From Natural History to Natural Magic

From Natural History to Natural Magic: Francis Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum Proefschrift ter verkrijging van der graad van doctor aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen op gezag van de rector magnificus prof. mr. S.C.J.J. Kortmann volgens besluit van het college van decanen in het openbaar te verdedingen op maandag 16 december 2013 om 14:30 uur precies door Doina-Cristina Rusu geboren op 12 maart 1985 te Boekarest (Roemenië) Promotores Prof. dr. Christoph Lüthy Prof. dr. Ilie Pârvu (University of Bucharest) Copromotor Dr. Dana Jalobeanu (University of Bucharest) Manuscriptcommissie Prof. dr. J.M.M.H. Thijssen Prof. dr. Dan Garber (Princeton University) Dr. Kathryn Murphy (Oxford University) Cover designed by Lucia Dumitrescu and Doina-Cristina Rusu (original image Francis Bacon, Instauratio magna, London, 1620) From Natural History to Natural Magic: Francis Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum Doctoral Thesis To obtain the degree of doctor from Radboud University Nijmegen on the authority of the Rector Magnificus, Professor dr. S.C.J.J. Kortmann and from the University of Bucharest on the authority of Rector Magnificus, Professor Mircea Dumitru to be defended in public on Monday 16 December 2013 at 14:30 hours by Doina-Cristina Rusu Born on 12 March 1985 in Bucharest (Romania) Supervisors Prof. Dr. Christoph Lüthy Prof. Dr. Ilie Pârvu (University of Bucharest) Co-Supervisor Dr. Dana Jalobeanu (University of Bucharest) Doctoral Thesis Committee Prof. dr. J.M.M.H. Thijssen Prof. dr. Dan Garber (Princeton University) Dr. Kathryn Murphy (Oxford University) ........................................... The appetites of matter ................. 6.................................. 4............................................. 7 Chapter 1................................................................................. 6........................ 2......................................... 59 2................................................. 2............................. 4.......................... 44 1....................... 37 1.................................................................................... the Instauratio magna .............. 2...... 1... The role of experiment ................................................................................................ 5.................... 6.......... 31 1....... 22 1................ Natural Philosophy and Magic: A Survey of the Status Quaestionis.......................... 4......................................... 52 1................................................................................................ Experientia literata ..... 51 1.............................................................. 3........... 7............................................. 6............ The theory of matter in Bacon’s cosmology.............. 34 1................. 63 2... 8...... A deplorable lack of theory concerning experimentation................ Simple natures: schematisms and motions ....... 6... 8........... Introduction . 1....... 39 1....................................................... 4.......................................... Bacon’s project................. 18 1....................... Scholarly studies of Sylva sylvarum .......................................................Table of Contents List of Abbreviations ........... 5 Introduction ................................ 8....... 3.................................. Conclusions . 3.... 6... Introduction . “Experiment” and “experience” in the theoretical works and the Latin natural histories .............................. 20 1........................................................................................................................ 61 2....................... 64 1 ............... Induction and forms ... 8........................................ Bacon.......... 1.......................... 8.......... 3.................. 53 1............ 59 2....... The beginning of the contemporary debate: Thorndike and Rossi ... The relationship between experiment and theory .. 1............................................................. Bacon’s matter theory............. “Experience” versus “experiment” .......... The history of arts and the role of the efficient cause.............. 1............. 55 1........................... 2....... 17 1......................................................... 57 Chapter 2: Sylva Sylvarum in the Context of Bacon’s Natural Philosophy ................ 46 1................................................................................................ 23 1............................................................................ 9............. Bacon’s reform of natural history.... 43 1......... 3......................... 4.................... 35 1............................ Functions of Bacon’s experiments . Tangible and pneumatic matter ............... 56 1............................................. Bacon’s experiments: “the torture of nature” or “legal interrogation”? ........ 17 1..................................... 1..................................... The issues at stake ....... 2........................................................ Operative philosophy: the influence of alchemy and magic... 27 1.................. 5... ................................. 3.... 2....... 5..............2...... 137 Chapter 4............................................ 3........... Conclusion ... 3......... 4............... 70 2................................. A Case Study on Bacon’s Use of Sources: Experiments with Plants in Sylva sylvarum and the Magia naturalis ............... The pedagogical function of experiments.................. 4. 6......................... 2.......... 99 3.. The mysteries of the book .......................................... 4............... spiritual magic and divination ......................... 3. Introduction ............................. 3.... 96 Chapter 3: Types of “Experiments of Light” in Sylva sylvarum ........ 2.................................................................. 2........ 1...... 3............... 3.......... The issue of terminology: theory........ 3...... Bacon’s own distinctions between types of experiments ....... The Historia vitae et mortis ....... 2............................................................ 2.................................................................... 3.......... 82 2................. “Experiments of light” and “experiments of fruit” .. The first function of experiments: illustrations of matter theory .......................... 74 2......... “Experiments” and the art of experimenting in Latin natural histories ............ 83 2...... 90 2............. 4.... Experiments as models of natural processes ..... 3...................... 3............................ 69 2..... 82 2............................................... 5.. 3....................................................... 2..... 3... 3......................................................... 4......... 1......................... “Experiment solitary” and “experiments in consort” ........................ Second function of experiment: rejection of experiments proposed by ancients and moderns ................. Bacon’s own experiences and borrowings from sources ........... 2....................... Scholarly views on the function of Bacon’s experiments in Sylva sylvarum ............. 114 3............. Operative instances: medical receipts........................................ 4............. 3...................................... 3....... 3................ 86 2.. 126 3........... 120 3.............. 88 2....... 3........ 1... experience and experiment .......... 3................... 3........ Experiments used to refute theories or opinions formulated by Bacon’s predecessors........ 1................. 99 3................. The Historia densi et rari .................... 68 2..................................... Different types of instances under the title “experiment” ............... 3.. 4................................... 86 2... 139 2 ........... 5. Experiments directed towards establishing correlations between those properties of the bodies that cannot be observed by the senses ............ 3... 4. 4..................... 3..................... Vulgar experiences and experiments ............................ Conclusion: Sylva’s variety of instances............... 93 2... 4............................. 72 2....... Experiments directed towards the production of knowledge .......................... 101 3... 130 3.......... 3.................. 89 2.... 3................. 103 3................... 1............................. The standing of the Sylva sylvarum vis-à-vis the Latin natural histories ..... The Historia ventorum ............................................. 93 2............ 3.... 74 2........... 108 3. 66 2........... 4. 1.... Theoretical and empirical instances......... Conclusion: Sylva sylvarum in the context of natural and experimental history .. 4...................................... 4.................................. Conclusion ....................................... 2.... 4........ 4...... 4....... Experiments exploring the properties of bodies during the development of a process . 4. 73 2.. 104 3. .............................. 2.................................... 3............................ How a magician should manipulate nature............................ 3............ Physics and metaphysics: the discovery of causes ..... 197 5........ 4............. 232 Conclusions ...... 204 5........ How mechanics becomes natural magic ................. The classification of sciences ........ 5...............................5............ 4....................................................... 8.......... 207 5....... 4............. 4.............. Introduction ...................... Bacon’s creative use of sources for his Sylva sylvarum ........... Appetites....... 214 5...................... 4.................................. Conclusion: Bacon’s science of magic ............ 178 5.................................. 3........................ 231 5.. 4. Generalizations ........................................................................... Methodological criticism ..................................................................................................... 3............................................................... 242 Appendix 1: Bacon’s classification of sciences according to De augmentis scientiarum................ 214 5........... 3............................ 4..........4... 4. 3.... Previous Scholarly Views..................................................... latent processes............................. 153 4...... 209 5................................................................................................. 185 5.......... 183 5............................................................................................ Conclusion . 3.................. New species of things............................... 3............................................. 159 4............ 3............ Plants in Della Porta and Bacon: the case of grafting ........ 202 5................................................ 3........................... 4............................................. 6.. From mechanics to magic ............................... 2....... and forms 190 5.......................................... 4......... 3................. 235 Bibliography ................................. 4................ 192 5..................... 141 4......... 1........... 183 5............................ Problems of boundaries: Bacon’s science of magic . 180 5............................. 4........ 174 Chapter 5: Sylva sylvarum and the Baconian Science of Magic. 217 5.... 5................................................................................................. 156 4............ Relations between simple natures... Introduction ............... 264 3 ................ Bacon’s transformation of the Science of Magic .............. The science of magic in Della Porta’s Magia naturalis ............. Different interests in the study of plants: Magia naturalis and Sylva sylvarum ....... Different types of magic ...... motions and forms .......................... Germination and vivification ......................................... Physics and metaphysics: discovery of latent schematisms.......... 2.................................. 1.... 1....... Conclusion: Is Sylva about natural magic? .........................4............................... Degeneration and transmutation ............................................................................................................ 3............................... 2........................................ 139 4. 1......... 4............................................................................. 3.............................. Bacon’s definition of form ................... 143 4........ 222 5... 3.................... 4.................. 212 5............................ 178 5.. 166 4........................... 187 5... 7.......... 3................................................................................ 1............................................................................... 4.... 1..... 227 5.............................. State of the scholarly debate ....................................... 3..... 3................................ 2.............................. Addition of causal explanations ..... 2................... 3.......... ...)..................................... 278 Samenvatting.......................................................... centuries V and VI ..... 275 Appendix 7: Scheme of Bacon’s borrowing from Della Porta’s Magia naturalis in Sylva sylvarum........... 269 Appendix 3: Simple motions and their corresponding appetites according to the Abecedarium novum naturae ...................................................................................................... 4............................................................................................ 3............................. 294 4 ............................................. 272 Appendix 6: Table of borrowings from Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia Naturalis and Hugh Platt’s Floraes paradise in Sylva sylavrum.. 285 Acknowledgements ........................................................................... 292 Curriculum vitae ...................................................... centuries V and VI .......................................................................................................................................... 270 Appendix 4: Sums of motions and measurements of motion according to the Abecedarium novum naturae ..............................................................................Appendix 2: Simple schematisms of matter according to the Abecedarium novum naturae ....... 271 Appendix 5: Tables for the experiments exploring the properties of a body during the development of a process (section.............................. 277 Summary .... 3...................................................... 1–169) HGL = Historia grauis & leuis (OFB XII. 7 vols. OFB = The Oxford Francis Bacon (15 vols. 641-52) CV = Cogitata et visa (SEH III. 7-17) HSMS = Historia sulphuris. 505-521) DO = Distributio operis (OFB XI: 26–47) DPAO = De principiis atque originibus (OFV VI. and Lord High Chancellor of England (14 vols. V. planned. Collected and edited by James Spedding.). Alban. 270-359) Ess = The essayes or counsels. 1857–1874. Baron of Verulam. 417-439) CDSH = Cogitationes de scientia humana (SEH III. AL = The Advancement of Learning (OFB IV) ANN = Abecedarium novum naturae (OFB XIII. 11-38. Sir Brian Vickers (Oxford. 137-39) HSAR = Historia sympatiae et antipatiae rerum (OFB XIII. Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon Heath (London. General editors: Graham Rees and Lisa Jardine (1996–2006). facsimile reprint Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1961–1963). civill and morall (OFB XV) FL = Filum labyrinthi (SEH III. Viscount St. 591-620) DAS = De augmentis scientiarum (SEH I. 171–225) CDNR = Cogitationes de natura rerum (SEH I. mercurij et salis (OFB XII. 96–169) DINP = De interpretation naturae proemium (SEH III. V. 227-335) HNE = Historia naturalis et experimentalis (OFB XII. 272–498. 3–119) DFRM = De fluxu et refluxu maris (SEH I. 493-504) HDR = Historia densi et rari (OFB XIII. 47-64. 135) 5 . 687-764) DVM = De vijs mortis (OFB IV. 441-458) DGI = Descriptio globi intellectualis (OFB VI. 197-267) DSV = De sapientia veterum (SEH VI. to date). 605-86.List of Abbreviations SEH = The Works of Francis Bacon. 177-198) CF = Calor et frigus (SEH III. 133-35) HIAI = Historia & inquisitio de animato & inanimate (OFB XIII. 2006–). V. IV. 421–837. 215-52) Other Abbreviations: FP = Floraes paradise. 167-68) NA = The New Atlantis (SEH III. Hugh Platt (London. 237-41) ILM = Inquisitio legitima de motu (SEH III. 19-131) HVM = Historia vitae et mortis (OFB XII. 557-86) SS = Sylva sylvarum (SEH II. 2-61) PMR = Physiological and medical remains (SEH III. 795-836) PID = Partis instaurationis secundce delineatio & argumentum (SEH III. Neaple 1589 for the Latin version) 6 . 527-39) VT = Valerius terminus (SEH III. 1608) MN = Magia naturalis. Giambattista Della Porta (London. 140–377) IDM = Inquisitio de magnete (OFB XIII.HV = Historia ventorum (OFB XII. 541-56) RP = Redargutio philosophiarum (SEH III. 621-40) IM = Instauratio magna (OFB XI. 243-57) TPM = Temporis partus masculus (SEH III. 2-25) MN = Magnalia naturae (SEH III. 1558 for the English translation. 331-680) TC = Thema coeli (OFB VI. 171-93) TDL = Topica inquisitionis de luce et lumine (OFB XIII. 448-73) PhU = Phenomena universi (OFB VI. 119-66) NO = Novum organum (OFB XI. 48-447) PAH = Parasceve ad historiam naturalem (OFB XI. and its overall aim was to render all kinds of discoveries possible and to improve human life. and magic. mechanics. what Bacon “performs” in several experiments from Sylva is natural magic in the sense defined in his earlier works. it is a natural history. Physics and mechanics study them from the point of view of the material and efficient causes: while physics investigates the causes of the “simple natures” in the individual bodies in which they appear. in turn. inducing these natures upon bodies.” However. which are (as we shall see) much more than what natural histories are traditionally expected to provide. in the form of observations and experiments. physics. But what about magic? Does it represent the only science that was not developed by Bacon? This dissertation claims that Bacon constructed and presented his science of magic in Sylva sylvarum. the other four disciplines deal with the hidden structures (the so-called “schematisms”) and hidden motions responsible for visible changes. Sylva sylvarum has never been read in connection with Bacon’s science of magic. mechanics applies this knowledge. as we shall document. Metaphysics and magic. these disciplines are allocated the following tasks: natural history is supposed to gather information about the world. a work published posthumously by his erstwhile assistant. the four disciplines deal with these “simple natures” from different perspectives. Metaphysics is treated by Bacon in the second book of the Novum organum. In fact. Magic. because they include theoretical considerations and propose veritable transformations of nature. finally. This reformation in turn relied on the radical transformation of five disciplines. applies this knowledge in order to transform bodies. William Rawley. Of all these five disciplines. a discipline viewed as 7 . The main reason for this is that according to its title. where he investigates the simple nature of heat. Metaphysics seeks what is common to all those bodies in which one of the simple natures is present. represent the superior pair of sciences. Bacon names both these structures and motions “simple natures. to wit: natural history. metaphysics. Bacon composed and published natural histories. but they investigate their formal causes. Physics and mechanics were treated in the Latin natural histories.Introduction Francis Bacon’s project was the reformation of natural philosophy. They deal with the same entities treated also by physics and mechanics. In their reformed state. And this is how they are transformed in Sylva. A detailed comparison between the Magia and Sylva will show the creative and original way in which Bacon used this particular source for his historical and philosophical writings. namely dealing with individuals). it has been surrounded by suspicions that its contents do not correspond to Bacon’s intentions. or else as a commonplace book or a notebook. drawing conclusions about his understanding of natural histories. to belong to physics and mechanics (according to Bacon’s own definition of these disciplines. and that it was possibly not even meant to be published. The way in which Bacon built his natural magic is better seen in the transformation of the borrowed “instances” from the book representing the main source of Sylva: Giovanni Battista (or Giambattista) Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. and its subjects of inquiry are concerned. Finally. because this book looks very different from Bacon’s other natural histories as far as its language (English. out of which information could be taken for use in the construction of a real natural history. physics. the study of the hidden properties of matter). it has even been considered to be an inferior type of natural history. by generalizing upon Della Porta’s operation of individuals and by adding causal 8 . its structure. I will be able to document that Bacon took Della Porta’s work. many of its 1. they can be shown to belong to the respective domains of natural history. not Latin). As our close reading will demonstrate.inferior compared with the other four disciplines.000 so-called “experiments” have been identified as borrowings from other sources. mechanics. And as these experiments are employed at different stages in the process of inquiry. Moreover. Sylva has been viewed as an imperfect kind of natural history. and that Sylva represents the attempt to lift them up to the superior level of metaphysics and magic (once again according to his own view of these disciplines. the experiments reported in Sylva have a range of different functions and lead to different types of results. despite its title. As for magic. In addition. once they clearly speak of operations on the hidden forms and natures of bodies. experimentation and magic. as Sylva is a posthumous publication. For this reason. Della Porta’s experiments enter the domain of natural magic proper. There are two comparisons to be done here: one between singular instances and the other between the central concepts of their theories behind the manipulation of nature. It places this book in the context of Bacon’s theory of experimentation and his matter theory. it has been already mentioned that Bacon understands by it the application of new forms to a given body – and this is precisely what we see happen oftentimes in Sylva. metaphysics and natural magic. This dissertation proposes a new reading of Sylva sylvarum. and moreover examines Bacon’s use of sources. he also explains how magic. It will be shown that Bacon read Platt’s horticultural treatise (which in turn repeatedly responds to Della Porta’s Magia naturalis) alongside Della Porta’s book. but focus on the experiments of the two investigators involving plants. it is a feature of Bacon’s natural magic. because he expects the knowledge obtained in their study to be applicable in the animal realm. Indeed. has been illustrated only in one case in the Novum organum. scholars have mostly limited themselves to repeating Bacon’s own definition of magic as the application of the 9 . As mentioned. as we shall see in chapter 1. It is well known that Bacon’s project for the reformation of natural philosophy has remained incomplete. we shall present a hitherto unknown source of Sylva. through the claim that Bacon denotes the end of Renaissance magic and the beginning of modern science. The reason for this choice is that plants occupy for Bacon a special place. Bacon is at pains to explain the way in which his own science differs from that of others. or else negatively. and most importantly to the human body. has hitherto been considered to have been absent from Bacon’s work. Most