ticipate the satisfactory execution of this important inquiry by Messrs. Ellis, Spedding, and Heath:

tripectora tergemini vis Geryonai;

the three Cantabrigian fellows, who have proposed to themselves the revision, elucidation, and purification of Lord Bacon's remains, and who have been now for several years engaged, with little perceptible result, in preparing a new and complete edition of his works. Like their amiable predecessor in the same labor, the late Basil Montagu, they will, in all probability, either negligently or ignorantly overlook this significant question, notwithstanding its direct bearing on the history of modern science and philosophy, and its interest in relation to the legitimate claims of Lord Bacon on the admiration and regard of posterity. It is strange that works so celebrated and so important as Bacon's should never yet have been edited by a philosopher, a scholar, or a man of science; but should have been left to the inadequate attentions of persons having no natural or acquired aptitude for their proper treatment, and possessing but very moderate literary attainments. Hobbes was engaged in the original preparation of some of these treatises, and presented them with a Latin dress; but no name of celebrity, in England at least, has since been connected with their publication.

It might, perhaps, be regarded as a favorable symptom of the times that so many republications of the writings of Francis Bacon have been issued from the press during the late years; sometimes of his whole works, more frequently of his master-pieces, or of his exoteric and popular productions. This may minister merely to a literary fashion, and cater to that taste, which is so strongly exemplified in our day, of acquiring a superficial and ostentatious acquaintance with the principal works of all the classical authors of our own and other tongues. There is much reason to apprehend that the lately increased circulation of solid and celebrated books is, in great measure, due to the prevalence of such an appetite; but it is not unreasonable to suppose, at least to hope, that the earnest study and genuine appreciation of the Baconian philosophy may be extended among the elect, as one consequence of the fashion. Such an extension is greatly to be desired; for, amid all the eulogy of Bacon and the inductive method with which our ears are, and have long been habitually stunned, we are sorry to say that the indications are rare of any familiarity with the intrinsic merits or demerits of either. The result has been a noisy and inane arrogance, pluming itself on knowledge never possessed, and running headlong into error and danger, with a most amusing confidence of security and miraculous illumination.

But, while new editions of Lord Bacon and other celebrities, some forgotten, some dimly remembered, are streaming from the presses of different nations, no one thinks of reproducing the greater work (Opus Majus) of Roger Bacon, and introducing him to the curious regards of an inquisitive generation, cognizant of his name, but having little further acquaintance with him. Amid all the exhumations, of buried philosophies, and the unexpected resuscitations of the dry bones of defunct sages, neither private necromancers, nor corporate resurrectionists, neither French eclectics nor Camden clubs, neither Cambridge dons nor London publishers, dream of a new edition or translation of the writings of the "Doctor Admirabilis," whose profound speculations illumined the ages of alleged darkness, and secured admiration by the display of a light almost as brilliant as that of the "Novum Organon," and certainly more amazing when considered with reference to the time of its appearance. The most eminent of the forgotten philosophers of the mediæval centuries has been entirely disregarded by a generation solicitous for the re-production of any relic, whether priceless gem or useless rubbish, which has received the sanctifying mold of obscure antiquity. Bohn has already merited public gratitude by his valuable and judiciously selected libraries of cheap classics, from the midst of which we have picked his neat edition of Bacon's popular works for the text and occasion of our present remarks. He would render an additional service to the English-reading community, if he would annex to his scientific, or to his Antiquarian Library, or to his new series, the Philologico-Philosophical Library, a skillfully abridged translation of the Opus Majus of Friar Bacon. The middle and larger portion of the work treats of the Reformation of the Calendar, of mathematics, of optics, and the other sciences; and, although it originated views of much significance in the history of scientific progress, it is loaded with mistaken speculations and antiquated learning, which would be tedious, cumbrous, and repulsive, if exhibited in their full extent. But the vigorous original doctrines, which have either been adopted by succeeding generations, or have aided in the subsequent discovery of truth, though now thrown aside themselves, might be dexterously extracted, with so much of the wild menstruum in which they float as would show their connection with the philosophy of their author, their relation to the convictions and modes of thought of the twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries, and would also illustrate the characteristics of the intellect of Roger Bacon, in its strength and in its weakness. A complete edition of all the surviving remains of that remarkable man, prepared by a diligent and competent scholar, and furnished with a copious com

mentary to explain the many difficulties which occur in his writings, and trace his dependence on his predecessors and his cotemporaries, and his influence on his successors, would be exceedingly desirable for students of the history of science and philosophy. His Opus Majus has alone been edited as yet; even that has been but once edited, for, though the edition of Jebb was republished at Venice, the addition of the Prologus Galeatus, designed to exculpate Bacon from the charge of magic, scarcely renders the Venetian republication a new edition. Among the manuscripts of his works preserved at Paris, and more abundantly at Oxford, neither of which collections was carefully examined by Dr. Jebb, other treatises than his principal composition might be discovered, and might aid us in determining the progress and the range of his speculations, if they rendered no further service. It may be that he inserted in the Opus Majus, which he composed to be submitted to Pope Clement IV., and sent to his holiness by his pupil, John of London, all that was essential and distinctive in his philosophical labors. But this is scarcely probable or possible. It can hardly be conceived that all the hardy and novel dogmas contained in the numerous treatises, of which the titles are given by Jebb, could have been compressed in their full integrity into the scanty limits of the specimen addressed to the pontifical judgment. Nor is the hypothesis of such a compression sustained by an examination of the work itself. Many discoveries and acquisitions were attributed to Roger Bacon in cotemporary, or nearly cotemporary times, of which there is either no trace or a very insufficient intimation in his single printed work. It is exceedingly probable that, in his case, as in the list of the productions of Aristotle exhibited by Diogenes Laertius,* separate books and chapters have been represented as distinct works in many instances. But, as we would commit a grave error if the recognition of this blunder of the Greek gossip led us to infer that Aristotle's surviving works had been reduced to the Organon, so we are in danger of committing a similar, and perhaps equally grievous mistake, if we conclude that all of Roger Bacon's writings are virtually contained in the Opus Majus.

