7/27/2019 Europe, Early Modern and Modern
1/2
Europe: Early Modem and Modem 1631Elizabethan enforcement was
strict, and, in the end,vicar and congregation conformed to the new
order.
R OGE R B. MANNINGCleveland State UniversitySTEPHEN GAUKROGER.
Francis Bacon and the Transfor-mation of Early-Modem Philosophy.
New York: Cam-bridge U niversity P ress. 2001. Pp. xii, 249.
Cloth$59.95, paper $21.95.Th i s is a remarkable book, written by
one of ourleading authorities on Rene Descartes and Cartesian-ism,
who turn s his attention here to Francis Bacon andBaconianism, one
of the most densely researchedtopics in the history of early modem
science. StephenGaukroger offers one more reading of Bacon's
philo-sophical achievement. "Bacon," he says, "is concernedwith
nothing less than a new era in human existence,th e key to which
lies . . . in a new kind of naturalphilosopher, whom Bacon hopes to
mould" (p. 115).Th is new man (not woman), unlike philosophers
ofold, would not merely contemplate the world but usehis knowledge
to improve the human condition byproviding us with "infinite
commodities" (p. 71). Norwould he contemplate in splendid
isolation; rather hewould furnish a method of collective inquiry
intonature that would allow us, with state sponsorship, tomarshal!
the talents of many researchers.Gaukroger makes his case by both
quoting fromBacon himself and drawing on the work of Baconscholars,
including especially Julian Martin, AntonioP6rez-Ramos, Graham
Rees, and P eter H arr ison.Gaukroger argues that "Bacon's was the
first, system-atic . . . at tempt to transform the early-modem
philos-opher from someone whose primary concern is withhow to live
morally into someone whose primaryconcern is with . . . natural
processes" (p. 5). I wouldbe happier if Gaukroger, in developing
his argument,had dealt with the fact that Bacon also saw himself
asa moral philosopher and had treated more fully Ba-con's own views
on ethics and morals. In this respecthe could have drawn on the
work of Benjamin Far-rington, Jerome R. Ravetz, Anthony Low,
MarkkuPel tonen, Ian Box, John C. Briggs, and John E.
Leary.Gaukroger also raises the question of Bacon's influ-ence on
later seventeenth-century philosophers butrestricts that influence
to his impact on their naturalphilosophy. Men like Sir Edward H
yde, John W ilklns,T homas S prat, John B eale, John Evelyn, Joseph
G lan-vill, and S amuel P arker saw Bacon as both a moral anda
natural philosopher and were deeply indebted to himon both counts.
For these Baconians, science wasmeant to serve certain well-defined
moral and socialpurposes, and these in tum were underpinned
bynatural religion. A full assessment of Bacon's legacywould have
to take all this into consideration.Gaukroger 's book is laced with
interesting observa-
"bypassing [K ing] James altogether" and turning toP rince H
enry instead (p. 161). Bacon also never seemsto have considered any
working contemporary scien-tific institutions as precedents for S
olomon's H ouse,his proposed scientific research center, despite
theexistence of organizations like Gresham College andT ycho
Brahe's superb observatory, U raniborg, patron-ized by the Danish
king (pp. 163-64). Finally, Gau-kroger draws a parallel between a
projected but neverrealized S olomon's H ouse and the contemporary
butvery real Society of Jesus (pp. 127-31). Both weremeant to be
devoted to reform, one of science, theother of the Catholic Church,
and both required theirmembership to live according to a strict
discipline seenas necessary to the accomplishment of their
respectivemissions. Both, Gaukroger claims, also required abso-lute
obedience to their respective rulers: the pope inthe case of the
Jesuits, and the monarch in the case ofS o lomon 's H ouse. But, as
to the latter, Gaukroger ismistaken. The king is not the head of
that scientificpowerhouse, "the lantern" of Bacon 's U topian
king-do m of Bensalem; in fact, according to Bacon, therewill be
times when the king is not even informed of hisscientists' research
findings: "some of these we doreveal sometimes to the state," their
spokesman says,"and some not."Gaukroger says rather cryptically
that Bacon's NewAtlantis is a portrait of a scientific U topia, "w
hereself-respect, self-control, and internalized moral au-thority
are central" (p. 52, n. 42). I would like to readmuch more from him
on this. It is a statement that sitsoddly with his notion that
Bacon should be seen not asa moral philosopher but as a new kind of
naturalphilosopher. I do not think Bacon and his followerswould
have understood that distinction. Gaukroger'st reatment of his
thesis, provocative and suggestivethough it is, needs some serious
tweaking, if not amajor overhaul.
JAMES R. JACOBJohn Jay C ollege,City University of New
YorkCYNDIA SUSAN CLEGG. Press Censorship in JacobeanEngland. New
York: Cambridge U niversity P ress.2001. Pp. xi, 286. $59.95.Cyndia
Susan Clegg has written a knowledgeable,detailed, and shrewd study
of censorship during thereign of James L Althoug h she focuses
primarily on thetwenty-three years of James's kingship, her book
hasimportant implications for the ways in which bothliterary
scholars and historians conceive of censorshipand describe its
effects.Central to Clegg's arguments concerning the natureand
effectiveness of censorship is her insistence that asa Jacobean
political and cultural practice it must beunderstood as multivocal
rather than univocal, local