importantly. namely Hugh Platt’s Floraes paradise. and Bacon’s own experimentalism and theory. using the former as a corrective of the latter. latent process. Magic. can be reinstituted (see chapters 1 and 5). But when engaging with Bacon’s own understanding of magic. both the generalizations and the explanations being cast in terms of Bacon’s matter theory. simple motion. which according to the view defended in this dissertation represents the upper end and ultimate stage of natural philosophy. previous discussions of Bacon’s views on natural magic have mostly underlined Bacon’s criticism of contemporary magic. I shall not offer a complete comparative analysis of the two books. etc.. Besides making these contributions to the central concepts of Bacon’s natural philosophy – such as form. However. in its original and noble sense. its theoretical twin. there. It is indeed true that in his theoretical and methodological writings. this thesis also aims to improve our historiographical understanding of Bacon’s Sylva. where salutary effects are brought about by changing the latent forms. Bacon’s own experimental reports in Sylva may thus no longer be viewed as unidirectional borrowings from Della Porta. but as the result of a complicated triangulation between the Neapolitan’s book. In this thesis. For this reason. Platt’s critique thereof.explanations. the theme of Bacon’s use of magic has been barely discussed in the Bacon scholarship. given that metaphysics. the aim of improving the human lot is a characteristic of Bacon’s science in general. schematism. and. forms discovered in metaphysics. Against this background, Sophie Weeks’ research constitutes an important step forward. She has, for the first time, connected Bacon’s reform of natural magic with his theory of matter. Our thesis will extend Week’s work considerably, by showing that Bacon’s conception of magic as the application of forms is not only reflected in, but constitutes the core of, the experimental collections of Sylva sylvarum. An investigation of the experimental and argumentative procedures of Sylva will also tell us something very important about the disciplinary entanglement in Baconian experimentalism. Many scholars have explicitly or implicitly assumed that the five disciplines composing Bacon’s reformed natural philosophy were practised separately and treated in different treatises. Recent scholarship has shown, however, that the natural histories written and published by Bacon during his lifetime present us with a mixture of physics and mechanics. As we shall hear in chapter 1, Peter Urbach and Guido Giglioni have argued that this mixture is not a sign of confusion, but that Bacon never proposed a water-tight separation between natural history and induction, the latter being Bacon’s method used in physics and metaphysics for the discovery of forms. But even in those few cases in which induction and natural histories were seen as a related enterprise, natural magic was left out. The reason for this omission seems to reside in another misunderstanding on the part of Bacon scholars, namely in the assumption that if magic is indeed the manipulation of those forms that metaphysics has discovered, then Bacon could not have performed any experiments in natural magic, given that he failed to complete his investigation of forms. I take this interpretation to be wrong. Bacon’s belief was, as I will argue in this dissertation, that in order to establish whether a given definition of forms was correct, one first had to test it in practice. Evidently, such a verification of provisional definitions of form, if successful, produces the very works that are the preserve of natural magic. Note, however, that it is not my intention to claim that each “instance” reported in Sylva belongs to the domain of natural magic. This book contains 1,000 experiments, of which many are recordings of mere observations or very simple experiments, which can be considered to be at the level of natural history. Others seem to be at the level of physics and mechanics. The claim is rather that of the various types of “instance” presented in it, some – and in fact the most important ones – do belong to natural magic. If my interpretation is correct, and if we therefore accept that Sylva sylvarum is at least in part a book on natural magic, then we must also accept that that it represents, by way of models, the last step and potential fulfilment of Bacon’s general project. Should this be 10 correct, then this book, which the secondary literature has generally ignored, becomes all of a sudden one of the key texts for the understanding of Bacon’s natural philosophy. The claim that Sylva marks the potential fulfilment of the Baconian project should not be understood as saying that with it, Bacon’s science has arrived at its endpoint and completion. In fact, it is not evident whether such a completion would even have been possible according to Bacon’s own conception. Cannot science, for Bacon, always be improved and new inventions be made? The precise way in which I deem Sylva to mark the potential fulfilment of Bacon’s project is this: in it, he described and performed all the sciences that deal with natural knowledge, that is to say, natural histories, physics, mechanics, metaphysics and magic. To be sure, all these sciences appear in Sylva in a scattered form, and Bacon would readily have admitted that it would have taken the effort of the entire scientific community to complete and apply these scattered observations, following his examples. What is the purpose of Sylva, then? According to my hypothesis, with what turned out to be his last work, Bacon gave his followers a model of how nature could be truly manipulated. Some methodological points The works that provide the basis of our analysis are, apart from Sylva sylvarum, those that form part of Bacon's project of reformation, that is, of the Instauratio magna: the Novum organum,1 the De augmentis scientiarum,2 the Historia naturalis et experimentalis (with its three Latin natural histories),3 the Abecedarium novum nature4 and The New Atlantis.5 1 Novum organum or Directions concerning the Interpretation of Nature appeared in 1620. From the six books it was supposed to contain, Bacon published only the first two. The book was supposed to deliver Bacon’s method of induction or the discovery of forms. The first book is concerned with purging and cleaning human mind from the errors and “idols” that affect the processes of knowledge. The second book starts with an exemplification of induction in the case of the form of heat and also gives indications on how to construct the natural and experimental histories, presenting a list of instances and the knowledge they can provide when used in the construction of a natural history. 2 De dignitate et augmentis scientiarum was published in 1623. It represents an extended version of the Advancement of Learning (published in English in 1605, as a proposal for the reformation of knowledge dedicated to the new king, James I). However, while the latter had only two books, the extended version had nine, the first being a translation of the first book of the Advancement, and all the others an expansion of the second book The book deals with Bacon’s tree of knowledge (see appendix 1), offering classifications and definitions of all the sciences. 3 The Historia naturalis et experimentalis ad condendam philosophiam: sive, Phenomena universi, the third part of the Instauratio magna, was supposed to contain six natural histories, as an exemplification of how the natural historical work should be done. From these six titles, Bacon published two during his lifetime (in 1622 and 1623, respectively), the Historia ventorum and the Historia vitae et mortis. The third, Historia densi et rari, was left in manuscript form and was published posthumously by Bacon’s secretary, William Rawley. However, an introduction of the book, containing rules for the construction of a natural history appeared in the first edition together with the Historia ventorum. 11 Whenever I found it fruitful to do so, I have compared these texts with the early ones (namely the Valerius terminus,6 The Advancement of Learning,7 the Descriptio globi intellectualis,8 the De sapientia veterum9). These works are invoked to illustrate that Bacon’s overall conception of the structure and tasks of the scientific disciplines did not significantly change over the years as well as to underline the differences they nevertheless display, with the aim of identifying the factors that influenced the changes in Bacon’s thought. In those among the above-mentioned texts that were written as contributions to the Instauratio magna, I pay special attention to those passages that discuss Bacon’s theory of experimentation, his distinctions between and definitions of the sciences, as well as his theory of matter. From the “instances” of Sylva, I tried to find the clearest case studies and passages for the establishment of a classification of its “instances” as well as of a typology of experiments. As for the chapter that compares Sylva with Della Porta’s Magia naturalis, I have chosen – as mentioned above – their respective treatment of plants (centuries V and VI in Sylva and book III of the Magia naturalis), because of the significant body of text and because both authors view plants as important models for animals and humans. For my final chapter, on natural magic, I include, beyond the experiments on plants, other “instances” dealing with what I take to constitute “Bacon’s forms.” As my textual source I have used the Oxford Francis Bacon (indicated as OFB in the footnotes) for all texts that have already been published in this series. For all other works, I 4 The Abecedarium novum naturae was never published by Bacon. Its place within the project of the Instauratio is still unclear. The book is a list of definitions of all simple schematisms, simple and compound motions, measurements of motions, greater masses and conditions of being. Bacon’s idea was that nature is written in an alphabet and all the letters can be discovered and defined with the aim of applying them for the creation of “new words,” in the sense of new objects. It is mention if the Historia naturalis when he explains the existence of pairs of schematisms among the subjects of the natural histories, which suggests that Bacon was planning to publish it, but did not have the chance. 5 The New Atlantis was published posthumously, together with Sylva sylvarum, in 1626 or 1627. As almost all of Bacon’s works, it is unfinished. The book presents the story of an unknown island, where science is advanced and life is better for all the citizens. At its centre stands a scientific community, charged with the dissemination and communication of knowledge. The standard interpretation of this fable is that Bacon’s aim was to show what society would look like and how human life would be much improved if his model of science was performed. 6 Valerius terminus or the interpretation of nature was probably written in 1603, but first published in the nineteenth-century edition of Bacon’s works. It is a fragmentary work, which includes discussions on the scope of knowledge, the errors of the human mind and the discovery of forms. 7 The Twoo Bookes of Francis Bacon of the Proficience and Advancement of Learning divine and human, dedicated to King James I, was written in 1605. The first book describes the deficiencies of the sciences as performed in Bacon’s days, and is at the same time a defence of knowledge against possible attacks. The second is a manifesto in favour of a reformation of knowledge and its disciplines. Bacon was hoping that the new king will patronize such an enterprise for the advancement of knowledge. 8 The Descriptio globi intellectualis was written in 1612 and was meant to represent the first part of the Instauratio magna, for the divisions of sciences. It was left unfinished and, as has already been mentioned, in 1623 Bacon published De augmentis on the same topic. 9 The De sapientia veterum was first published in 1609, and went to several editions during Bacon’s life. It relates the fables of the ancients, interpreting them in the key of natural or moral philosophy. Bacon considers these fables to contain seeds of knowledge, if correctly interpreted. 12 have used the nineteenth-century edition (indicated as SEH in the footnotes). For my quotations, I used the English translations throughout. However, in all texts that were published in Latin, I compared the translation with the Latin. Wherever I felt that the translation did not capture the exact sense of the Latin, I used my own translation, indicating deviations in the footnotes. For Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis, I used the first English translation of 1658, which I once again compared with the Latin original, indicating my changes in the footnotes. Hugh Platt’s Floraes Paradise was quoted from its original first edition from 1608, written in English. Structure of the dissertation This dissertation is composed of five chapters. In the first chapter, “Bacon, Natural Philosophy and Magic: A Survey of the Status Quaestionis,” I offer an overview of the available scholarship on the themes relevant for this dissertation, that is to say, regarding the influence on Bacon of the occult sciences of the Renaissance, the operative character of Bacon’s natural philosophy, his natural and experimental histories, his method of induction and his matter theory. The aim of this chapter is, on the one hand, to provide a starting point for the following chapters, and, on the other, to show, through a comparison with Bacon’s texts, why some interpretations are not accurate or complete. This survey also documents that Sylva sylvarum has been neglected by Bacon scholars, and explains why this happened. The reasons for this neglect will be rejected here; the subsequent chapters will instead fill the lacuna. From chapter 1, it will also become clear why a comparison of Bacon’s experiments with their textual sources and a reconstruction of Bacon’s science of magic are indeed necessary. The second chapter, entitled “Sylva Sylvarum in the Context of Bacon’s Natural Philosophy,” offers an introductory study of Sylva sylvarum. An analysis of the instances of which it is composed and a comparison with those of the histories included in the Historia naturalis et experimentalis will show the similarities between Sylva and the Latin histories. I believe that Sylva is not an “imperfect” natural history, nor a commonplace book. It will be seen that Sylva is composed of regular sensory observations, interventionist experiments, theoretical considerations, methodological advice, medical receipts, natural divination and spiritual magic, in the same manner that the Latin natural histories are composed of all these different instances. To be sure, this chapter will not solve all the mysteries surrounding this book, such as its structure or composition, but it will show why Sylva may not be dismissed as 13 unimportant. Moreover, my claim is that its lack of structure represents Bacon’s method for the selection of readers: its unity hidden behind the apparently different phenomena is to be discovered only by those prepared for this. The others can only use the knowledge of Sylva at a very basic level – to improve their lives or to understand certain phenomena. The third chapter, “Types of ‘Experiments of Light’ in Sylva sylvarum,” will provide a classification of those experiments that Bacon conducted for the production of knowledge and which he himself called “experiments of light.” It will be shown that the previous functions attributed to Bacon’s experiments, either in Sylva or in the Latin natural histories, do not cover the entire diversity of Baconian experimentation. This classification will start with the less complex ones and proceed to the most complex ones, both in terms of the experimental set-up and the of type of results they provide. In our typology of six classes, the first one is composed of those experiments that illustrate Bacon’s matter theory as established in his speculative writings. There are furthermore classes of experiments the task of which it is to refute existing experiments or theories. Though they do not provide positive knowledge, they are still important for the natural histories, because they cleanse them of wrong conceptions and give science the possibility to advance. The last three types of experiments have as their function to study the changes of bodies during a given process, to transform the imperceptible processes of nature into perceptible ones, and to work on simplified models on those occasions when the objects under investigation cannot be directly examined. The results of these experiments are very different: for the fourth class they just establish changes in the bodies, but changes which can be further used to establish common characteristics of bodies at the deeper level of matter theory. The fifth render experimentation, and thus knowledge, possible where it is difficult or impossible to obtain sensory access. The last class permits the transfer of knowledge from one group (under study) to another one, that has the same characteristics, using the frst as the simplified model of the second. This classification will be used later in the dissertation in the proof that these last three types of experiments realize the passage from physics to metaphysics and from metaphysics to magic. Chapter four, entitled “A Case Study on Bacon’s Use of Sources: Experiments with Plants in Sylva sylvarum and the Magia naturalis,” deals with the issue of the sources of Sylva. Since the publication of Bacon’s works in the second half on the nineteenth century, Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis has been recognized as Bacon’s major source for his Sylva. However, no comparison of the two texts has ever been carried out, and the secondary literature has limited itself to insisting endlessly that a big number of instances in Sylva are “copied” by Bacon. I will try to fill that lacuna by providing a detailed comparison 14 between the two texts, conducting an in-depth analysis of the plant and agricultural experiments. In the process, it will become clear how original Bacon’s ways of borrowing and adjusting the instances taken from Della Porta’s book have really been. We will find that the main changes he introduced into Della Porta’s experiments have to do with generalizations, the addition of explanatory causes and the methodological criticism of Della Porta’s experimentation, proving that Bacon and Della Porta have different interests in the same experiments. This chapter will also introduce a new source for Bacon’s experiments on plants, namely Hugh Platt’s Floraes paradise and document how Bacon criticized some of Della Porta’s experiments on the basis of Platt’s experimental reports and by adding his own experiments and theories to both of them. In the light of this hitherto unknown source, new light will be thrown on Bacon’s method of using previous histories. Not only did he not simply “copy” experiments from other books, but he carefully selected and transformed them, compared sources and kept for his own history only those experiments that seemed both reliable and useful, either for the discovery of the processes of nature, or for the production of greater effects, or even for the refuting of wrong theories and experiments. The final chapter, “Sylva sylvarum and the Baconian Science of Magic,” reinterprets this book in the larger context of Bacon’s conception of natural magic and in comparison with Della Porta’s own book on magic, the Magia naturalis. In order to understand what for Bacon the exact office of magic consisted in, it is necessary to give a definition of forms and also of the relation between the main Baconian disciplines, that is, the two pairs of physics and metaphysics as well as mechanics and magic, because they are connected with one another, and each occupies an important role in the construction of knowledge and in the discovery or manipulation of the elements out of which nature is composed. Our excursion into Bacon’s theory of matter will allow us to connect some concepts that have been discussed in separation in the secondary literature and have therefore misled scholars into claiming that Bacon’s system is not coherent. Through a detailed study of Bacon’s examples of induction and of the relation between schematisms of matter, simple motions, and appetites, we will be able to define his concept of form. This definition, in turn, will help us show that many experiments in Sylva sylvarum are nothing if not attempts to modify and superinduce “forms” upon bodies, which is precisely what the task of natural magic consists in. It will also be shown how Bacon used Della Porta’s experiments in an original way, as a basis upon which a true natural magic could be constructed, and how the essential concept of magic differed for the two authors, Bacon seeing his magic much superior to Della Porta’s. 15 and should indeed be read as one of Bacon’s most important writings. By applying to the whole nature what Bacon managed to do only to a very restrained range of phenomena and groups of objects. this should not be seen as a finished method. Bacon managed to deliver. nature can be truly manipulated. all these arguments should suffice to indicate to the reader that Sylva sylvarum constituted an important project for Francis Bacon. at least in a draft version. a complete method for the instauration of man as a creature that possesses the means to interpret nature and the power to transform it. If this is indeed the case. but as something that has the character of a model. Various of his 1. Of. course.When taken together. it follows that before his death.000 instances represent his proposal of a reform of natural magic. 16 . Chapter 1. which have always been considered to be the source of Bacon’s preference for operational science. of induction and of matter theory. it is impossible to discuss an individual issue without referring to many others. It is the purpose of this chapter to construct a map of scholarly discussions concerning Bacon’s natural philosophy. so as to justify my attempt at a new analysis of Bacon’s natural historical and magical texts. even though they speak of related subjects. Introduction Bacon’s writings are notoriously fragmentary. and indeed to Bacon’s philosophy as a whole. of the theory of experimentation. so as to understand better where we stand at present and which issues still await a solution. Certain themes resurface throughout his works. I shall also attempt to account for misreadings. These two characteristics of Bacon’s writings – their fragmentary character and their thematic interrelatedness – have led to many misinterpretations of Bacon’s theories as well as to conflicting interpretations in the secondary literature. In my analysis of debates conducted in the secondary literature. while the solution to the question they tried to answer was located in fragments elsewhere. 17 . in Bacon’s overall philosophy of natural history. For this reason. notably when scholars have decided to focus on one problem or text to the exclusion of others. Given the main theme of this thesis – the nature and purpose of the Sylva sylvarum – I shall focus on Bacon’s operative science and the way in which it was influenced by the occult sciences of the Renaissance. Bacon. Natural Philosophy and Magic: A Survey of the Status Quaestionis 1. Particularly relevant will be the place. 1. Let us therefore delve into the Baconian literature of the past half century. 2. and to advocate a new program including “experimental science. quite anachronistically. Thorndike affirms that there is not much that one can say for Francis Bacon. Thorndike then presents several of Bacon’s ideas concerning method. it was not true. Thorndike does not attempt to explain why Bacon. natural history.” [. biology. without any explanation of the reasons which led Bacon to affirm these ideas. the modern scientific explanation of a given phenomenon. describing his scientific method as useless and accusing him of having accomplished no scientific feat. even a Francis Bacon..11 Alas. The beginning of the contemporary debate: Thorndike and Rossi Lynn Thorndike’s encyclopaedic A History of Magic and Experimental Science dedicates an entire chapter to Francis Bacon. 