A complete and thoroughly annotated edition of Roger Bacon's writings would be interesting only to scholars and men of science; it would be too ponderous for those who desire simply a cursory acquaintance with his philosophical career. The wishes of the former class of readers have never been sufficiently enthusiastic to invite a repetition of the labors of Dr. Jebb, on an ampler scale; and the

St. Hilaire, De La Logique d'Aristotle, part I, chap. iii, vol. i, pp. 25, 26. Vide Jebb, Preface, Opus Majus, pp. xi-xiv, ed. Ven.

circle of those who are to be attracted by any new publication of his works must be considerably enlarged before any such publication will be hazarded. This can only be effected by such an abridgment as we have suggested. Whatever illustration of the intermediate books it might be desirable to introduce, could be very conveniently incorporated into the pages of a full and luminous introduction to the translation of the other parts. But who, in these days, is familiar enough with the learning, and philosophy, and science of the Saracens, Alchemists, and Schoolmen, to compose a satisfactory introduction to such a work? It would be a very meager achievement of this task to offer a mere biography of Roger Bacon. We should require, in addition to this, an instructive account of the intellectual condition of his age; of the influences under which his mental aspirations were formed; of the circumstances which favored, and of those which impeded his attempts at philosophical reform; and of everything which may reflect light upon his true position in the history of philosophical and scientific progress. But, whether embodied in the introduction, or inserted in its original order, a condensed statement of the substance of the middle books would be all that could prove generally useful. It would be necessary to translate in extenso, only the opening books and the conclusion, for it is in these that the philosophy of science is discussed, and the foundations of experimental philosophy are laid. It is principally from these that Lord Bacon has borrowed those doctrines and expressions, which have suggested the suspicion of his obligations to the old Franciscan, and which may be found to constitute characteristic elements of his own philosophy.

What we have indicated as alone expedient to be introduced into an abridged version of the Opus Majus, would furnish the contents. for a volume suitable to be included in Bohn's series, and would form an attractive and instructive addition to his collection. If such an addition were published by him, or by any other member of the worshipful fraternity of bibliopoles, it might compel the editors and indiscriminate eulogists of Lord Bacon to take cognizance of his obligations to earlier philosophers, and especially to his namesake, whom he so rarely and grudgingly mentions; or, if this duty were still neglected, as has hitherto been usual, it would invite and enable others to investigate the relations and agreements of these homologous and homonymous philosophers, and discover the extent to which the younger reformer was indebted to his precursor, and the degree of criminality attending the concealment of this indebtedness. To expedite such a consummation, we propose to give here some of the principal results derived from our own examination.

It may be expedient to prefix a few dates to the observations which we are about to offer. The period of Roger Bacon's birth and that of his death are uncertain. Neither date has been accurately determined. The discrepancy, however, on this subject between the various authorities is too slight to merit much attention at present. The year 1214 has been accepted as the date of his nativity, and his death has been assigned to 1292 or 1294. He was born at Ilchester, in the County of Somerset, studied at Oxford and Paris, and, at the instigation of his friend, Robert Grosse-Tête, Bishop of Lincoln, entered into the Order of Franciscans, after his return to England, and subsequently to the year 1240. He devoted himself assiduously, perhaps exclusively, to scientific pursuits intimately connected at that time with Alchemy, and not very favorably regarded by his Franciscan brethren, who were by no means distinguished among the great monastic orders by intellectual attainments. The works of Aristotle had been condemned and proscribed by the Council of Scissons in 1209, and the condemnation had been reaffirmed by the Papal Legate at Paris in 1215. The influence of the Church, alarmed by the multiplication of heresies, was at this period decidedly adverse to the studies in which Roger Bacon was engaged; and these studies were rendered more suspicious in his case by his connection with Robert Grosse-Tête one of the earliest leaders of ecclesiastical reform in England. His illiterate brethren regarded him and his avocations with no favorable feelings; and the Opus Majus was written and dispatched to Pope Clement IV., as a defense against their accusations by the exposition of his views. After the death of Clement, and under the pontificate of one of his successors, Nicholas III., Jerome d'Ascoli, the Superior of the Franciscans, in 1278 condemned the works of Bacon, and sentenced him to prison. In this confinement he was detained ten years. 1288, he addressed himself to the compassion of the pope, and sought his favor by transmitting to him a tractate, De retardandis senectutis accidentibus; a subject which has a strong flavor of Alchemical associations, but which engrossed much of Lord Bacon's attention. The pope was Nicholas IV., Jerome d'Ascoli, the former Superior of the Franciscans, the judge by whom Roger Bacon had been condemned. Nicholas IV. remanded him to closer imprisonment; but the intercession of powerful friends at length procured his liberation. The release came in time only to accord him liberty in death, for he expired at Oxford not long after, at the age of seventy-eight, in 1292 or 1294.

In

A still briefer chronology of the better known life of Francis Bacon will be sufficient. He was born at York House, in the Strand,