laertius, Lives, X.
8.Quoted in ibid., X, 6.
9.This and the two preceding Greek passages are taken from ibid., X, 131, 132.
10.Ibid., X, 14.
12.A recurrent idea in Plutarch’s criticism of Epicureanism; see Doctrine of Epicurus, 1088, 1090, 1092, 1096.
13.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1088E.
14.Diogenes Laertius, Lives, X, 128–29.
15.Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, II, 172.
16.Pindar, Olympian Odes, I, 13.
18.Diogenes Laertius, Lives, X, 6.
19.Ibid., X, 15–16.
20.Tautopathy: suffering caused by same thing as was habitually used previously.
21.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1087E–F.
23.Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, IV, 627.
24.Plato, Philebus, 40B.
26.Exod. 15:23; 17:7.
27.Virgil, Aeneid, I, 203.
28.Plato, Philebus, 46C; 31E–32A.
29.See Plato, Philebus, 51B, 33D, 52D.
30.Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, IV, 1114.
31.Juvenal, Satires, VI, 130.
32.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1088B.
33.Juvenal, Satires, XI, 208.
34.The self-inflicted blindness of Democritus is described by Marcus Antonius Coccius (Sabellicus), De Omnium gentium omniumque seculorum insignibus memoriamque dignis factis et dictis exemplorum libri X, II (Basle, 1541), 65. Robert Burton refers to the legend in the preface to his Anatomy of Melancholy.
35.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1094C.
36.A paraphrase of Plato, Gorgias, 497E–498A.
37.Seneca, Epistulae Moralaes, 23, 4.
38.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1097D.
39.Horace, Carmina, III, xix, 21–22.
40.2 Sam. 19:34, 35.
41.Plato, Philebus, 28C; the Latin phrase which follows the quotation states a main theme of the dialogue.
42.Possibly a free adaptation of Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, X, v.
43.Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, X, iv.
46.See the Koran, XXXVIII, 49–52; LXXVI, 5, 6; LXXXIII, 22–28.
47.Seneca, Epistulae Morales, 59, 12. Bacon tells this story in The Advancement of Learning (Works, III, 309).
48.Plato, Republic, II, III.
49.Aristotle, Politics, I, iii, 9.
53.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus; Culverwell’s paraphrase is more extreme than the argument put forward in the closing sections of Plutarch’s essay, 1102D–1107C.
54.The following criticism of Epicureanism is a summary of Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1090A–C, 1103C–D; the five subsequent Greek quotations are from 1103C, 1101C, 1102A–B, 1100D.
55.Swept OED swoop, 2.
56.Diogenes Laertius, Lives, X, 120.
57.This and the following Greek passage are from Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1106E–F.
58.This story of Lucretius’ death is related by Jerome in his Chronicle under the year 94 b.c.
59.Homer, Iliad, XXII, 390, quoted in the “Moralist” Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1104C.
60.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1106F; Plutarch cites Herodotus, History, vii, 46.
61.Plutarch, Doctrine of Epicurus, 1106E: “Wherefore it is neither the dog Cerberus nor the river Cocytus that has made our fear of death boundless; but the threatened danger of not being, representing it as impossible for such as are once extinct to shift back again into being.”
62.Seneca, Naturales Quaestiones, I, Praefatio, 12.
63.Culverwell is probably not quoting a source here, but bringing together typical neo-Platonic terms; see Plotinus, Enneads, IV, viii, 2, 16; VI, ix, 3, 35; Plato, Phaedo, 80B; and chap. 5, n. 4.
1.Musaeus, Hero and Leander, 8–9.
2.Augustine, Confessions, I, i.
3.Ovid, Metamorphoses, I, 85–86.
6.Bacon, Descriptio Globi Intellectualis (Works, v, 538–39) and Sylva Sylvarum (Works, II, 352): “It appeareth also that the form of a pyramis in flame, which we usually see, is merely by accident, and that the air about, by quenching the sides of the flame, crusheth it, and extenuateth it into that form; for of itself it would be round.”
8.Homer recounts the story of Vulcan’s fall in books I, XIV, and XVIII of the Iliad.