18 . astronomy. however. despite his allegedly crooked and useless philosophy. could not think straight when he thought as a naturalist and tried to amass “experiments” on the one hand and to grapple with magical tradition and superstition on the other hand. Francis Bacon was as helpless as Pliny was in antiquity or as any one else was in the early seventeenth century. astrology. [. was nevertheless “much cited and admired by many of his contemporaries. It was a relatively easy thing to criticize the past and present state of learning. The best that any one can say for him is that he really tried..] But when it came to getting down off one’s high horse of generalities and putting one’s shoulder to the problem of particular phenomena of nature and dealing with specific facts and beliefs and traditional errors.10 Thorndike there accuses Bacon of taking what did not belong to him in the sphere of philosophy. that he was much cited and admired by many writers of his century. witchcraft and logic. his success in the 10 11 Thorndike. and its course did not run smooth. The path of magical and experimental science was no straight and narrow one. VII. 63-88. medicine.. as well as in his career as Lord Chancellor. and instead corrects him in some cases by pitting against him. In conclusion.” If this description of Bacon’s philosophy were accurate. It must be admitted. 88. Ibid.. experimentation.1. vol.] Even a Lord High Chancellor. He was a crooked chancellor in a moral sense and a crooked naturalist in an intellectual and scientific sense. He did not think straight. History of Magic.. that Bacon’s method is completely different from Renaissance “pre-science” and should rather be considered as a step towards modern science. which Bacon brought about. and despite Thorndike’s advice. According to Rossi. Bacon was seduced by a vision of logic assisting in the classification of instances: the art of memory and the method of places. however. scholarly attention to Bacon was rekindled and he came to be viewed both as one of the most important figures of the Scientific Revolution and as the principal advocate of the experimental method. together with Bacon’s condemnation of it and his praise of science. He hastens to add. his book starts by tracing the heritage of magic. forcing it to yield to man’s domination. For this reason.. was not influenced by the occult sciences of the Renaissance. This change. In other words. This is a point that should be always kept in mind by the historians whose aim is to discover how certain traditional concepts are gradually remoulded by the demands of a given age” (Francis Bacon. the new method of science that Bacon proposes and the development of his thought across the years. 21. In this regard. merely one page later. but by the tradition of rhetoric. 207-14. In the second half of the twentieth century. but he did borrow from this tradition the idea of science as the servant of nature assisting its operations and. Rossi claims that Bacon regarded magic and alchemy as the ultimate aims of human endeavour. Pointing out that Bacon’s method for the discovery of the form of heat as described in the second book of the Novum organum is based on the method of tables taken from Ramus’ rhetoric. was influenced in the first place by Ramus’ rhetoric. They were directed at specific objectives and may be ascribed to a definite phase of culture.13 Indeed. Bacon’s view of the mechanical arts and magic must be seen as a reaction to the Hermetic tradition of Renaissance magic. 19 . 14 Ibid. The Novum organum. subsequent historians of philosophy have taken a great interest in Bacon’s works.12 Although Rossi’s main interests are rhetoric. as well as the idea of knowledge as power.seventeenth century would indeed be hard to understand.14 12 Rossi might have had Thorndike’s criticism in mind when he wrote that “the basic themes of Bacon’s philosophy are often biased and polemical.. Rossi’s main thesis is that the metaphysical aspect of magic and alchemy had little or no influence on Bacon. The start of a more balanced scholarly investigation into Bacon’s philosophy must be sought in Paolo Rossi’s Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science. 11). 13 Ibid. he concludes that Bacon transplanted typically rhetorical concepts into the field of natural science. by stealth and cunning. Rossi maintains. However. Gaukroger maintains that Bacon did not cut himself loose from the occult sciences. in fact.” An important assumption of his examination is the distinction between theoretical and practical knowledge. Bacon condemned. the philosopher began to transform himself into a scientist. 189. on one hand.”15 When analyzing Bacon’s fables.. the main problem to be addressed in this dissertation. Ibid. not into their static principles. on the other. 17 Ibid. Rossi affirms that the metamorphosis of Proteus. and by relying on the rhetorical tradition in constructing his own natural philosophy. 99. miraculous interventions that would by-pass human labour and space the sweat of the human brow. is an idea taken from alchemy. inquiries should be made into the ‘appetites’ and ‘inclinations’ of things.” 18 Stephen Gaukroger’s Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Early Modern Philosophy goes in the same direction as Rossi. Rossi returns to a discussion of his attitude towards magico-alchemical practices as evidenced by the fables of Proteus (matter) and Cupid (the atom). With regard to the first two. 105: “What he attacked was a presumption to dominate nature by extrinsic. the role played by mathematics and the role of eclecticism. the magico-alchemical attitude towards nature as being “impatient. as a reaction to this anomalous manner of producing knowledge. 15 Ibid. Bacon aims “to free natural philosophy from the constraints that had traditionally been placed upon it. with the superiority of the latter. patient and plodding. and of Proserpine (the spirit) and Deucalion (the mechanic). starting with Bacon. but rather from philosophy.” while the correct one should be “humble. said Bacon. There are three aspects that shape Bacon’s understanding of natural philosophy and the superiority of practical knowledge: his classification of knowledge. Gaukroger also views Bacon as a first step towards modern science. He adds that. for Bacon.18 1. but its aims were limited and insufficient. 16 20 .With respect to the magico-alchemical tradition. Bacon promoted a type of discipline very close to modern science. This is. and that his choice of a Democritean diversity of atoms was determined by “his ‘alchemical attitude’ to the problem of transmutation.” because “he believed that all substances being composed of identical particles. One of these topics is the influence of the magico-alchemical tradition of the Renaissance and its connection with Bacon’s science of magic. “concerned with factual rather than speculative issues. a happy medium is required between the arrogance of the miracle-makers and the slothful unadventurousness of those who are content with the human lot. according to Rossi. dogmatic and illusory. 3.”17 However. signifying the transformation of matter upon a process of isolation. Rossi’s book opened many new directions for research in the field of Baconian studies. The issues at stake Without a doubt. constraints which prevented it from being pursued in the practical vein that Bacon envisages” (225). Rossi states that “traditional philosophy was not. contrary to Rossi. With his classification of knowledge. To attain true results...”16 In the other two fables. a fallacious philosophy. I shall address five themes in this chapter while attempting to develop them further.).” 133-34.). 4. the posthumously published Sylva sylvarum. Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. as we shall see in detail. There are admittedly also scholars. I will turn to Bacon’s method of induction and the theory of forms (1. which I shall develop more fully in the main chapters of this thesis (chapters 2-5). His magic was not a reaction against. most famously Brian Vickers. 7. his experiments and his matter theory have subsequently been analyzed. and especially his last one. I believe that the best place to look for the way in which Bacon reformed the science of magic is the natural and experimental histories.). Despite Rossi’s claim that the occult traditions exerted only a limited influence on Bacon. Sophie Weeks.).Rossi’s interpretation has not gone unchallenged. the emphasis had been quite singularly on Bacon’s method of induction and his theory of forms.). 19 20 Weeks. in which the central place is occupied by experimentation (1. I will then discuss Bacon’s reform of natural history (1. and against Rossi and Vickers. Finally. have started to attract the attention of scholars in recent years. has drawn attention to an important error of interpretation in Rossi’s book. It is my hope to redress the balance in favour of the nexus between natural history. 22. together with Bacon’s theory of experimentation. According to Weeks. impostures and fantasies: “Baconian reform is more correctly presented as an instauration of magic. 8.” 505-7 and “Analogy. magic and experimentation. Vickers. but rather a purification from. without which his project cannot be properly understood (1. these histories. ending with a brief discussion of his theory of matter. it was not Bacon’s intention to create a scientific alternative to Renaissance magic. the latter’s method. 6. I will start with a description of the general view of Bacon’s project. 21 . who adamantly refuse to recognize any influence of these occult sciences upon Bacon’s work. “Francis Bacon and the Progress. Before then. for one. 5. which is that of reforming knowledge and putting operative science at the centre of the investigation of nature (1. Fortunately. rather than as an institutional and methodological preparative to the emergence of modern science.”19 While I consider this interpretation to be correct.20 Siding with modern tendencies. natural philosophy. by a range of scholars within the context of the alchemical tradition. The first is considered the De augmentis scientiarum. On the influence of the story of the Fall of Man on Bacon’s project of Instauratio. 81. From the other 21 IM. would lead to numerous possibilities for the “benefit and use of life.” Milner. he published the De augmentis scientiarum. he published in the first year the first and the last (the Historia ventorum and the Historia vitae et mortis). 129). The Philosophy to Come. Theology. 4. or The Active Science23 Beginning with the Novum organum Bacon wrote and published two of the six books in 1620. OFB XI. Bacon started his Historia naturalis et experimentalis in 1623. From the list of six.”22 As is well known. OFB XI. in the Novum organum. see Whitney. “Francis Bacon. 23 See Plan of the Work in IM. the plan for his Instauratio magna remained unfinished. Precursors or Anticipations of the Philosophy to Come 6.21 This knowledge. The aim of this restoration was to give back to humankind the knowledge it had lost. which is not officially presented as the first part of the Instauratio. Further on. Three years later. “The Theological Foundation. aph. Bacon’s project. “Bacon’s Science and Religion. OFB XI. together with its innocence. The Religious Foundation. and there are some unpublished texts written in this period which have an unclear place in the overall scheme. Georgescu. The Phenomena of the Universe or Natural and Experimental History for the Building up of Philosophy 4. Of the six parts. “Francis’s Bacon’s Instauratio. one every six months. Instead of completing the Novum organum and thus providing his readers with true induction. The Ladder of the Intellect 5.” 22 IM.” McKnight. 23.1. never to be published by Bacon himself. Bacon defines the final aim of philosophy: “the true and legitimate end of the science is nothing other than to supply human life with new discoveries and resources” (NO. with the aim of publishing six histories within three years. or so Bacon expected. 22 . The Fall of Man. OFB XI. but the similarities between it and the original plan have made scholars consider it as such. On religious influences on Bacon’s works see Briggs. while the second (the Historia densi et rari) was left in manuscript form. Matthews. I. 27. Bacon started the second and the third. 23.” For a general view of modern science as the recovery of lost knowledge. the Instauratio magna In 1620 Bacon started a project to reform natural knowledge and restore man as the King of Creation. see Harrison. The Partitions of the Sciences 2. to the place he had lost after the Fall. The six parts are: 1. Novum organum or Directions concerning the Interpretation of Nature 3. aph. the Abecedarium novum naturae. and limited in scope compared with what they might be. He observed that in his day inventions and discoveries were in fact made by craftsmen. Farrington analyzed both the unpublished and the published works. One of the first authors to have drawn attention to the operative side of Bacon’s philosophy is Benjamin Farrington. is in operation equivalent to a rule” (NO I.. 127.three (the Historia gravis et levis.”25 The guiding idea is that knowledge of nature brings with it the possibility of its manipulation. Bacon had to abandon both the Historia naturalis et experimentalis and The New Atlantis. mercurii et salis and the Historia sympathiae et antipathiae rerum). emphasizing the way in which Bacon explained his reorganization of knowledge. Both the meaning and the sources for this operative vision of knowledge have been analyzed at length in the secondary source material. As for the Sylva sylvarum: or a naturall history in ten centuries. Noticing Bacon’s interest in craftsmen’s activities and in their inventions and discoveries. Probably one of the most cited Baconian affirmations is that “knowledge is power. 65).” Farrington argues that in order to invent new arts. together with The New Atlantis. casual. 44-45). William Rawley.. The remedy for this was to bring learning into relation with industry and invention. there exist only introductions. of 1955. Operative philosophy: the influence of alchemy and magic As mentioned before. and its place is deemed to be either at the end of the third part or at the beginning of the fourth part of the Instauratio. Bacon’s secretary. the limited vision of craftsmen was not enough. Francis Bacon: Philosopher of Planned Science. according to Farrington. he argued for the idea that his philosophy was the result of a desire to combine the ability of craftsmen with “learned wisdom. The origins of Bacon’s proposed reform. OFB XI. The same ideas can be found in Farrington’s second book. The quotation from the Novum organum is: “Human knowledge and power come to the same thing. a reorganization of science was needed. 4. “Preface” SEH III. in the sense that once the cause of a phenomenon is discovered. mentions that in order to complete the Sylva. the Historia sulphuris. Francis Bacon. But he observed also that inventions were few.] That which in thought is equivalent to a cause. 1. 1.”26 In order to do this. its reproduction becomes possible.24 The other text written in the last years of Bacon’s life. Theory and learning were needed (Farrington. were the voyages of discovery and the increased speed with which innovative inventions spread 24 Rawley. [. it was published posthumously. the purpose of the Instauratio magna was to restore human power over nature. was discovered in the late-twentieth century by Graham Rees. 26 “What is the connection between his practical aims and his thirst for knowledge? It lies in the fact that while Bacon thought the wisdom of the learned had taken the wrong turning and become unprofitable he did not think the labours of practical men could supply the deficiencies of learned. 25 23 . His idea was not to discard the wisdom of the learned but to reform it. 3. but their practice wrong. According to Farrington.28 Farrington maintains that Bacon’s conception of science is opposed to this magicoalchemical vision – his own ideal of science is that of a democratic. His criticism of magic and alchemy (both moral and intellectual) represents. bodies are no longer consistently thought of in terms of atomic structures.” Muriel West attempted to show that Bacon could not have been Boyle’s source for his alchemical practices. and this is why they like to clothe their knowledge in an obscure and enigmatic style. given that he did not understand the alchemists’ obscure language. which presents not only additions to knowledge. The Philosophy. 52-53. When examining the unpublished texts from the period 1603-1609. however. both of which are borrowings from the magico-alchemical tradition..”29 Rossi and Farrington’s claims regarding the influence of magic and alchemy on Bacon and on his operative philosophy have been developed and criticized by Muriel West.” For example. Farrington argued that the magico-alchemical influences were not confined to Sylva. of what would later become the Industrial Revolution and the religious temper of the age. Consequently. 28 24 . but that these influences “exist also in the most carefully considered works. 29 Ibid. in other words. the great instauration of man’s dominion over nature. In his article “Notes on the Importance of Alchemy to Modern Science in the Writings of Francis Bacon and Robert Boyle. the possibility of the transmutation of gold. that Bacon was in two minds about these “disciplines”: their aims seemed noble. Farrington traces four lines of argument in the Novum organum: 1) the operations of magicians and alchemists are confined to few experiments and to the production of few effects. 2) the auricular tradition on which their theory rests is full of impostures. in Bacon’s later writings. to mention only a few prominent authors. in Farrington’s eyes.27 According to Farrington. two specific ideas were crucial for Bacon’s philosophy: namely the idea of man as the servant and interpreter of nature and the doctrine of knowledge as power. 3) their attitude is corrupted by vain-glory and self-seeking. and 4) their practitioners think they are a privileged class of illuminati. cooperative enterprise intended for the public good. Farrington pointed out.. which Rossi had compared with the magical texts of the Renaissance. which is a “dominant” theme in Bacon. William Newman. but this doctrine could not account for the possibility of transmutation. Bacon started as an alchemical atomist. 54. Ibid. “but a new way of life. an essential part of Bacon’s contribution to science. 51. but rather as made up “of simple natures. made him modify his original atomism.through Western Europe: the initial progress. Peter Zetterberg. Sophie Weeks and Silvia Manzo. even though he extracted some general 27 Farrington.” I will come back to this issue when addressing the problems which surround Bacon’s theory of matter. The operative side of the Historia vitae et mortis is composed of ten chapters.” Gemelli shows that Bacon’s medical and historical knowledge was voluminous. for both types of alchemical operations it is impossible to claim that Bacon’s method is in any way similar to that of the alchemists..” 103. “Notes on the Importance. and not according to the traditional recipes of the alchemists. and ways and places of living. Ibid. “one must discover a substance that will do the same thing for the living body that known preservatives do for a dead body. West insists on the similarity between Bacon’s method and that of the alchemists: “to make gold. In his article “The History of Life and Death. medicines. medicine. and in particular the very possibility of transmuting gold with the help of the philosopher’s stone or the idea of gaining immortality with the elixir of life. more subtle matter. He contradicts himself at every turn. West continues. “Notes on the Importance.information from the alchemical literature: “Bacon’s remarks on alchemy show considerable confusion of mind – a confusion not easy to account for. According to Gemelli. 104.” 104. In respect to the prolongation of life. Instead.”32 To be sure. to the spirits.” each of which is assigned to a different part of the body. natural history. 34 The Historia vitae et mortis was not only influenced by alchemy.35 West concludes that “Bacon may have realized that he could be accused of distorting the truth when he passes off as ‘new’ the Experiment as his Method. called “operations. 32 Ibid.. does not notice that what Bacon criticizes is the method used by the alchemists. ointments.”33 But again. Bacon does need the proper substance. or even to the external air. containing contributions to history. He tries to justify himself by pointing out that the alchemists ignore the ‘middle axioms’ while they leap back 30 West. his method for prolonging life contains diets. 103-4.34 Thus. West’s interpretation is mistaken: Bacon does not have a unique substance. 33 Ibid. natural philosophy and operative sciences. this history is very rich. heat can have this effect by the elimination of the rarer. the process of making gold must be one of condensation: in certain conditions. 31 25 .31 West. As for the heat.”30 West contends that even while censuring the alchemists. but this is so because not every substance can be transformed into gold. one must discover the proper substance to begin with and use only a moderate heat with the temperature kept steady for a rather long period of time. Bacon recommends ‘nitre’ (saltpetre) because it cools and restrains the spirits and keeps a man from wearing himself out. Bacon believed that such wonders as the transmutation of metals and the prolongation of life were possible if conducted correctly. 35 West. however. OFB XI. These anticipations are very difficult to eliminate from knowledge.” But since it seemed clear to him that the alchemists’ method did not lead to the desired results.and forth between universals and particulars. Knowledge thus must start from mere experiences. The difference between their method and Bacon’s did not consist in a reliance on experiments. 26 . should be done through aphorists. 75). once again. Moreover. aph.38 Despite all his efforts to reform natural philosophy and eliminate existing errors. it seems fair to say that West does not distinguish sufficiently between Bacon’s method and the philosophies that Bacon criticized in the doctrine of idols. being wrong. as well as on our superficiality in distinguishing between those alchemists criticized by Bacon and those accepted and integrated into his works (Joly. 37 The anticipations are “are gathered from a few facts. improved method.39 This method 36 Ibid.” but that the selection of persons should not be done with an obscure language. since the theory invented by the alchemists are of no use. Joly rightly concludes that alchemy could easily be transformed into a “serious” science once it adopted the Baconian scientific method. 106). 75). but Bacon never presents this idea as his own. The selection. aph. in connection with language: Bacon had a “rather pathetic (even if tacit) admission that the ‘fanciful and tumid and half poetic’ style of the enigmatical writers was beyond his comprehension. 105. according to Bacon. This way of transmitting science was harmful for the advancement of the sciences. 28 OFB XI.”36 West does not seem to notice that Bacon accepts in the Novum organum the fact that the alchemists performed experiments and that they were indeed attempting to build up a natural philosophy. In conclusion. West did not notice that Bacon’s criticism was directed at a different level: indeed. which. 30.. albeit out of too few experiments. see Rusu. “Virtues and Collaborative Research. while communication of information should be one of the main characteristics of science. they at once impress the intellect and fill the fantasy” (NO I. etc. according to West. Bacon also intended to exclude the vulgar from the secrets of knowledge (ibid. who drew premature conclusions about the entire universe on the basis of merely a few experiments with gold. West also mentions the idea of Nature as a book which should be read. This empirical approach conflicted with that of the alchemists. initiation methods. but in the way in which these were put to use. Bacon proposed his own. and this is the main characteristic distinguishing the two approaches.” which required that experiments be tested and theories not be incorporated into a philosophical system before being confronted with experience in as many disciplines as possible. 38 Another place in which Bacon displays an ambivalent attitude is. and those of the most everyday kind. On the selection of scientists. he did not consider that everyone is apt to be a “true son of knowledge. Some of these were precisely the ideas of the alchemists: both the transmutation of gold and attempts at the prolongation of life were described by Bacon as “noble. The charge Bacon levelled at the alchemists was that of “anticipating nature.”37 whereas the true method was that of the “interpretation of nature. Bacon admitted that there were several traditional ideas that should be kept. But. because not even the alchemists were able to communicate between themselves. because as Bacon states “radical errors in the first digestion of the mind are not to be put right afterwards by first-rate functions and remedies” (NO I. cannot be used in production.” 39 Bernand Joly considers this interpretation of Bacon’s attitude towards alchemists to be based on our tendency to consider alchemy an irrational science. “Francis Bacon”).” He even criticizes the obscure language of the alchemists as a way of selecting their audience. the interpretation of nature includes various middle axioms: it does not jump from experience to the final theories.. 1. OFB VI. since not everything can be discovered through descriptions of phenomena. Paolo Rossi has claimed that in the art-nature debate. DAS II. 26 and “Bacon’s Ideas of Science.had to start with the collection of natural histories and arrive at final theories only toward the end of the investigation. for this reason.” 31-43. 2. the mariner’s compass or the printing press. according to Bacon. The first two are descriptions of nature (either left by herself. The history of arts and the role of the efficient cause The investigation of nature should start. I will thereafter move to the theme of natural philosophy and the issue of induction and the discovery of forms. have to discuss the issue of natural histories and stress the central role of the history of the arts. Francis Bacon. in the case of generations. See also DGI. William Newman’s Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature argues that Bacon’s position was not as original as Rossi claimed. 294. which are based on experiments. he affirmed that Bacon was the first to have established that natural and artificial objects differed only in their efficient cause. In other words. he radically changed. 103. the conception of the relation between art and nature. I shall. II. while the last is composed of experiments in which nature is constrained to unveil herself. but only in the efficient. and that Aristotelian alchemists such as Themo Judaei and Daniel Sennert had already made significant and analogous contributions to the discussion about the distinction between natural 40 41 Rossi. pretergenerations and art. 4. according to Rossi. Rossi based his affirmation on Bacon’s statement in the De augmentis scientiarum. It is at this level that the operative character can be seen. or studying its deviations. 27 .”41 Against this. chap. conceptions that had dominated the history of philosophy from Aristotle up to Bacon’s own time. With this view. while their material and formal causes coincided. They are composed of the history of generation. in the case of preter-generations). “that the artificial does not differ from the natural in form or essence. with collecting facts and experiments about nature. This combination of natural and artificial phenomena within the same “natural and artificial history” has led to a scholarly debate about the role of art.40 Moreover. SEH IV. natural and experimental histories should be the first disciplines to be studied. Bacon was principally influenced by socalled mechanical discoveries such as gunpowder. ”43 Still in response to Paolo Rossi.46 According to Weeks.] An examination of Bacon will reveal views that are in significant respects identical to those of Themo and Sennert and dependent on the same general sources. “the famous trumpeter (bucinator) of experimental science was a major beneficiary of the art-nature debate.”44 the connections between the bonds of Proteus and the powers of heat. 265. 28 .”45 Joining this debate on the art-nature distinction in Bacon’s natural philosophy. for example in the image of experimentalism as “Proteus bound. so that it would reveal its deepest secrets. The significance of Themo and Sennert lies less in their originality in the laboratory than in the fact that they brought tacit experimental practices into the full purview of academic natural philosophy. 45 Newman. or the “essential heterogeneity” between the heat of sun and that of fire. Newman concludes that “it would not be an exaggeration to say that the art of chymistry was for Bacon the model upon which he built his concept of experiment pushing nature to the limit. In conclusion. so Daniel Sennert gave voice to a view of experimental intervention and isolation that he drew from the practices described in a multitude of alchemical texts. The existing world and the objects it contains do not exhaust the possibilities of matter. 47 Weeks. Experimental natural philosophy aims at the repetition of these very activities. which could moreover be invoked in support of both Rossi’s and Newman’s visions of the matter. Promethean Ambitions.” 43 Ibid. 256: “Just as Themo Judaei articulated a concept of maker’s knowledge that was implicitly used by many a medieval and early modern alchemist. 260. Bacon’s most important contribution to science lies in his conception of magic.” 121.and artificial and to the role played by experimentation. [. is not that Bacon identified the products of art with those of nature (as Rossi had claimed). Bacon’s concept of the artificial relies on more than a mere difference in efficient causation. 46 According to Weeks. Promethean Ambitions.”47 According to this view.. according to Newman. natural activities.. thanks to which the smallest bodies were united with each other. “Francis Bacon.. who also owed an open and substantial debt to the Scholastic debate on art and nature. and the recognition that artificial heat can accelerate natural processes. Newman states that an alchemical influence can also be seen easily in other areas. but that he placed the difference between art and nature in the efficient cause. as they do not take into account the cosmological foundation of Bacon’s philosophy. it is not enough to establish the characteristics of Bacon’s conception of art just on the basis of the above-cited quotation from the De augmentis. which works through “a recapitulation of the very processes that gave rise to our current nature. the natural world has come about as a result of magical.42 What is important. the discussion about the impossibility of annihilating matter. The same may be said a fortiori for the great propagandist of experimental science Francis Bacon. 44 Newman names here Willem Mennens’ Aureum vellus (1604) and Blaise de Vigenère’s De igne et sale (1608). as several alchemical authors in the High Middle Ages had done. Sophie Weeks has maintained that Rossi’s and Newman’s approaches are equally mistaken. there are potentially many 42 Newman. This is why the products of art and those of nature differ only with respect to their efficient cause. ‘nature of herself supplies these sparingly. True nova..” Because of this. 29 . Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. time will show’ (NO II. though less developed. 135. and minerals. where the objects of magic are to be found: those bodies which cannot exist except by the hand of man.” 52 Ibid. and which represent the true aim of Bacon’s operative science. Bacon’s science of magic must be seen as a science of deviation. 50 This idea. art refers to the shifting of the current system out of its habitual course in order to actualise hidden facets of nature. OFB XI. In brief.51 These ideas can be schematized. 51 Weeks. there exist two kinds of artificial products: imitationes naturae and artificialia or nova. “lie outside nature’s ordinary course. This leads to the striking tenet that forms the cornerstone of Bacon’s programme. In Bacon’s programme. 51. as in Figure 1 below. In an ideal world. “Francis Bacon. the first belonging to the realm of naturalia and the second to artificalia). See also Weeks.” 49 In Weeks’ dissertation. can also be found in Antonio Pérez-Ramos. he says. Peter Zetterberg’s article “Echoes of Nature in Solomon’s House. but also aims at what can possibly be brought into existence once the constitution of things is known. what is central to 48 Ibid. which can be produced both by nature and by man (such as gold found in sand or gold rarefied in furnaces. Weeks writes.48 For Weeks. It is in the third. the philosopher would be able to produce new forms. 442). plants. preter-generations represent the proof that nature has dormant powers which come into being even in the fixed system of the actual world. 210.other objects that matter has the power to bring forth. This feat is possible by combining existing simple natures (Francis Bacon. art for Bacon is the operative analogue of the primary cosmogonical contraction exercised in Cupid’s restraining and binding of matter’s absolute potency. nor can exist without human intervention. 130-31: “Nature’s ordinary course (the current world) represents only a single facet of the possible facets that nature could potentially present.. preter-generations are considered to “offer immediate sensory confirmation that nature's fecundity extends beyond its ordinary course and that the dynamical network of motions is not irrevocably stabilised and is therefore capable of further distortion via human operative power” (Francis Bacon’s Science. 101). while the second does not. In the Novum organum. namely. according to Weeks. According to Weeks’ interpretation. the white area consisting of objects that represent.49 They are a result of impediments and represent a confirmation that the system is not irrevocably stabilized. Fig. The dark area represents the ordinary species of animals. Within the grey area are to be found the imitations of nature... 76). who contends that what is characteristic for Bacon’s operative science is exactly the fact that its scope is not limited to the actual world. but what she may do when her folds have been shaken out .” 135-36: “This science engages in the systematic production of heteroclites or marvels through the precise application of impediments resulting in things that lie outside nature’s habitual paths.50 The first type imitates already existing objects. 1: The relationship between naturalia and artificialia52 Yet another conception of the aim of Bacon’s science is proposed in J.” According to Zetterberg. aph. that the artful manipulation of bodies involves a recapitulation of the original binding activity of Cupid. more complex than would appear in light of the oft-quoted passage from Book III of the De augmentis. the objective as announced was also always imitation. IV. for instance.Bacon’s philosophy is the imitation of nature.” 193. for his description of Salomon’s House. 361. as in the case of Della Porta. arguing that of those practices which seem to have influenced Bacon. 54 Ibid. mentions in their respective analyses of Bacon’s discussion of causes an important complication. this time on Colie’s article “Cornelis Drebbel and Salomon de Caus: Two Jacobean Models for Salomon’s House. 187. the author gives some examples of representative figures of these practices and the way in which they use the term “imitation.” SEH II.”54 To this.” 57 Zetterberg. 30 . 56 Again. imitation played its role in the transformation of other metals into gold. Bacon used reports of experiments related in Della Porta’s Natural Magic.” Further.” 188). It is of course correct that Bacon recognizes the difference between the natural and the artificial to reside in the efficient cause. carefully fashioned and crafted in imitation of the natural world. he stops short of claiming that Bacon was unoriginal: rather. for the imitation mines and metals. however. Bacon’s conception of the efficient cause is thus more original and. chap.58 It therefore seems that man and nature are remote efficient causes. “Echoes. 328). while in the mechanical arts what was imitated were the heavens.53 Zetterberg describes Salomon’s House in The New Atlantis as “an artificial world. imitation was always foremost: in alchemy. Zetterberg claims that “His source for horticultural wizardry.55 as well as by Cornelis Drebbel and Salomon de Caus.56 and probably also John Dee’s Mathematicall Preface. Zetterberg agrees with Rossi that Bacon abolished the ancient distinction between the natural and the artificial. 58 DAS III. he adds that.” arguing that Bacon was undoubtedly familiar with this literature. SEH IV. on the secondary literature. and perfuming. the whiteness present in ice. “Echoes of Nature. and for several other instances of natural magic was surely Porta’s Natural Magick which contains chapters on such things as the production of new plants.”57 None of these authors. air and water. while the immediate ones are the object-causing changes in nature. what is new about him is the larger context of natural philosophy “in which the doctrine assumes its new meaning. Bacon was familiar with the work and copied liberally from it when composing the Sylva Sylvarum” (“Echoes of Nature. 55 The basis of his affirmation is Ellis’ statement that Della Porta was the main source of Sylva. in the context of his discussion of the distinction between physics and metaphysics. the practical or applied science of the age. later in the De augmentis. However. The efficient cause must be sought rather in those objects which serve as the vehicles of form – for example.” 180: “[…] in natural magic. the counterfeiting of precious stones. for the imitation smells. at the same time. Cornelius Agrippa’s Vanities and Uncertainty of Arts and Sciences and Roger Bacon’s engines.. 53 Zetterberg. and that Bacon was a transcriber of his Natural Magick (“Preface. Still. Zetterberg’s affirmation is based. he states that the efficient cause of objects is neither man nor nature. Thaumaturgike and Archemastrie. and notably to Bacon’s method of experimentation and the matter theory which emerges from his experimental natural histories. Rather. Zetterberg. 201: “Instead of trying to complete the unfinished New Organon. On the one hand. the Descriptio globi intellectualis and the Historia naturalis et experimentalis. As we shall see in detail in the course of this thesis. 1. Bacon maintained. this natural historical preoccupation was lamented by scholars. Bacon chose. From Magic to Science. the limitations of this understanding of efficient causality becomes apparent. An exact description of the aim of Bacon’s natural philosophy will constitute the subject of the fifth chapter. For this very reason. identifies Della Porta’s Magia naturalis as the source of inspiration. Nova are possible. and natural history became his main preoccupation during his last years. But Della Porta’s stated aim is not imitation. Weeks declares that nova cannot exist without human intervention.” 31 . If this were the case.59 It is indeed evident that Bacon’s preoccupation in his last years was the compilation of natural histories. Ever since The Advancement of Learning (1605). but his main goal was that of modifying nature. it should constitute the material basis for a reformed natural philosophy. the first circle should coincide with the second. Bacon expressed the view that natural histories had to be reformed in order to be able to furnish the material for natural philosophy. Bacon’s activity of collecting natural histories in the last years of his life prevented him from finishing the Novum organum. but at the same time claims that preter-generations are nova. but not necessary his ultimate and sole aim. content and scope. when arguing that imitations are Bacon’s aim. but the creation and invention of new things. under the impulse of new interests to adopt a new programme. attention has in recent years shifted to the natural and experimental histories themselves. Bacon’s reform of natural history According to Rossi. so as to bring pleasure to the reader or fascinate them with the wonders of nature. The same idea is stressed by Bacon time and again in the De augmentis scientiarum. 59 Rossi. in turn. who frequently sought Bacon’s importance in his theoretical writings alone. Bacon was of course keenly interested in the process of imitating nature. A natural history should not be written for its own sake. 5. Bacon considered his own histories to be different from traditional ones in function. While initially.When Weeks and Zetterberg declare that Bacon’s aims are either nova or imitationes. who hold that natural history is an attempt to “reform. n. the De augmentis and the Parasceve. types.60 Another significant difference between Bacon’s theoretical ideal and his actual practice lies in the subjects of the histories: the list at the end of the Parasceve records natural things (starting with the heavenly bodies and going through all the variety of things. Dana Jalobeanu has questioned the received view of Bacon’s reformation of natural history as proposed by Graham Rees and. ibid. ibid. which form part of the Historia naturalis et experimentalis. xxvii and. 60 See Rees “Introduction” to HNE. introductory. 62 Jalobeanu.While the general picture is clear.”62 According to Jalobeanu. in the sense that Bacon’s actual natural histories are much more complex than the theoretical ideal he had sketched. it should. Jalobeanu. be mentioned that Bacon’s idea of natural history as set down in The Advancement..61 Recently. to build a new natural history ‘purged of its vices’. on account of the differences between the titles. Further. n. see Anstey. The Jewell House. this interpretation has at least two problematic features: first. simple motions. On the differences between how natural histories are described in The Advancement of Learning. reconfigure or revolutionize the commonly received tradition of humanist natural history. 3). it assumes that there was only one kind of natural history in the Renaissance.” OFB XII. OFB XII. Harkness argues “that Bacon explicitly plagiarized an existing sixteenth century discipline. philological and florid natural histories of the humanist kind. or. including histories of inventions and the main arts.. subsequently. Jalobeanu. he explains the selection of these precise six titles: “I have not taken the titles (since I am not up to dealing with them all) in order but I have picked some out. “Francis Bacon. however. 15). These are the various schematisms of matter or forms of the first class. such as mechanics or medicine). consist of pairs of simple natures. because they contain causal explanations. 13). and some of them are highly operative.” 251). n. Findlen. “Introduction. measures of motions. while the histories he “kept for himself. most difficult and noble on account of the obscurity of the thing. 2.. ‘standing on a new. even though the general features are certainly recognizable.” 61 In the “Rule of the present history. “Francis Bacon. changing its scope and purpose and putting it to work in the service of an elite culture” (Harkness. the De augmentis and the Descriptio differs from that of his Latin natural histories. ibid. 246-48. and some other things besides” (HNE.” 199.” Bacon mentions that he did not include the titles from his own catalogue: “To the titles of the Catalogue which deal with things concrete. often contradictory. which are most weighty in respect of use. 32 . According to Jalobeanu.. sums of motions. xxxiii. the Latin histories are hybrids of natural history and natural philosophy. “Findlen describes Bacon’s natural history as an organized attempt to discipline the received humanist (Plinian) tradition. the sympathy and antipathy of things or the most profound processes. second. almost a revolution with respect to the received project of natural history. 4). OFB XII. more evidentiary definition of history’” (Jalobeanu. As Graham Rees has correctly observed. “Francis Bacon’s Natural History. it is based on the assumption that Bacon wrote only one kind of natural history. life and death. while there are several. Jalobeanu reports Graham Rees’s position that “Bacon’s natural history represents a clear break with the humanist tradition. the ones which present the widest range by way of example” (ibid. handiest on account of the abundance of experiments.” to be published in the Historia naturalis et experimentalis. Bacon’s natural history is a ‘handmaiden to philosophy’. I add on titles relating to abstract natures (which I have mentioned as a history kept back for myself). by Paula Findlen and Deborah Harkness. pedagogical and similar to the learning of the alphabet of nature” (Rees. Unlike the encyclopaedic. xxv-xxxiii. methodological and metaphysical principles”.”65 Reflecting further on this theme. natural histories have strong philosophical commitments and “should contribute to expanding the cognitive range of the 63 Jalobeanu.” For this therapeutic character. The differences between Pliny and Seneca are. according to Jalobeanu.” while “for Seneca. “Francis Bacon’s Natural History. which is characterized by a moral and therapeutic tone. and thus they are explicitly addressed to philosophers already on the path to wisdom and virtue. each of which sailed under the generic banner of historia. Senecan natural history promotes a no-wonder attitude and recognizes the myriad empirical facts hidden behind the law-like regularity of a Providential universe.” 72. every part is equally relevant.” 216-20. Jalobeanu asserts that Bacon’s natural histories share more characteristics with Seneca than with Pliny. his actual natural histories of virtues. For Giglioni.” that “Plinian natural history is allencompassing. Natural History.” (Ibid. but “not in the sense in which timber offers materials for building a house but rather as the letters and rules of grammar offer the basic materials for the construction of words in a language. genres and traditions. Seneca’s Naturales quaestiones are meant to be part of a larger program of philosophical reformation. the most evident source of the aim of Bacon’s reformation was Seneca’s Naturales questiones. generate new facts through experientia literata and are “heavily indebted to specific claims taken from Bacon’s pneumatic theory of matter. based on several layers of presuppositions.” In fact. natural history can even generate knowledge without the presence of a method. Guido Giglioni has argued that natural history provides more than simply the material for natural philosophy.”64 Agreeing with Graham Rees on the placement of natural history vis-à-vis natural philosophy. “Historia and Materia.66 What is new and original about Bacon’s type of natural history is his attempt to provide axioms.63 While the “mother history. see also Jalobeanu. According to Jalobeanu. Precisely because they are directed to the interpretation of nature. Jalobeanu explains that the former offers material for the latter. that “unlike a ‘Plinian’ natural history. nor can anyone conceive of a thinking activity that is abstracted from the objects of thought. “The Philosophy. method and history are closely intertwined. 66 Giglioni. singularities and the unusual.. and Spiritual Medicine. as “there is no natural history without method. 65 Jalobeanu. qualities and the appetites of matter are very different: they start with experiments and experimental facts. the presence of hypothetical and provisional explanations and the depiction of nature as collaborative and cumulative. its ‘material’. but is clearly indebted to Seneca and the Neo-Stoic tradition. we should study the important and relevant phenomena – only that which is crucial to our understanding of the order of the cosmos and the capacities of the human mind. which is interested in wonders.while there in fact existed a variety of trends.” 25. 74).” 64 “Francis Bacon’s Natural History.” 228: “Bacon’s works of natural history are constructions with a more pronounced theoretical character. if this is understood in the sense that induction is the form and natural history the matter. is not very original. curiosities. “Idolatry.” as Jalobeanu calls Bacon’s description of an ideal natural history in his theoretical writings. Giglioni explains that in Bacon’s opinion “there is no method that is ‘objectively’ separated from the matter under investigation. 