9.Epictetus, Discourses, I, i.
10.Claudian, Satires, III, 215–16.
11.Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 1.
12.Gerhard Jan Voss (1577–1649), author of Historia Pelagiana (London, 1618); Culverwell took the Latin phrase and the Greek word from p. 20 of this work, and he followed chap. iii in assigning Pelagius’ nationality (incorrectly) and summarizing the opinions of Jerome, Chrysostom, and Augustine.
13.Thomas Bradwardine, De Causa Dei (London, 1618), sig. a6v.
14.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, cxlix; this statement and the preceding Latin sentence are quoted from one of Thomas’s discussions of human merit and the necessity for grace.
15.Prosper of Aquitaine, Liber contra Collatorem, xii (337) (Migne, LI, col. 216).
16.Culverwell was probably reminded of this commonplace of Aristotelian physics (see On the Heavens, I, viii) by Thomas’s use of it in Summa contra Gentiles, III, xxv, where he discusses man’s movement toward God.
17.The source has not been identified; Robert Ferguson in his The Interest of Reason in Religion (London, 1675), 43, quotes the same sentence and translates it (“By the Light of Nature, they nodded after a Summum Bonum”) in a manner which suggests that he might have read the Discourse.
18.Augustine, De Verbis Apostoli, sermon 14 (Migne, XXXVIII, col. 1338), quoted in Davenant, Determinationes, 235: “Pace eorum dicam, qui cuiquam salutem promittit sine Christo, nescio utrum ipse salutem habere possit in Christo.” Anthony Tuckney repeats Culverwell’s version of Augustine’s statement on the title page of his None but Christ (London, 1654).
19.See the discussions of condign and congruous merit in Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I–II, qu. 114, art. 3 and Davenant, Determinationes, 66–69 and 151–55.
21.Zanchius, De Operibus Dei, pt. III, III, iii, thesis I.
23.Virgil, Georgics, II, 490; Culverwell’s eye may have fallen upon this proverbial line from Virgil when he was reading Bradwardine (see n. 13 above), where it appears on the page he quotes.
24.Ovid, Metamorphoses, III, 137.
25.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, xlvii.
26.Ibid., III, xl; see also Rom. 10:17.
27.A close paraphrase of Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, xl.
28.Both the phrase and the idea come from Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, I, qu. 12, art. 12: “Whether God can be known in this life by natural reason.”
29.Defined and discussed by Thomas in the Summa contra Gentiles, III, liii, from which chapter Culverwell excerpts three of the following four quotations.
30.See Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite, Divine Names, I, 4, in Opera Omnia (Paris, 1644), I, where the idea is abundantly illustrated, although the exact quotation has not been discovered.
31.Ps. 36:9, quoted in Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, liii.
32.Quoted in Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, liii.
33.Rev. 21:23, quoted in ibid. III, liii.
34.Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles, III, lviii.
35.This statement and the previous two Latin phrases are quoted from ibid., III, liii.
36.Both Latin phrases are quoted from ibid., III, lix.
37.A close summary of the concluding paragraphs of ibid., III, lix.
38.Ibid., III, lx; the second half of the quotation is Culverwell’s expression of Thomas’s concept.
39.Ibid., III, lxi.
40.See, e.g., ibid., III, xxvi: “That happiness does not consist in an act of the will.”
The textual notes list all departures in this edition from the first edition of 1652. Emendations by the editors are marked (ed.); all other preferred readings are from the edition of 1654 (see Foreword: “The Text”).
This book is set in Adobe Garamond, a modern adaptation by Robert Slimbach of the typeface originally cut around 1540 by the French typographer and printer Claude Garamond. The Garamond face, with its small lowercase height and restrained contrast between thick and thin strokes,is a classic “old-style” face and has long been one of the most influential and widely used typefaces.
Printed on paper that is acid free and meets the requirements of the American National Standard for Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, z39.48-1992. ∞
Book design by Louise OFarrell, Gainesville, Florida
Typography by Impressions Book and Journal Services, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin
Books printed and bound by Edwards Brothers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
Paperback covers printed by Commercial Printing Company, Inc., Birmingham, Alabama