33 .” and lastly that they target different readers: “while Pliny’s natural history is a book to read for pleasure and profit intended for ‘everyone’. Bacon’s experimentalism has received a multitude of interpretations. Because of the variety of writings in which Bacon either discusses experiments or touches upon the problem of experimentation. The role of experiment Bacon’s criticism of what we now call the “occult sciences of the Renaissance” was mainly directed at methodological issues. and viewed their objectives as “noble. As we have mentioned earlier.”70 Bacon’s reform of natural philosophy would strive to correct these errors and to base theory on a scrupulous inquiry of nature. At one end of the spectrum.”68 1. Constructing theories out of a few experiments might seem “to those who daily deal in experiments of this kind. a hypothetico-deductivist. 68 Urbach. and also because of the unique mixture of modern and traditional elements which are found in his philosophy of science. Urbach maintains that the discovery of the form of heat is the illustration of Bacon’s theory. using observations to generate hypotheses and hypotheses to generate new observations. who created a theory of the entire world out of a few experiments on the loadstone. 64. and finally arriving at a level in which the light of the mind is reconciled with the reality of things (intellectus)” (ibid. but this was not the case. according to whom there exists no clear separation between collecting facts and the inductive process of interpretation. but to other people empty and incredible. On the contrary. 34 . we encounter the 67 Ibid. 155. 69 NO I.” His main complaint about the “empirics” was that they constructed a philosophy “on the darkness and narrowness of a handful of experiments. by freeing it from the subjection to narrowly subjective categories and by providing a representation of the world (mundi imago) that matches reality (qualis inventur). presumed that their knowledge was based on an inquiry into nature. We encounter Bacon as an inductivist. 70 Ibid.intellect. and even (…) to correct old ones. Bacon’s method “will go back and forth..”69 Such a philosophy was more dangerous than that of the scholastics. who based their knowledge only on their reason without forcing it to confront nature. 6.”67 Giglioni thus agrees with Peter Urbach. and who have had their fantasy infected by them. The empirics. OFB XI. 7475). the investigating animal and conscious reactions (sensus). or as a speculative philosopher who invokes experiments merely as a rhetorical device. aph. he did not reject them wholesale. Induction is “an attempt to replicate the motions of matter at a higher level of awareness: starting with nature’s original tendencies (perceptiones). to be probable and practically certain. Bacon’s examples are the alchemists and William Gilbert. Francis Bacon’s Philosophy. according to Bacon. 65. Fox Keller. nature is altered and tortured.” argues that these discrepant views about Bacon’s theory of experimentation have rendered his sophisticated methodology of experimentation “invisible” to historians. which does attribute to Bacon a genuinely experimental approach. with rape and an abusive domination of the male scientist upon a feminine nature. who considered himself a humble servant of nature. Harding.71 In between lie recent studies which paint a more moderate picture of Bacon as an “experimentalist philosopher. 113. Johann Valentin Andreae’s Christianopolis. 35-37. namely. Mechanism was. it was with the aim of illustrating his speculative ideas. Reflections on Gender and Science. motion is external. 72 Merchant. his experimentalism has been viewed from a variety of perspectives. The Death of Nature. squeezed and moulded her. Bacon’s experiments: “the torture of nature” or “legal interrogation”? Starting with Carolyn Merchant’s book. even when he performed experiments himself. I will try in the following sections to sketch these perspectives and to indicate the reasons why a number of them are deficient. for Merchant. Merchant offers a definition of what experiments were for Bacon: 71 The former view is that of Graham Rees and Guido Giglioni. The Science Question in Feminism. but centred his works entirely around observations and experiments. the latter Karl Popper’s and Thomas Kuhn’s.72 In the Renaissance context in which nature and the Earth were represented as a woman. according to Merchant’s view. Interpreting Bacon’s affirmations on human knowledge and power from the Novum organum and the Instauratio magna in the sense that the hand of man forced nature out of her natural state. we encounter the view that Bacon did not attribute any role to hypotheses and theory-formation.suggestion that Bacon’s natural histories are mainly based on reports borrowed from sources. and the female world soul is eliminated. which he simply explained and reinterpreted in the light of his own matter theory and. See The Death of Nature. 164-90.” Even in the middle field. Merchant contends that Bacon’s New Atlantis undermined and transformed the concept of an organic community: in Bacon’s laboratories. 69-98 and 172-86. Dana Jalobeanu. but did not accept its vitalist nature: for Bacon. 1. a rational antidote to the disintegration of the organic cosmos initiated by Bacon. 1.73 In another comparison. who took from the magical tradition the concept of the manipulation of matter. an organic model which expresses the need of peasants and artisans for a social revolution towards an egalitarian community in which people could return to a Golden Age of harmony with nature. this time with Della Porta. 35 . matter is passive. Bacon’s experimentalism has often been associated with the torture of nature. in “Learning from Experiment. 6. Bacon is presented as a mechanic controller of nature. At the other extreme. both of which she considers “organic utopias”. 73 Merchant compares Bacon’s writing with Tommaso Campanella’s City of the Sun. The Death of Nature. 74 Against this vision. In any case. so important to the rise of Western science. It is true that in The Masculine Birth of Time. This struggle will ennoble humanity if moderation is consistent with legitimate interrogation.”75 Based on a philological inquiry. not only with brute force.” the term he used to define work upon nature. 86. 36 . and the penetration of hidden secrets – language still used today in praising a scientist’s “hard facts. he “envisages a struggle that tests the nobility both of the seeker and of nature. The vexations of art are like the bonds and handcuffs of Proteus.” The constraints against penetration into Natura’s lament over her torn garments of modesty have been turned into sanctions in language that legitimates the exploitation and “rape” of nature for human good. since man can only put together or separate natural bodies. while the rest is done by nature itself. which are not opposed to nature. meant to shake. “Wrestling with Proteus. it struggles against his grip.. is the key feature of the experimental method – constraint of nature in the laboratory. his force induces manifold mutations. These arguments support her idea that the new science of the Scientific Revolution took its central concepts from Bacon’s view: “The Baconian program. to agitate.Here. The entire chapter entitled “Dominion over Nature” (164-90) presents Merchant’s arguments against Bacon’s use of nature for the benefit of human life. dissection by hand and mind.76 Because the seeker cannot reduce matter to nothing. But even if the actions of the seeker are not contrary to nature. Accordingly. but even more with the dazzling variety of those “strange species” it produces in response. and moreover. or to disturb. 171. Bacon compares nature to a servant. Peter Pesic argued in his “Wrestling with Proteus: Francis Bacon and the ‘Torture’ of Nature” that the image promoted by Merchant does not match the intention behind Bacon’s experimental method.” 82. Pesic argues – and correctly in my opinion – that Bacon condemned torture (as physical abuse). while “vexation. not with raping female nature.” or the “thrust of his argument. they stand for the interrogations of a divine minister worthy of respect and reverence. in bold sexual imagery.. the 74 Ibid.” “penetrating mind. which is based on one quotation from Bacon’s corpus. contained within it a set of attitudes about nature and the scientist that reinforced the tendencies toward growth and progress inherent in early capitalism” (185). 75 Pesic. for Pesic there is a great difference between torture and service. Servants of nature will get Proteus’ answer only if they grasp him tightly. 76 Ibid. nature becomes a wife. Bacon uses metaphors associated with legal investigations. but towards the end. The struggle is mutual (Proteus tries his seekers as much as they try him) and has an appropriate ending: the force must cease and the seeker will recognize Proteus’ primal form. ” 81 See Feyerabend. Consequently. “Natural Knowledge. that the foundation of Bacon’s experimental rule was problematic. aph. “Experimental Philosophers. “Experience” versus “experiment” In his article “Experientia-experimentum ou le mythe du culte de l’expérience chez Francis Bacon.” “Idolatry. For Bacon see NO II. while experience claims to replace traditional authority. Jalobeanu. the vexations of nature are an encounter between nature and the scientist. In the Novum organum. Francis Bacon on Communication and Francis Bacon. as a means to purge fallen human nature and to erase. conviction and inspiration. Weeks.” Didier Deleule takes aim at Feyerabend’s description of the problematic way in which Bacon uses experience. which purges the clouded vision of man. Lancaster. The struggle of scientific research requires not mere suffering but. “Bacon’s View”. Francis Bacon’s Science.78 From a scientific point of view. 79 Ibid. “Classical Empiricism. in a few words.81 Deleule rebuts this position. “Bacon’s ‘Enchanted Glass’”. Natural History. as torture can elicit false confessions. which leads to lame works. Cocking.”79 In short. Given that Bacon stated that the human mind should be the mirror of nature. Giglioni. for Pesic.80 1. 6.77 Bacon not only argues for a legitimate type of experimentation. in the sense that it depends on personal intuition. he presents cases in which some experiments are cruel or inhuman.” and “Empirical Aspects”.” “Natural History. the interpretation of nature depends equally on authority. This idea was developed in a series of articles about the therapeutic role of experiments. 2.servant of nature needs special discernment and extraordinary tenacity more than sheer strength. it needed to be cleansed before it could be used to offer a true reflection of nature. rather.” 169. Feyerabend had declared. Ibid. Park. 361.. and that the interpretation of experience was dependent on the experimentalist’s authority. 88. 78 37 . the idols of the human mind. Bacon 77 Ibid. 41. In his acceptation. 80 This theme has received considerable attention from Bacon’s scholars. “Philosophy According to Tacitus”. “The Natural Philosopher and the Virtues” and “Francis Bacon”. An example is the alchemists’ torture of nature with fire. This issue has been extensively studied in the secondary literature: Wallace. 89150. 93. within possible limits. 69-95. arguing that by carefully distinguishing between experience and experiment. Harrison. Bacon’s interpretation of nature is as problematic as Luther’s or Calvin’s interpretation of the Bible. he is also aware of the potential dangers should vexation turn into torture. he “sees the danger that overzealous or uncritical experimentation might elicit misleading or distorted responses from nature. Pesic continues. the purification and consecration of the elect. OFB X. a confrontation in which each is tested and purified. Pesic presents a very detailed account of the influence of law and torture on Bacon’s philosophy. ” 60. one arrives through experiments at knowledge. according to Manzo. 84 The same distinction appears in Silvia Manzo as something new in Baconian philosophy. An experiment is a deliberately sought-after experience (quesita) which endows the experiment with the function of transforming the experience. “Experientia-experimentum. 86 Ibid.82 In this set-up. that it is only in Bacon’s theoretical writings that experience finds an epistemological function.renders the things themselves the only authority. Ibid.83 In other words. 249.87 82 Deleule. and is often used as a testimonium against common-sense affirmations. 85 Fattori. limiting his analysis mostly to theoretical writings. in the end. is less testing and more prospective and inventive. they must be understood as a preparatory step towards the true natural and experimental history that Bacon depicts in the De augmentis scientiarum and other theoretical writings. The difference is that in experience the fact is not sought.”86 It is through the possibility of exploring nature that man can become a minister of nature. In the Novum organum. “experience” is defined as a proof and test of the truth... “experience” and “experiment” verify one another. with correcting its errors and defining its programme: “from mere chance. it becomes an experiment (“Experimentación. Fattori argues. namely verification and exploration. As regards the experiments reported in Sylva. according to Fattori. Deleule unfortunately abstains from examining Bacon’s natural histories. since Bacon does not provide an epistemological status for the concrete phenomena he reports in these works. experiments function merely as mediators. 252 (my translation). 83 38 . such as the De augmentis and the Novum organum. Her working hypothesis is that Bacon’s important contribution to the birth of experimental philosophy resides in his consideration of experiments as theorized experience. Deleule accepts that experiments possess for Bacon two functions. Bacon’s experiments include observations and artificially instigated experiments. 65. transforming it into something which can both be known and interpreted. Moreover. Bacon’s method. Marta Fattori distinguishes between experiment and experience in a similar way. For this reason. the difference residing only in that they are sought. 87 Ibid. she takes the natural histories (both the Latin histories and the Sylva) to be far less important from a philosophical viewpoint.” 245. In other words. “Experientia-experimentum. however.84 She provides some important details about the appearance of these two terms throughout Bacon’s English and Latin writings. while in experiment it is.. since most are taken from other authors. and mere experience structures itself in such a way that nature becomes truly a res explorata. as such. Manzo suggests that if experience is recorded and used in science.85 In the early writings.” 57). through which induction and experientia literata have seemed to overlap. of physics. distinct from mere experience. it should be mentioned that Fattori’s view of Bacon as having a clear concept of experiment.”88 1. 6. 3. appeared only towards the end of the seventeenth century. is not generally accepted. 39 . while the latter moves from one experiment to another: This Art of Indication (for so I call it) has two parts. while Bacon’s experiments were concerned with “how things behave. Moreover. I will argue that Bacon’s distinction is not between experience and experiment. 5. I shall try to prove that the proper place from which to reconstruct Bacon’s theory of experimentation is precisely his natural histories (see 1. as far as the production of knowledge and the “inventions” and “discoveries” obtained after its employment were concerned. but between experience and theory. In the context of our current historiographic examination. when presenting his methods of discovery. Peter Dear. II. for example. The one of these I will term Learned Experience. In her article “Experientia literata or Novum organum? The dilemma of Bacon’s Scientific Method. on the other.” Lisa Jardine points out that the distinction between the two methods of 88 89 Dear. DAS V. Experientia literata In the De augmentis scientiarum. 3. much like the Aristotelian kind. 473. Bacon makes a distinction between induction and experientia literata. “The Meaning of Experience.89 Baconian scholars have discussed experientia literata in the context of natural history. in Chapter 2. or the New Organon. It appears to have worked differently in each of these fields. There. and Chapter 3). section 2.This issue will be discussed below. the other Interpretation of Nature. The former proceeds from experiments to axioms and back to experiments. on the one hand.” and “took for granted the establishment of such general facts from singular instances. For the indication either proceeds from one experiment to another. states that “event experiments” (in the modern sense). and between mere or vulgar experience and experiment. which axioms themselves suggest new experiments. or else from experiments to axioms.” 111. 2. chap. and even of metaphysics. 5. SEH IV. 3.” 58. 95 Pastorino’s example is the bladder experiment from the Historia densi et rari. 92 This is exactly the opposite of Benjamin Farrington’s short analysis of experientia literata. and for this reason belongs to physics. OFB XI. “Weighing Experience. 112. 5. This type of “experience” represents. or as an organizational system of classification and cross-referencing of observation.”91 The first function of experientia literata in the natural histories is to organize the latter into tables. aph. or to res: the former is the provenance of Novum organum but the latter is not. moreover.. Sylva is Bacon’s own compendium of natural facts. experientia literata has the function of organizing the materials gathered in the tables of natural histories. For Pastorino. as facts were generalized from singular instances (Dear.”94 The most important feature of experientia literata. and experientia literata belongs to the senses. 93 Dear considers Sylva sylvarum an example of experientia literata. Sophie Weeks has argued that “physics belongs to mens. Bacon’s observations are “counted. the drawing of connections. Revolutionizing the Sciences. experientia literata provides the material for natural and experimental histories and also includes an operational side: it provides rules for new experiments and technical inventions by way of offering a “translation” of already existing experiments. on the very basis of Bacon’s theory of experientia literata.93 as a means to establish general facts from singular instances. and concludes that Bacon’s method of experimentation is not different from that of scholastic philosophers. experientia literata is crucial for the generation of experimenta lucifera (theoretically valuable experiments. according to Pastorino.”95 Pastorino 90 Jardine. Weeks. 94 Pastorino. in Weeks’ view.92 Dear’s vision of Bacon’s experimentation. similarities. ibid. 111). while experimenta fructifera are incidental to the level of experientia literata and play no role in the interpretation of nature. 21). for an explanation of this term. and the one which provides the material for natural history. which he defines as a written record of experience. Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. Dear discusses experientia literata. 174. but also says something about 91 40 . But.” 543. Jardine is referring to NO I. has recently been challenged by Cesare Pastorino. Finally. Pastorino shows that Bacon’s quantification does not only weigh objects. according to which experientia literata contents itself with experiments of fruit and does not rise to experiments of light (Francis Bacon. Against this view. 159.. “Experientia literata.”90 For Jardine. “experimentation reached its ‘literate’ stage only if detailed in written reports. taking as an example the burning glasses of the Novum organum. see below).discovery is drawn less sharply in the Novum organum. It facilitates. presented above in section 1. analogies and differences between experiments of various arts. In his Discipline and Experience. 548-51). a quantitative stage of experimentation in Bacon’s scientific inquiry. 121). where “Bacon insists that the successive stages of his method itself must be checked and ratified by direct sensory experience. Discipline and Experience. at the same time. 101. weighed. Experientia literata designates the ability to produce works thanks to the knowledge of material and efficient causes (ibid. and measured. The importance of weighing is also claimed in the Novum organum.. is its level of precision and quantitative accuracy: after all. in the Mathematical Instances (also called Instances of Measurement. though. while making previously unknown relationships visible” (Georgescu and Giurgea. becoming thus different from the specific ways of measurements in the period: goldsmiths weighed by comparing everything to gold. namely to the “Instances of the Lamp” (a second type of “Special Powers”). see Pastorino. which aim to raise the imperceptible to a perceptible threshold. 98 Those experiments that are part of experientia literata “allow a dissection of the world into small units of systematic knowledge. 99 Ibid. Jalobeanu concludes that several examples in the Latin natural histories belong to this kind of instances.” 562-70. “Redefining. Jalobeanu defines this type of “experience” as a methodology for deciding which experiments are appropriate for constructing the right facts for any particular subject. There are some “core experiments. 96 For the role of mathematics and the criticisms of Dear’s view. but also for the possible use of mathematics. Connecting experientia literata with the “Instances of Special Powers” in the Novum organum.” in other words. He does not. the structures of bodies. some remaining unsolved by Bacon. which were the result of a careful investigation by means of experientia literata in which quantification played an important role. they generate new relevant problems. and these two aims overlap or are even identical. is objective in relation to what is studied. who has also investigated the role of experientia literata in Bacon’s other natural histories. they also contribute to mapping the studied phenomenon and understanding how it is brought about. Some of these are discussed by Dana Jalobeanu.97 Yet another function has been attributed to experientia literata by Laura Georgescu and Mădălina Giurgea. Quantification is. but does not necessarily fully resolve the question. 97 Jalobeanu. address the other functions of experientia literata. they conclude that the experiment of weighing bodies is open-ended.” Pastorino is undoubtedly correct in his description of the connection between experientia literata and quantification in his criticism of Dear’s depiction of Bacon’s experimentation. because “the rationale behind the experiment is the extraction of supplementary information that increases the level of intelligibility of the query.” 163). however. moreover.96 In fact. Bacon’s trials with gases and various substances are constructed in exactly the same way that Dear describes “event experiments.” 96-99. but they are only singled out as important for further research. but that the addition of substances is likely to improve the previous results. not only a precondition for operation.conjectures that Dear’s misleading claim that there are no “event experiments” in Bacon might be due to the fact that he failed to notice the tables presented in the Novum organum. experientia literata has two distinctive features: it brings about new information and this information. according to Pastorino. “Weighing Experience.”99 This experiment raises other questions. out of which Bacon develops an entire natural history. For them.98 Using as their case study the Historia densi et rari. This fact puts natural histories in opposition to both theorizing and blind experimentation. In doing so. 41 . “Core Experiments. appetite and intellect.” or “endeavour. while yet others are solved by Bacon himself with the help of experientia literata. Bacon’s programme is based on the assumption that mind can mirror nature. which organize matter according to specific patterns of an appetitive nature” (Giglioni. conatus. nisus). See Georgescu. “A New Form of Knowledge. knowledge can no longer be an entirely natural process.” 104 Ibid.” “attempt.For others.101 The interpretation of experientia literata offered by Jalobeanu.” 102 This is to be understood in the sense that the mind has access to the structural appetites of reality. he offers advice on searching for the answer. finally. “Learning to Read Nature”). this is where experientia literata intervenes: it is a mediated experience “in which sense knowledge (sensus) begins to disentangle itself from the sylva of natural perceptions and appetites (perceptio.”100 in this case variation in matter and production. the mind adjusts itself to the reality of things.” Giglioni there claims that the notion of experientia literata can be better understood if it is placed in relation to Bacon’s notions of matter. can pin down essential factors for the production of particular phenomena. so that the mind is able to have a first glimpse of nature’s operations. In her analysis of the Historia ventorum. in the latter they rely on the first rudiments of experience and acquire a basic knowledge of the ‘alphabet of nature’.”103 Its modi experimentandi are the rudiments of this cognitive literacy. when “categories and objects adjust to each 100 Ibid. can extend the domain of research and. Giglioni’s explanation of this distinction is as follows: “While in the former stage. It is in this context that invention can take place. 101 42 . in Bacon’s general sense of “test. As a consequence of the Fall. motion. when human reason was warped into a distorted mirror. Georgescu takes a further step by discerning another set of the functions of experientia literata: it can make essential contributions to conceptual innovation. the modes of making experience of reality. appetitus.102 In the transition from sylva (or matter) to metaphysics (the last science).” is “the way in which a series of material circumstances are set up in order to have first-hand experience of specific phenomena and to get acquainted with things.”104 Sylva sylvarum represents the exemplification of this process of discovery. 103 Ibid. The solution to its distortions is to organize knowledge according to topics and repositories of places and subjects. Georgescu and Giurgea has been discussed in great detail in Guido Giglioni’s “Learning to Read Nature: Francis Bacon’s Notion of Experiential Literacy (Experientia Literata). that is. Experiment. In the study of nature. 165. “a definite number of dynamic arrangements of matter (veritable laws). matter’s perceptiones and the soul’s sensationes are still not capable of reaching a degree of awareness. which Georgescu and Girugea define as “a series of manipulations applied to the original experimental setting.. called forms or schematisms: namely. see also Peter Pesic (above. As Malherbe puts it. but without interpreting nature. which leads many times to exploratory experimentation. 109 Giglioni. classify. the senses can access invisible processes to which they would otherwise have no access.110 Though it is true that Bacon’s experiments possess all these functions. 1.106 Interpretation takes place only through induction. “Mastering.” 48. 105 Ibid. they have as their sole function the illustration of Bacon’s theory of matter.109 Jalobeanu proposes a whole plethora of functions. An examination of the natural histories together with the second book of the Novum organum has led scholars to mention additional and more specific functions.”107 With its assistance. this list – however vast it may be – does not cover all the possible functions that Bacon assigned to experiments. 4. but complex at the level of analytical evaluation. which does not lead to the meaning of the book.” 76. 6. Bacon’s aim in performing and describing experiments was to give an account of the basic appetites of matter in the most common operations of nature. which emerges from the exercise of writing natural histories. However. While experiments are simple at a technical level. I will dedicate one entire chapter (chapter 3) to the classification and presentation of the experiments Bacon used for the production of knowledge and discovery of causes.other in the very process of knowledge. group together phenomena previously considered to belong to different realms. For a similar function. means reading the book of nature. classify and define the subject of experiments (Jalobeanu. and refute common opinions. “Bacon’s Method. 110 These functions are the result of Bacon’s technique of experientia literata. experiments illustrate and demonstrate. 108 Rees. “Learning from Experiment”).). “Quantitative Reasoning. the experiment “provokes nature where it has not yet informed the mind. 107 Malherbe. and is able to find the parameters. Functions of Bacon’s experiments In discussing Bacon’s theoretical writings. Rees has argued that the function of Bacon’s experiments is to test and eliminate theories and establish facts.” 150-52. 6. section 1. numerous scholars have mentioned one of the basic functions of his experiments: to aid the senses wherever they cannot delve deeper into nature. To begin with.108 According to Giglioni. inquire into the motion of spirit. 106 43 . the most important and complex functions are concept formation and modelling.”105 Experientia literata. 1. According to her. Ibid. viewed from this perspective. 114 Hesse. represent an instrument to expose his speculative ideas. hypotheses are mere fictions and suppositions. Probability and Certainty. though. “Historical Remarks. 115 Ibid. 118 Cohen. an exactly opposite vision of Bacon’s science. William Dickie. 38-49.113 Mary Hesse. Let observers collect facts. 122. For Peter Urbach. “Probability. finally. According to them.” 112 44 .” and is not based on an analysis of any practical works.. 5. however. Comparison. to cite a further authority. who asserts that the facts compiled in Bacon’s natural histories are “theory-free.114 According to her. maintaining that. considers theory and experimentation to be completely separate and to work at different levels. while accepting the presence of theory in Bacon’s works.. The relationship between experiment and theory I have already described the conception according to which Bacon’s experiments.”116 This statement is surprising. We encounter this view in Lorraine Daston. 119 See Manzo. convincingly argues that Bacon’s ladder of the intellect produces a series of gradual hypothetical conclusions in an attempt to increase certainty. 127. the necessity of using hypotheses was due to the fact that. There exists. however. 66-67.” 122. as it seems to contradict her earlier affirmation that the first vintage of the form of heat rests on the rejection of “anticipations.115 Hesse claims.1. 113 Dickie accuses Bacon of proposing “a division of labour. there are many scholars who have recognized the importance of hypotheses for Bacon.119 111 Daston. 6.118 Silvia Manzo. which states that hypotheses and theory played no role in it. that Bacon never gave any indication of how this would work “in practice. “Francis Bacon’s Philosophy.” 221. Bacon’s method is an interaction between empirical data and hypothesis. Shapiro. Let theorists evolve the laws governing the facts” (Dickie.”111 Barbara Shapiro seems to agree. writes that Bacon began to allow for hypotheses mostly after the publication of the De augmentis. whether performed or only recorded.” 465-66. in turn.112 Still. for Bacon. Baconian truth cannot be reached if it is based only on experience or only on theory. 117 Urbach. it would be impossible to explain the natural world in terms of hidden natures.117 while Jonathan Cohen puts induction at the stage of development at the same time as he assigns greater certainty to hypotheses. “Factual Sensibility. in their absence.” nor realized how far “anticipations or hypotheses must be allowed to guide further inquiry. 116 Ibid. 485). Francis Bacon’s Philosophy. In an original way. which collect and use things. but its special gift is to convert and digest it.Given this divergence of views and opinions. “Honey from Heaven. OFB XI. At the same time. which make webs out of their own substance. it may be worth recalling Rossi’s view on the matter. The true job of philosophy is not much different. Bacon compares the work of true natural philosophers with the activity of bees. Following Seneca. 153. Rossi shows how both conceptions are wrong. spiders and bees. aph. spin webs from their own entrails. To do just this is one of the aims of the following four chapters. that whoever has defended it in the past has usually failed to take into consideration Bacon’s natural histories. Spiders. where one can retrace quite specifically how experience and theory are used in conjunction. 121 NO I.” 252).” 45 . Rossi divides earlier Bacon scholars into two groups: those who find in Bacon only an accumulation of data (neopositivists and Popperian epistemologists). we shall need to investigate in detail how Bacon 120 Rossi has correctly pointed out that Bacon’s protest against the rationalists’ philosophy “had been mistaken for a protest against the theory in general” (“Ants. it remains true that the extreme interpretations cited above can be refuted only by looking at the theoretical writings. for it depends not only or mainly on the powers of the mind. like the works of the ants. Still. which should be the middle course between the other two approaches: gathering material from flowers. Nevertheless. I should like to point out. but the bee takes the middle path: it collects its material from the flowers of field and garden. 95. For a history of this metaphor. in the manner of spiders. once again. theory unproven by confrontation with facts will be like the work of spiders. only store up and use things. the rationalists. Experience unguided by theory will be fruitless. nor does it take the material gathered from natural history and mechanical experiments and store it unaltered in the memory but lays it up in the intellect changed and elaborated. Rossi had explained Bacon’s combination of experience and theory by employing Bacon’s own metaphor of ants. see Quiviger. but digesting it by their own power: Those who have dealt with the sciences have either been empirics or dogmatists. Therefore from a closer and purer alliance (not so far achieved) of these two faculties (the experimental and the rational) we should have good hopes.121 Though siding personally with this moderate interpretation.120 and those others who view his science as one that wishes to dominate nature and humankind (the Frankfurt School). in the manner of the ant. The empirics. This metaphor was widely used in the Renaissance literature. will lead “to the truth. his criticisms of both rationalists and empiricists. in his own experimental work. Robert Ellis. (ii) if the number of simple natures involved in any body or process is finite in number. using his mind to transform empirical data into theory. Conjectures. This has become the central Baconian theme thanks to Popper’s interpretation of Bacon’s induction as “the (true) reading of nature” or “the (true) reading of the law.” According to Popper.”124 The concept of form also stands at the centre of Mary Hesse’s “Francis Bacon’s Philosophy of Science. because it rests on the following four assumptions: (i) it supposes that species and abstract natures are finite in number. such truthfulness becomes possible. then it should be possible to enumerate all simple natures. but Bacon’s originality lies in his process of exclusion.” SEH I. 7. by purging one’s mind of all anticipations and conjectures. “The Logic.”123 In Bacon’s view. For him. which narrows down the list of foreign and unessential elements. according to Ellis.” 279. 3. forms are based on the theory that subjectively experienced qualities of bodies must be the result of others which “belong to the substance as its essential attributes. 1.”122 However. equally identified form and induction as the core notions of Bacon’s philosophy. infallible. 124 Ibid.. n. 14. in the first step. (iii) it is possible to 122 Popper. its speculative side has as its objective the discovery of forms. thus the analysis of essential forms must be purely conceptual. Ellis considers exclusion to be the fundamental feature of Bacon’s method. See also idem. the relationship between natural history and natural philosophy has been discussed at length with a focus on natural histories. “General Preface. 46 . The method needed to arrive at forms is Bacon’s famous induction. 35. nothing exists except for individual substances. and subsequently by the method of “eliminative induction. For Popper. Bacon’s induction is identical to Socrates’ “maieutic”: it is a method of cleaning the mind so as to render it capable of recognizing manifest truth. Now. almost a century before Popper rendered Baconian induction once more fashionable. His tables of presence might resemble the methods of induction developed by others.” which analyzes the second book of the Novum organum and the Valerius terminus. This process. Bacon’s method is. one of the nineteenth-century editors of Bacon’s works. 123 Ellis. 30. and to find out whether he indeed acted in his natural histories like a bee. Induction and forms In the previous section. as regards natural philosophy.applied. according to Hesse. n. but it is also prior.” has been criticized by Peter Urbach. namely those involved in the summary form of which all other natures are specifications. Urbach begs to differ. Instead. Thus.” and these laws are not simple correlations of phenomena. and that Bacon’s method is infallible. as a part of the interpretation of nature. 128 Ibid. With respect to her suggestion that scientific understanding is obtained by correlating simple and directly observable natures. according to Hesse. but it is not even clear whether simple natures are indeed “simple. then a deductive argument follows. 127 Hesse.125 Bacon’s idea of form. not only to man. John Milton.. Ellis’s and Hesse’s interpretation. 132. and (iv) Bacon assumes a one-to-one correspondence between the form and the simple nature under investigation. it is a physical property or “nature. based on the experimental rejection of anticipation.” 145-56. insofar as theories must go beyond the facts from which 125 Hesse. Bacon permitted hypotheses to enter his methodology from the very beginning. Mary Horton also views Bacon’s forms as “no more or less than the laws of nature” (“Bacon and ‘Knowledge Broken’. Urbach disapproved of Hesse for not noticing that “form” and “nature” are the same thing. Hesse concludes that Bacon’s method is certain and infallible if the set of four rules is applied to the mass of data. by contrast. nor is it an abstract conception. of those natures which are not co-present with the one under study. which attributes to Bacon what has been dubbed the “hypothetico-inductive method.127 All these Baconian characteristics of form are problematic. but transcends it to its real cause. for not only does it remain unclear whether by induction we can find the forms of all simple natures.” as there can be “only a few. has a different interpretation and contends that Bacon’s system is not coherent and has so many problems precisely because of his identification of laws with forms (“Laws of Nature. In his view. 126 47 . The forms are also called “laws. in the sense of a type of nature found in constant conjunction with a given nature. meaning that it must reflect the nature of things in relation to the universe. according to Hesse. a form should be understood as relative to the state of development of the ladder of the intellect at any given moment.” 126-31. “Francis Bacon.”128 Nevertheless.126 And finally.” It is not a mere mathematical description of a phenomenal nature. The form of a given nature is not only the specification of a nature which is more general in the sense of being present in more particulars.” 686). has these characteristics: it is not a cause. irreducibly simple natures. “Francis Bacon’s Philosophy. 23).” 243.eliminate all natures not involved in a form with the help of negative instances (even though it cannot be guaranteed that the required experiment will always be possible). but represent the order imposed by the first congregations of matter. that is. If these four conditions are fulfilled. 114). but they must be applied to every instance in which a given nature appears. even where this instance has not been included in the initial investigation of that form. 113. had to become a confident manipulator” (ibid.130 Pérez-Ramos.” 133 Ibid. in accordance to a particular matter theory which is built on analogies with his 129 Urbach. Copenhaver. 135 Ibid. there are several positions to be found in the scholarship.. 132 This constructivist criterion of truth identifies “know-what” with “know-how. According to Pérez-Ramos. Francis Bacon’s Idea. Moreover. 67. “The exultant perception of man as an alter deus.. With these three concepts. Man.” but never as “infallible.”129 As for Bacon’s sources in his definition of form. and [. in the sense that the philosopher has to posit an individual form for each individual quality. “Magic and Astrology. Francis Bacon. by contrast.. Urbach points out that Bacon always presents his theories as “certain.135 Baconian forms are a purely intellectual construct. physics becomes metaphysics. reflected in the field of “practical arts. 74-82. as the generality of the axioms increases.. of ‘productive’ knowledge. alter creator.” 247.”131 Including Bacon in the so-called “maker’s knowledge tradition.134 Forms are characterised as combinations of material units and simple motions.”132 he views Bacon’s philosophy as a philosophy of techniques. Axioms are drawn from a finite number of instances. they are speculative or hypothetical. 187-90. 134 Ibid. Brian Copenhaver views “form” as a reformulation of the magical theory of forms and occult qualities under the influence of Ficino’s reading of the Neoplatonists. of technical know-how. 289.” “proved” or “demonstrated. only the arrangement and the motion of the minute parts of the body are responsible for its microscopic appearance..they have been drawn. then. was in the end responsible for inspiring such a radical redrawing of the map of human knowledge.] in inductio several of these elements are fused together. 131 Pérez-Ramos. 130 48 . in opus we can glimpse Bacon’s less sober dreams about man’s magical manipulation of the physical world in the impending great restoration of the sciences. To begin with. in order to be a knower. opus and inductio.. 91-92.”133 PérezRamos’s analysis revolves around three key concepts: forma. As a consequence. he reconstructs Bacon’s philosophy as follows: In forma we perceive a tantalizing commitment to a particulate matter-theory. presents Baconian form “as a notion transitional between the ‘substantial forms’ of late Scholasticism and the ‘internal structures’ and ‘real essences’ of the Corpuscularians. focusing on the problems of form. motions and forms. Jardine. in the sense that “it corresponds stage by stage to the process of perception of natural phenomena. the minute parts of natural bodies. 70.observations of the sensory experience.and early seventeenth-century authors. Lisa Jardine’s analysis of the Novum organum goes in much the same direction. 139 Wilson. The Invisible World. 137 49 . Catherine Wilson emphasizes that the latter is a “necessary device for dehumanizing the inquiry” (because neither the senses. 138 Ibid. He did so by pointing to the components of form. nor reason can penetrate the inner processes of nature). Analyzing the relation between mind and induction..”139 The aim of this method is the “uncovering of latent structure and latent process.” and in this respect.”137 What seems to me particularly important is Jardine’s novel reading of the second book of the Novum organum.” On the basis of a comparison with methods employed by other sixteenth. which combines an exposition of the rhetorical techniques used by Bacon in the interpretation of nature with an analysis of matter theory.136 Once Bacon renounced scholastic forms. 48. where I will show that a detailed examination of the second book of the Novum organum demonstrates clearly that the relationship between physics and metaphysics must be defined in terms of schematisms. which guarantees the objectivity of the results of investigation. latent process and latent configuration. experiments are indispensable for uncovering the subtlety 136 Ibid.. interposed between the mind and its intended subject. 96. 143. Jardine concludes that Bacon’s type of induction is supposed to be a natural method. knowledge of latent processes and latent configuration is an essential part of the application of forms in order to transform bodies. Francis Bacon. comparing Bacon’s induction with previous conceptions of “method. It is in the context of generalization and abstraction that Jardine individuates the weakness of the Baconian programme in the following way: Despite the fact that the superior study of metaphysics of forms is supposed to give man complete control over nature. A further theme must be mentioned here.138 The importance of this theme will become evident in my last chapter. he had to account for the problem of change in natural bodies. In fact. induction is “a ‘machine’ to work upon the stuff of nature. or existentially meaningful” (The Invisible World.140 In fact. The form of the simple natures is not a form in an Aristotelian sense.” In her conception.”142 This interpretation has been refuted by Sophie Weeks. not as structures. but is their substructure. “Bacon had proposed. 146 Weeks. 140. and the investigator’s exchanges with the subject matter are not made easy. 241. not sensitivity or spirituality. That is. The work of seeking out forms demands application and exactness. 2: Sophie Weeks. as Paolo Rossi and Mary Hesse had done earlier. in the sense that “it describes how the genus (a more primordial simple nature) is limited in order to give rise to the species (the given nature). generating a simple nature. Francis Bacon. 228.144 A form can also be defined as a relation between genus and species. Weeks bases her argument on aphorism 15 in the second book of the Novum organum (OFB XI. 50 . and present universally in bodies where motion is restrained in the specific and requisite manner. Take Stephen Gaukroger. 144 Ibid. as “a relation between two simple natures. for the first time. 143 Weeks. They are “matter’s unfolding powers. who takes form to be the “hidden states of the fine structure of things. Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. Francis Bacon.”145 Potency motion / vis / appetite of the atom sum of simple motions / form the great sum Substratum Atom schematismus the great schematism Fig.” this means that efficient and material causes are specific to embodied structure. such a view on form is very common among Bacon scholars. and is invariably connected with the presence of another simple nature. pleasant. but as abstractions. a route to the knowledge of the occult. which limits matter’s power. The potency-substratum distinction146 140 Ibid. 141 Gaukroger. 45. 253).” not concrete configurations. 46. If we apply this model to the “form of heat. 221. 2). 49). for whom form is an “act. she speaks of forms. Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. 142 Quinton. Weeks defines form. 145 Ibid. a “form” is a bond or a law.. but the form is fixed.of matter.. for whom form is the “basic material structure. the form heat is the simple nature per se. independent of all embodiment.”141 or Anthony Quinton.”143 Couching the issue in terms of a material “substratum” and its “potency” (see Fig. specific properties and virtues of things that proceed discursively and disinterestedly. see Rees “Atomism and ‘Subtlety’”. For an interpretation defending a continuity in Bacon’s vision (either as a strong atomist or. Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. as one would have expected. 147 It remains a matter of dispute whether Bacon changed his mind about the existence of atoms or just considered them to be too subtle to be investigated and operated upon. without connecting them in any way to the appetites of matter. and furthermore considers motion to take place at the level of atoms.As we can see in Figure 2. Manzo. We have seen in our last section that the discussion concerning induction has always been connected with the concept of forms. forms. Atomism in England. Entre el atomismo and “Francis Bacon and Atomism”. 8. contrariwise. The main questions that have been discussed in the secondary literature are the ontology of Bacon’s matter theory. the thorny issue concerning the connection between the forms and the other entities which populate Bacon’s matter theory has mostly been avoided by Bacon’s scholars or has sometimes been considered impossible to establish. On the idea that Bacon favoured atomism at the beginning of his career but changed his mind later on. the entities it contains. in her analysis. simple and compound motions. 1. Francis Bacon’s Philosophy. she does not connect the definition of the form of heat with the definitions of motions in Novum organum and the Abecedarium.” 51 . however. schematisms of matter. Moreover.147 Instead. in the Novum organum. It seems clear to me that starting with the Novum organum of 1620. Bacon did not think that the investigation of nature performed by the natural philosopher could penetrate down to level of the atom. Francis Bacon. After all. 50-55. Urbach. When delving into matter theory here. I will focus on those entities studied by physics and metaphysics: pneumatic and tangible matter. “The Fourfold Democritus. appetites of matter and. see Lüthy. Why this is a mistaken interpretation will appear more clearly below. once again. Weeks. see Hesse “Francis Bacon”. while simple motions occupy a central place in his theory of matter. I will however not enter into the much-debated issue of atomism. and their relation to alchemical and magical operational techniques. cannot be quite right. For a more general treatment of atomism in early modern philosophy. Sophie Weeks takes the sum of motions and forms to be equivalents. Bacon’s matter theory Let us now turn our attention to another complex set of issues that have been controversially discussed ever since Rossi’s ground-breaking Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science. as someone who never considered atomism a theory that could explain the world). However. This. even if Weeks’ analysis of form is in many ways valuable. Bacon completely avoids all mention of atoms. Kargon. namely Bacon’s matter theory. Rossi. A final shortcoming of her interpretation is that she takes the motions associated with the form of heat to be atomic motions. ” 117. the salts: subterranean salt and the juices of plants and animals for the tangible domain and attached spirits and the heaven of the fixed stars for the pneumatic domain.148 When he mapped the structure of Bacon’s matter theory in a later article. oily substances. Tangible and pneumatic matter In answer to Rossi’s claim that alchemy had no influence on Bacon’s metaphysics. focussing on cosmology and matter theory. tenuous. Rees believed himself to have reconstructed “the lost foundations of Bacon’s speculative philosophy” and concluded that. The structure of Bacon’s matter theory149 By means of these intermediates. and salt – played an important role for Bacon. water and crude substances. as they had for Paracelsus.1. “Matter Theory. although not as principles of matter. “Francis Bacon’s Semi-Paracelsian Cosmology. The latter is the cause of the majority of observable phenomena in nature. weightless. 3: Graham Rees. 1. The first two constituted for Bacon the quaternia found in all objects of nature. both tangible and pneumatic: subterranean sulphur. two types of matter: tangible and pneumatic. Rees. 8. not a third substance. but a mixture of the other two. Salt was. gross and inert. terrestrial and sidereal fire for sulphur. sulphur. As Rees explains. Graham Rees published a series of articles in which he emphasized the enormous influence of Paracelsus and his school upon Bacon. for Bacon. 52 . for Bacon “chemistry 148 149 Rees. while pneumatic matter is corporeal. terrestrial and sidereal air for mercury. The Paracelsian triad of principles – mercury. there exist.” 189. and subterranean mercury. Tangible bodies (with attached spirits) Pneumatic substances Sulphur quaternion Sulphur (subterranean) Oil and oily inflammable substances (terrestrial) Intermediates Salts (subterranean and inorganic beings) Juices of animals and plants Terrestrial fire (sublunar) “Attached” animate and inanimate spirits (in tangible bodies) Heaven of the fixed stars Sidereal fire (planetary matter) Mercury quaternion Mercury (subterranean) Water and crude non-inflammable substances (terrestrial) Air (sublunar) Ether (planetary medium) Fig. according to Bacon. Rees conferred additional importance upon the quaternia and especially their intermediates. Tangible matter is heavy. invisible and restless. this short terminological elucidation does not as yet account for the central role Bacon attributed to the concept of “motion. These are three and they are in a perfect concordance with the universal appetites of matter – to exercise their own nature and enjoy themselves. is the effect of an appetite and is also the appetite itself. For an animate being. according to Rees. invisible events which take place in complex bodies” or occult texturae and phenomena of ‘consent’ and ‘sympathy’”. the appetites have a very strict relation and are dependent one upon another. Constituting an important terminological observation. Rees. both of which better the condition and enjoyment of a thing’s nature. while for humans. 151 53 . 152 Manzo. 2.153 The definitions given in the Abecedarium of the schematisms can be understood in geometric terms as “an order and 150 Ibid. Simple natures: schematisms and motions In a further article. 69 (my translation).” 239-40. Manzo devotes special attention to the appetites of the spirits. Manzo identified the latter with the “appetites”: “the motion.”150 1. three different meanings: “the structure of the universe as a whole”. and finally. Animals have an instinctive wisdom.” Rees also discusses the role of latent schematisms and motions. while the passive good corresponds to the appetite of self-preservation. entitled “Bacon’s Philosophy: Some New Sources with Special Reference to Abecedarium novum naturae. the actions have causes other than only the appetites. 118. but the motions are more predominant depending on the place in the universe where the body is situated. with their respective motion (see Appendix 3). However. also called virtue. the contrasted pairs of simple natures. but the cardinal science to which all others were in principle reducible. the “subtle. Schematisms are the occult structure of the particles of matter and the processes of their imperceptible motions.” to refer to a set of objects of both abstract and concrete physics. Entre el atomismo. to designate the structure of the universe. the “axiological antitheses. the bettering of their condition implies an approximation of the divine and angelic nature. are common for inanimate matter.. one can establish a classification of the ends that each individual pursues. These four appetites. in the guise of “latent schematisms. Because each body is searching for its own good.”151 Silvia Manzo has argued that there are only two senses in which Bacon used the word “schematism”: first. to multiply and consume other matter and to escape and unite with their connaturals.”152 Sympathy or antipathy between natural bodies is the main cause of motion. 8. and. Rees points out that “motion” is used by Bacon in a Medieval and Renaissance sense.was not merely the key to his cosmology. In an individual body.” As for “schematism.” it has. 153 The active good corresponds to the appetite of self-multiplication. as a change or propensity for change. “Bacon’s Philosophy. the schematisms of matter themselves cannot be the only causes of activity in nature: motions and appetites are equally important. the primordial qualities of matter – density and rarity. according to Manzo. They are. but Manzo does not introduce them into her discussion. and lastly. the aim of Manzo’s book is to reveal the unifying feature of Bacon’s writings.155 Because the quantity of matter is constant (only God can create and annihilate nature).”154 The causes of change in nature are the material schematisms. it is misleading to identify motions with appetites.configuration of matter at a microscopic level. Manzo adds. 155 Manzo’s argument starts with an analysis of the two kinds of matter.. “the supreme criterion of the qualitative distinction in nature. Manzo argues. I will show some of the problems with Manzo’s interpretation: first. will show the way in which schematisms. according to her. through an alchemical process of separation. Other schematisms are defined through the quantity of pneumatic matter they contain. The criterion for this separation is. because not all kinds of matter in all quantities are able to receive every kind of transformation. Within pneumatic matter.). a correct reading of the form of heat as described in the Novum organum. I 154 Ibid. 54 . the pair sulphurous and mercurial have a special position: they could have been part of the extensions of matter. together with the other three (see Appendix 3 – in the Abecedarium. positura and schematismus are in general used by Bacon as synonyms).” they cannot be considered criteria for the transmutation of bodies. order and display of the parts. attached and pure. There are other types of transmutations. Bacon failed to connect these schematisms with his forms. second. transmutation can be done according to precise proportions established in the occult inner sphere of matter. meaning the arrangement in space of their network. Bacon. together with a thorough reading of Sylva as a key to Bacon’s matter theory. An example of this is the definition of the form of white in the Valerius terminus. tangible and pneumatic. the true textures of things and the causes of all transformations and alterations in bodies. ANN. there are four pairs. but Bacon preferred to separate them from all the other schematisms and put them at the end of the list. as Rees has also noticed. there are several types of matter: imperfect matter.. This is the case of schematisms like “similar and dissimilar. Manzo omitted the pair “volatile/fixed” from her list). and the second fluid). according to the author. which.. there are limits beyond which contraction and dilation are no longer possible. 166).” “porous and compact. as Bacon acknowledges the existence of four appetites and sixteen motions (see Appendix 3). motions and forms are connected in Bacon’s theory of matter. given that they run “through them as through matters relating to bulk” (ibid. Though Manzo is correct in stressing the role of the simple natures “dense” and “rare. On the other hand. Sometimes schematisms are defined with respect to others (moist and dry are different because the first has the parts stable. The true causes of change.” “simple and composed. Another less important criterion to distinguish between bodies is the arrangement and dissimilitude of their particles. In the last chapter of this thesis. OFB XIII. appear as extensions of matter (ibid. And yet. However. There is also a quantitative criterion for other schematisms. Weight and mass play an important role. only in the Abecedarium do the pair dense and rare.” “fibrous and venous” and of simple arrangement. or texture (even though textura. Other schematisms refer to arrangement. by the Creator. is a quantitative vision of nature. In fact. focusing only on these two in which quantity and proportion are the most prominent. They represent. 189). cannot be subdivided into form and matter. 164. which were separated. in the same way in which dense and rare are the main criteria of the quantitative distinction” (ibid. which. 55 . we must turn to a further contested element of Bacon’s matter theory.” 1. as the primary level by means of which man can have power over nature – and this precisely because the appetites are the cause of every phenomenon and change in nature.argue. more precisely between the manipulation of matter in the exercise of operative philosophy and the manipulation of the human mind in the exercise of political power. “Mastering the Appetites. But this is not. that the notion of appetite is at the very centre of Bacon’s metaphysics of matter. Here I will discuss only his conception of Bacon’s appetitive matter theory. his so-called “appetites of matter. 159 Ibid. 8.158 Appetites are primary qualities which cannot be erased or altered. Put differently. as we shall see in great detail in chapter 5. In his article “Mastering the Appetites of Matter. that forms are structural patterns determined by natural motions.. Heat is produced by particles in motion in the sense that “heat is the result of struggling and conflicting appetites of matter” (“How Bacon Become a Baconian.”159 Giglioni 156 Giglioni’s main assumptions are that Bacon’s philosophy rests on a fully fledged metaphysics of matter.. its nisus and conatus. 157 Giglioni. namely. Guido Giglioni has focused on a specific part of Bacon’s matter theory. and in no way can they be described in mechanical terms.” 153. 33). they are of course frequently affected by changes within a body. without entering the realm of politics. the proper sense of this definition. for a mechanistic interpretation of heat. Here and now. The appetites of matter In a series of articles. Giglioni continues. and finally that Bacon is not the father of the following movements: mechanical philosophy. Giglioni states that “natural bodies are defined by forms. In summarizing Bacon’s matter theory. However. but only manipulated and controlled. Mechanical motion (in the sense of production and superinduction of a form upon matter) represents only a stage in the appetitive life of matter: “they signify the moment in which the natural propensity of matter.”156 Giglioni draws a parallel between the appetites of matter and the appetites of humans. because dense and rare exist in all bodies. 158 According to Giglioni. but rather an effect of the change of form. 3. and that natural motions result from the basic appetites of matter. they are not the cause. Giglioni attempts to prove that Bacon was not a mechanist. however. not of mechanical movements. There is no room. Giglioni argues. this is a language of natural desires.” 32). Bacon was considered a mechanical philosopher because his definition of heat as motion was seen as an anticipation of the later mechanical definition of heat.”157 Through his discussion of the appetitive nature of Bacon’s matter. empiricism or experimental science. the appetites of matter. are to be sought in the manipulation of the spirits. 37. meets with a source of resistance and tries hard to overcome it” (ibid. while the mechanical properties of things are “accidental and transient qualities of matter that affect only the secondary qualities of the objects. To avoid a mechanistic outcome – the absolute homogeneity and indifference of matter and motion – Bacon confers on these appetites tendencies to follow what is agreeable and to reject what is not. 161 Weeks.) of larger bodies are products of compositions and combinations of the seeds of things. 56 . uncaused and unique. Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. which is 160 Ibid. 4. – which through combination give rise to this world (the great schematism) (Weeks. 63. there are those who approach Bacon’s matter theory bottom-up. In other words.” Motions are “propensities through which bodies are able to feel and discriminate. motions and forms. 163 Ibid. as it were.”160 1.”163 With respect to the problem of how forms can be superinduced.. Sophie Weeks has combined both perspectives.” The “deepest” schematisms of matter are the sulphur/mercury schematisms (ANN. these tendencies he calls “perceptions. Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. 8. Because Bacon conceives of dense/rare and sulphur/mercury as polarizing tensions which run through all cosmological space. From the primary matter. The latter refer to matter conceived from the point of view of the substratum. to the schematisms. 174. 162 Ibid. the first being the innermost motion in matter.. he designates dense/rare “Explicatio Alpha” and sulphur/mercury “Schematismus Omega” (ANN. which are listed by Bacon as “oily and watery.”161 The first unfolding gives rise to the cardinal virtues and to the schematisms of matter. from the atom (as substratum and potency) to the diversity of things. 66.. hard/soft.162 Microscopic bodies are “nodes of complicated motions which have attained stability. 63-64).. fat and crude. etc. and finally.. that is. everything is emanated through a process of unfolding of the atom’s power: the virtues (such as dense and rare. above). while the simple motions emanate from the schematisms of matter (see Fig. starting with atoms and textures. 191). 64: “the antithetic pairs denote polarising tensions (i. sulphur and mercury” (ANN. in Bacon’s cosmology. which is independent. OFB XIII.e. cosmology and cosmogony. 189). Unfortunately. 2. “all motions and virtues stem from the atom by means of a process of unfolding. flamy and airy. These through further combination give rise to further schematisms – fluid/stable. opposing simple motions) in cosmological space. heavy and light.compares the appetites to mechanical motions. She has reconstructed the creation of the universe in Bacon’s thought. The theory of matter in Bacon’s cosmology As mentioned earlier. fragile/tensile etc. inflammable and noninflammable. she suggests that the binding power belongs to the spirit. Giglioni does not connect the appetites to the other ontological entities. while others have approached it from the cosmos. moist/dry. stellar and pure ethereal. OFB XIII.” Schematism is a “descriptive term for matter which can keep its form because the simple motions are locked in a state of dynamic tension. 191). The motions that emanate from the sulphur/mercury schematisms determine the primary natures of things. while the latter are responses to external stimulations and provocations. OFB XIII. compared to the studies of some others f Bacon’s works. OFB XIII. as the ‘rich and fruitful supply of active power’. I might be allowed to add that her interpretation. is the aim of Bacon’s science. and that an attentive look at the natural histories and. however defined. in which Bacon’s matter theory is presented in great detail. and the entities studied by physics. In our survey of Bacon literature. chapter 2 will therefore introduce Sylva and place it in the larger context of Bacon’s experimentalism. Conclusions In this introductory chapter. such as motions and schematisms. This is not only because this book will be treated in our second chapter. because she does not give enough importance to Sylva and the other natural histories. 7. The premise of this dissertation is that this is a mistaken view.” Because men do not possess transformative powers themselves. in Section 1. 57 . mentioning where Baconian studies stand with respect to Bacon’s natural history and natural philosophy. 1. Human agents cannot access this capacity to bind directly: an operator can only arrange things so that spirit’s transformative power is directed to particular ends. I already alluded above. I will place particular emphasis on those instances which 164 Weeks. is not complete (though more complete compared to other scholars who have focussed on a single entity). I will claim that Bacon’s posthumous Sylva represents the fulfilment of many of Bacon’s theoretical ideals. they must work by constraining this spirit and use its transformative power as an instrument. “Francis Bacon. but also because the existing literature has fairly little to say about it. We have seen that a great many scholars accept that operative philosophy. at Sylva sylvarum will show that the gap between theory and practice had been closed by Bacon. 9. is the principle by which material transformation occurs. Indeed.” The texts used are HDR. here too. Sylva sylvarum has been all but absent. To fill this lacuna. I have tried to provide a rough survey of the state of the art. SEH VI. to which Bacon conferred a privileged place. but assume that Bacon never managed to make his philosophy successfully operational.164 In this way. even though she mentions they should be treated more carefully. 759. 62-64 and DSV. to some of the shortcomings of Weeks’ reconstruction of matter theory with respect to forms and simple motions.defined as “a kind of tenuous matter ‘enclosed’ or ‘bound down’ (devinctus) in tangible bodies. The operator harnesses spirit’s binding power by constraining it. I will revisit all these issues in the last chapter and provide a new reconstruction of Bacon’s theory of forms. in particular. Here.” 139: “Spirit. Weeks connects pneumatic matter.. do not appear to pertain to a natural history. Even those who accept the idea that Bacon was influenced by the occult sciences at a deeper level have apparently not compared Bacon’s texts with those of authors whom allegedly influenced him. Because scholars have had a tendency to study Bacon’s writings individually. despite much scholarly attention to Bacon’s theory of experimentation. the Novum organum. these works clearly document Bacon’s wish to demonstrate that magic could be performed. that is. rather than in tandem. since many of the analyses have contented themselves with emphasizing the centrality of experiment in the investigation of nature. they have invented problems and paradoxes that can be solved through a simultaneous reading of the De augmentis scientiarum. all of Bacon’s last works. Chapter 4 will fill this gap and provide a detailed analysis of the two texts in order to show how Bacon distinguished himself from a tradition which influenced him profoundly. whose Magia naturalis has long been recognized as the most important source for Sylva. The neglect that Sylva sylvarum has suffered will become even more incomprehensible. Sylva sylvarum and the Abecedarium novum naturae. in the usual conception of the genre. 58 . The most obvious case where such a comparison should have been carried out is Giambattista Della Porta. Our last chapter will address the theory of forms in Bacon’s matter theory and the vexed notion of magic. because they say a great deal about Bacon’s mature method in general. have both been insufficiently understood. and about the purpose of combining natural philosophy and natural history. the function of natural histories in the construction of Bacon’s experimental philosophy. This problem shall be addressed in chapter 3. Added up. the role of natural philosophy in the collection of experimental instances. In fact. in particular. the Latin natural histories. and conversely. but have not gone any further in attributing functions to the great variety of experiments. For the German philosopher Gernot Böhme.” is still neglected and generally left out of treatments of Bacon’s experimentalism. so that it is not easy to establish Sylva’s role in the grand project of the Instauratio magna. However. Am Ende. Only in the last few years have the Latin natural histories (the Historia ventorum. the majority of Bacon scholars who have tried to answer these questions have done so via Bacon’s theoretical writings. 59 . Is it a notebook out of which the natural investigator takes the incipient materials for a natural history? Is it a natural history. Representing and Intervening. Sylva sylvarum or a Naturall History in Ten Centuries. After all. “Eighteenth-Century Origin. the scholarship is still in the process of trying to understand precisely how Baconian experimentalism worked in the first place. it has been customary to view Francis Bacon as the “father of experimental philosophy” and to associate him with a revolution in the practice of science. even in this context. Part of it is because he did not himself write the preface to this book. a book containing one thousand “experiments. Bacon’s alleged turn to experimentalism has also been interpreted negatively. the deleterious modern Western approach to nature as an object of dissection and exploitation may be summed up as the “Baconian epoch” (at whose end we now find ourselves). the Historia densi et rari. There are several reasons for this neglect.Chapter 2: Sylva Sylvarum in the Context of Bacon’s Natural Philosophy 2. Böhme. Introduction Since the late seventeenth century. as the title suggests? Or is it 165 166 See Cohen. 1.165 But whereas the early Royal Society defined itself positively in terms of a Baconian type of empirical science. and the Historia vitae et mortis) started to gain attention in the scholarship. What was the status of an experiment in Bacon’s overall project? What would he have considered an “experiment”? And what is its relation with experience and theory? Now.” See also Hacking.166 Such black-and-white descriptions appear far too strong and definitive for the tastes of Bacon scholars. it will become evident that even though all these disparate instances are called “experiments.” This chapter will not offer solutions to all the above-mentioned puzzles. Moreover. like the order and the structure of Sylva. they study the obscurity of the things and they are useful in practice. It could be argued that this fragmentary structure is used by Bacon as a method to select his readers – only the prepared ones are able to see the connection and the unity between separate phenomena. while the other natural histories are in Latin. HNE.” Bacon was aware of the fact that the titles comprised in the third part of his Instauratio magna are very much different from the list of natural histories added at the end of the Parasceve. I will then place Sylva in the larger context of Bacon’s theory of experimentation and turn to Bacon’s own use of the term “experiment” in the experimental natural histories he published during his lifetime. should such sources exist at all. of definitions and classifications. all labelled as “experiments. some experiments are grouped together (the so-called “experiments in consort”). as Bacon himself stated while composing it?167 Another reason for this neglect lies precisely in the puzzling aspects of the book: its fragmentary character. while others are singular instances.” this is not because Bacon did not have a strong concept of what an experiment is. 13: “To the titles of the Catalogue which deal with things concrete. Sylva is an intermixture of theoretical and empirical data. OFB XII. 379. SEH II. The Victorian editors of Bacon’s works took all these to suggest that Sylva sylvarum was no more than a “commonplace book. its paragraphs are numbered from 1 to 1.something more. 168 60 . a book of natural magic. The instances that have been considered to make Sylva an inferior type of history are in fact those that characterize the natural histories that Bacon “kept for himself”168 and planned to put together in the Historia naturalis et experimentalis.000. He mentions the reasons why he wanted to write these histories and not others: they abound in experiments.” analyzing both Bacon’s explicit distinctions and the implicit distinctions to be 167 See SS exp. ordered without any obvious criterion. Moreover. the aim of this chapter is to prove that Sylva is not an imperfect natural history. Subsequently. might remain a mystery until the discovery of new sources of information. of medical receipts and experiments of spiritual magic. I shall start by giving an overview of scholarly views on Sylva. I add on titles relating to abstract natures (which I have mentioned as a history kept back for myself). it has the structure of a notebook. This will be argued for by looking at the way in which he uses the concept in the Latin natural histories.” composed of experiments borrowed from other authors. they are difficult and noble. There are other puzzling aspects to Sylva: it was written in English. Some of them. its lack of structure. with just a few of Bacon’s own. 93. and again unlike the Latin natural histories. its apparent randomness. nor a simple notebook. I will provide a classification of the instances that he placed under the heading “experiment. Moreover. which do not pay attention to the causes of phenomena. 23-39. 65-77.” For Bacon’s approach as encyclopaedic. that contains instances to be found in a very similar way in Sylva. Nevertheless. we encounter three distinctive general approaches to reading Sylva sylvarum. Porta’s Natural Magic. Pliny’s Encyclopedia.173 169 “The principal sources are Aristotle’s Problems. “Strategies for Coping. I think. Sylva is thus compared with Renaissance collections of remarkable facts. Ellis identified the sources for many of Sylva’s paragraphs from which he concluded that Bacon was merely a transcriber of other authors. “Unpublished Manuscript. Aristotle's Problems” (Ellis. identifies Sylva with a notebook of experimental reports. Francis Bacon.” folios 29r-52v.169 Because of this. “Mastering the Appetites. The Natural Magic contributes more than any other book. Printed Commonplace Books. considers Sylva to be a commonplace book of the Renaissance type – a compilation of second-hand material. I shall turn to an assessment of Bacon’s experimental philosophy when viewed from the pages the Sylva sylvarum. “Unpublished Manuscript.”170 A second approach considers Sylva to be about rhetoric and transmission of knowledge. The first. Moss. the Inquisitio de magnete and the Topica inquisitionis de luce et lumine.” 172 Rees. For the commonplaces and the storehouses in the Renaissance culture. influences of the stars and specific forms. promoted by the nineteenth-century editor. with the aim of promulgating Bacon’s speculative philosophy. 171 Rossi. in the sense that it is less inclined to present phenomena as miracles and more inclined to describe them in natural terms.found in Sylva. “Learning from Experiment. and his Meteorologies. “Francis Bacon and the Progress. 2. Finally.172 The second and the third approaches originated both in Graham Rees’ discovery of an early manuscript at the British Library.” 378-79. Brian Vickers and Guido Giglioni.” 327). and compare it with the text of the Historia naturalis et experimentalis.” 501ff. Proponents of this approach include Paolo Rossi. Renaissance Concept. 325. To these are to be added Cardan De Subtilitate. sometimes offering explanations that could be understood by everyone. initiated by Graham Rees and subsequently developed by Dana Jalobeanu. 38.171 The final approach. his De mirabilibus auscultationibus (not genuine). Pliny’s Natural History. 170 Ibid.” Giglioni. Scaliger Adversus Cardanum. and one or two others. Scholarly studies of Sylva sylvarum In the secondary literature. see Lechner. out of which the student can take data for use as a basis for building up a natural history. Blair. he considered Sylva to be “far short of [Bacon’s] own idea of a just and perfect Natural History.” Jalobeanu. 2. and next to it. and Sandys’s Travels. the manuscript also contains instances to be found in the Historia vitae et mortis. Except for those that found their way in Sylva. in a collection coded “Additional Manuscripts. “Preface. in terms of “loose and popular notions of force and motion. Vickers. “Bacon and Rhetoric. see Doody. Because most of it was written in Rawley’s hand.” based on sympathies and antipathies. Rees assumes that it was composed after 1618 when Rawley entered Bacon’s service.” 173 For more information about the manuscript and its history see Rees. Ellis recognizes Sylva as being more scientific than the majority of the books of this kind. Robert Leslie Ellis.693.. 219-20. 61 . Bacon faces a risk: “the importation of those very theoretical prejudices which the collection of particulars is designed to avoid. 168. For Bacon see exp. it is very easy to notice that many of the paragraphs presented under the title “experiment” include nothing that could make us think of the intervention into nature that we ordinarily take experiments to be. states that the experiments in Sylva are delivered in an aphoristic style. “Knowledge Broken.000 paragraphs of the Sylva ‘experiments’. rarities and secrets. Both David Colclough and Stephen Clucas have argued for the thesis that Sylva is mainly concerned with the transmission of knowledge. because they are intended to “stir” and “provoke” men to knowledge. to prove that Bacon does not use the term “experiment” loosely.175 Indeed. (Ibid. probably in the last four or five years of Bacon’s life. in turn.” 165. and second.” even the borrowed instances. Before him. but this should not affect the way we understand Bacon’s theory of experimentation. Clucas finds some problems in Sylva. 174 Ibid. in this sense being closer to a “humanist natural history” then to an experimental method (Ibid. 179 Clucas’ example is “The experiments in consort touching the magnitude and exility and damps of the sounds. an essential part of its aphoristic although Rees does not exclude the possibility that at least parts of it had been written before 1618 and revised and corrected. he uses the word more loosely than usual.174 Rees considers that Bacon uses the term “experiment” in Sylva in a loose sense. This aphoristic way of recording experience is where Bacon’s novelty resides. it only referred to the interventions into nature. and half of the narrative is presented through a mythological story.. 172). Rees draws two important conclusions: first that Sylva was not the “hotch-potch of plagiarized scraps” that it had long been considered to be. 178 Ibid. In particular. in compiling experiments from other authors. some experiments seem designed to stimulate rigor and control. 138-62.60. SEH II. the aim of Sylva – the organization and transmission of data – will be easily perceived.”178 Moreover.176 Clucas. “Unpublished Manuscript.” 388. Its appearance in all the titles of Sylva remains problematic. and that if read that way. Pete Langman has seen the correspondence between Solomon’s House and Sylva (Langman. Colclough proposes that Sylva cannot be understood unless it is read together with The New Atlantis. moreover because it has as a consequence the ontological separation between the observing scientist and the observed experience. 62 . that “much of the material was used to display the explanatory power of [Bacon’s] ambitious speculative philosophy. Beyond Both. 176 Colclough finds a correspondence between the description of the island and Solomon’s House on the one hand and the subjects of Sylva on the other.Through a comparison of the common instances of this manuscript and Sylva.180 What Clucas does not mention is the strong methodological side to Sylva. It covers everything from experiments in the ‘modern’ sense(s) to procedural advice” (Rees. contra Rees. 251). 175 “When Bacon calls the 1. 177 Clucas.. while others are closer to the kinds of natural histories that Bacon criticizes – gathered for delight. seeking admiration.” in which Bacon produces sounds like voices of puppets. 398-403). 180 Clucas refers here to the experiments on spiritual magic from century X.177 Still.179 or containing superstitious stories. n. The aim of this chapter is.. 337. Giglioni seeing them as illustrations of matter theory. The idea that experiments are a corrective for our senses returns repeatedly in Bacon’s writings. as will be discussed in this chapter and those that follow. OFB XI. Guido Giglioni and Dana Jalobeanu have both looked carefully at the experiments in Sylva. so that whereas others merely claim to watch over and cherish the sense. Bacon’s self-description as “high priest of the sense” is found in a discussion of experiments as a means of preventing the deficiencies of the senses from affecting and endangering the activity of philosophy. I do so in fact. even when he borrows an experimental procedure. does not assimilate the source’s causal explanation. and Jalobeanu finding other functions in Bacon’s experiments. which offers a classification of Bacon’s experiments from Sylva according to their function in the process of knowledge. such as classification.style. Clucas is mistaken about the theoretical implications of Bacon’s borrowings. 3. when Bacon borrows them he does so with the aim of offering natural explanations. 63 . in which he presents himself as a “high priest of the sense. I will return to this subject in the following chapter. the term “experiment” (as well as 181 DO. and learned interpreter of its oracles. secrets and superstitious stories. 2. What is essential is the fact that Bacon.” is often used as a proof of his self-awareness as the initiator of a new type of natural philosophy. Other authors have emphasized the methodological character and not the transmission. I believe that I present myself as high priest of the sense (from which all natural knowledge should. For the moment. Moreover.181 Importantly.” “experiment. As for the rarities. namely experimental science.” in order to compare them towards the end of the chapter with the instances comprised in Sylva sylvarum.” “theory. I want to clarify some of the problems in Bacon’s theory of experimentation and the uses of such terms as “experience. unless we prefer madness.” and “science. 35. “Experiment” and “experience” in the theoretical works and the Latin natural histories The famous passage from the introduction to Bacon’s Instauratio Magna. be derived). concept formation and modelling. And indeed. ” 64 . Bacon gives examples of those experiments which should be included in an inductive natural history and which is the help they give to the mind. The only somewhat more detailed discussion occurs in the context of his treatment of the arts of discovery. in both Latin and English. But nowhere are we explicitly given a theory of the precise use and function of experiments as such: the theory can only be drawn out of the description of how the experiments are performed. which introduces the experientia literata. 3. The Advancement of Learning. Fattori also provides some graphics with the variation of both terms over years (57-58). 1. Weeks. The first book of the Novum organum. “The Philosophy. 183 As has been mentioned in the first chapter (1. a book that aims to offer general instructions for the 182 In her article “Experientia-Experimentum. emphasizes that experiments facilitate the relation between mind and nature. the De augmentis scientiarum. the term is not used very often in the body of the text. Georgescu. For an altogether different interpretation of experientia literata as a mnemotechnic art. while Sophie Weeks establishes it as the first stage of the interpretation of nature.183 A similar shortage of information afflicts the Novum organum.experience) is omnipresent in Bacon’s work. even though it attributes a very important role to the history of arts. which is concerned with the idols of the human mind and the means of repairing the damage the idols cause. the Novum organum.182 2. “Weighting Experience.” Marta Fattori presents tables and graphics documenting the presence of the two notions “experience” and “experiment” (in Latin or English depending on the language in which the text is written) in the De Sapientia veterum. but still distinct from it. while attributing several important functions to this procedure. the Novum organum or the De augmentis being clearly superior in this respect. Likewise. a book about classifications and definitions. while in the second book. Yet another reading comes from Dana Jalobeanu. there exist a few detailed studies of what Bacon meant by experientia literata. as Marta Fattori has documented.” Jalobeanu. Francis Bacon. “The Role of Mechanics. who argues that experientia literata is the instrument used to construct natural histories and it also represents the mechanism used for inventions.” 133-97. “A New Form.” 24-25. and the extension of the domain of investigation (Jardine. the Historia vitae et mortis. For example. except for these. The high number of occurrences of the term “experiment” in Sylva is due to its presence in the titles. the Novum organum and the De augmentis.). 3. says disappointingly little about experiments. the Sylva sylvarum and The New Atlantis. 143-49. “A Kind of Sagacity. conceptual innovation. in none of his works did Bacon develop a full theory of experimentation. the Historia ventorum. which in turn is composed of experiments. A more extended exposition of the role and function of experiments is found in the Parasceve ad historiam naturalem. recorded and used. 6. Lisa Jardine considers it to be the opposite method of that described in Novum organum. see Lewis. Pastorino. The term “experimentum” is most present in Sylva. Cesare Pastorino places the experientia literata at the level of natural histories and associates it with the quantitative stage of experimentation. The De augmentis scientiarum.” 104-20). A deplorable lack of theory concerning experimentation Despite the centrality of experimentation in his natural philosophy. namely the generation of unknown effects. The Essays. Laura Georgescu’s interpretation of experientia literata goes in the same direction. generations. while in the history of generations and preter-generations this is more difficult. See DAS II. a different aspect is given importance. Bacon suggests that the selection of important instances should be made according to the “Instances with Special Powers” as defined in the second book of the Novum organum. as it studies things “in motion” and leads to practical results. 294-98. those that manage to transform natural objects are more useful for a natural history than those that are merely based on the dexterity of the worker.184 Among histories of arts. yet this instance is useful for inquiring into the nature and impact of cold” (Parasceve aph. As in other. This is why. and also of practices which are not brought into arts.compiling of a natural and experimental philosophy and is situated half-way between the Novum organum and the Historia naturalis et experimentalis in the structure of the Instauratio magna. Bacon divides natural histories into histories of. or from the operative part of the “liberal sciences” (or “liberal arts”) or from those “practises and experiments which have not yet developed into an art of their own. There 65 . according to the type of phenomenon that Bacon investigates in those contexts. chap. Bacon offers his readers one special piece of advice. SEH V. 461. men can study the process through which a thing is created and changed or how a process develops. OFB XI. they also transform the subtlety of nature into something that can be investigated. These we call Mystery-men” (NA. In the Parasceve. 185 Parasceve aph. Among all these arts. respectively. 186 Bacon offers two examples of useful experimental evidence unrelated to the subject under investigation: the fact that lobsters and crabs turn red when being cooked says something about the nature of colours even if it does not contribute anything to the quality of the dinner or the art of cooking. preter-generations and arts. as we will see in more detail below. In principle. and their selection varies according to the theme of the natural history in which they are included. Not all of them are suitable for any subject. In addition. the same experiment can be of relevance for more than one art or one purpose: in each occurrence of the experiment in different contexts. there is again a threefold distinction. earlier writings. and also of liberal sciences. 4. 463). as has been stressed several times. 187 There are nineteen “Instances with Special Powers. namely that the philosopher should not pay attention only to those experiments that relate directly to the purpose of a given art. which may reveal important features of an object.” and the second book of the Novum organum dedicates significant space to the definition and exemplification of these instances. when Bacon explains what a history of arts should contain. 4.”185 or else from ordinary experience (which itself does not amount to a specific art). experiments have a greater access to the secrets of nature than mere experience. SEH III. but also to those that appear during the process of experimentation. since nature and not man is the creator and manipulator of the process under study. 164). OFB XI. The same idea is to be found in DAS. The second example is also taken from the art of cooking: “the fact that meat can be salted down more quickly in winter than summer tells the cook nothing more than how well and in what amount he has to apply the salt to the meat. depending on whether the history takes experiments from the mechanical arts.187 However.186 For exactly this reason. He emphasizes the importance of the last category. which he will later repeat throughout Sylva. nowhere does Bacon offer his reader a theory of how these instances 184 Bacon probably means by things “in motion” the fact that in the history of the arts. 2. It is not surprising that the activity of the Mystery-Men from the Solomon’s House in The New Atlantis is described in very similar terms: “We have three that collect the experiments of all mechanical arts. This explains why. the second draws a distinction that does not fit Bacon’s works. In any case. Briefly. there are two major views: there are those who think that Bacon did not have a strong conception of “experiment. One class of idols. however.” with “experiment” being a well-defined and controlled type of experience. 60. 4. Presumably. or names of things which do exist but are muddled. and the philosopher must decide himself which are relevant out of the nineteen instances. and rashly and roughly abstracted from the facts” (NO I. although used in all the natural histories.189 In his view. OFB XI. They all provide information requisite for induction. namely “experience” and “experiment. many times this transfer relies only in the experimenter’s “inspiration” and experience. it is in the Instances with Special Powers that his novelty with respect to authors of natural histories resides. as we will see below. has to do with language. 93-95). Unfortunately. 2. they do not appear with the names use in the Novum organum. SEH IV. though I consider the first view to be wrong. These are both divisions of experience. but on a careful reading. 421).188 2. ill-defined. 66 . the philosopher is simply expected to rely on the type of sagacity that Bacon invokes in De augmentis scientiarum. and it considers notions of things that do not exist as well as ill-defined notions. experience and experiment In the first chapter. others base their knowledge on mere experience. 188 I refer here to the sagacity that helps the scientist to choose between the different modes of experientia literata (DAS V. Bacon was highly preoccupied with specific and adequate terminology. We therefore have to analyze the very specific way in which he used them in his theoretical and practical writings. section 1. Bacon distinguishes between his own usage of them and that of previous philosophers.” Bacon did not offer a clear definition.should be selected for any particular natural history. chap. so there are names which through flights of fancy lack an object). 189 “Idols imposed on the intellect by words are of two kinds: for they are either the names of things which do not exist (for just as there are objects which through inadvertence lack a name. with respect to the crucial terms that concern us here.” a strong conception of the term emerging only towards the end of the seventeenth century (Peter Dear). is no special algorithm for their selection. including Sylva. both in recording experience and in theoretical abstractions. it was of paramount importance to get rid of this class of idols. According to Bacon. 2.. the idols of the market. given that words always mediate between nature and human knowledge. which are not enough for the process of induction and in consequence the existing histories are of no use. several opinions concerning Bacon’s concepts of “experiment” and “experience” were mentioned. Bacon himself handles two separate distinctions: the first between theory and experience and the second between mere or vulgar experience and experiment. they can be recognized. However. There is no algorithm and if it is true that sometimes the experiment itself can lead the experimenter to a new one. in what concerns Bacon’s proper use of these instances. aph. 6. 3. whenever he uses traditional terms. and those who believe that Bacon made a clear distinction between “experience” and “experiment. The issue of terminology: theory. ” 27-32). Observations for Bacon. the subdivisions of historia or experientia are the history of generations and preter-generations (which record mere experiences) and the history of arts (which report on the results of experiments). observations became an individual genre in the sixteenth century. that for him. or establish or illustrate some known truth. are theoretical comments made after a body of natural and experimental history has been amassed. are physics and metaphysics. or comment prompted by something seen. SEH IV. which are both theoretical disciplines that deal with the discovery of causes. after natural history. In a loose sense. 67 . or noticed” (OED online.” which is equivalent to “experiment. Colclough suggests that Bacon used the term “experiment” in the third sense given by the OED: “an action or operation undertaken in order to discover something unknown.” which limits itself to a non-interventionist. Bacon opposes natural philosophy to natural history. however. in other words all the disciplines investigating the natural world. can also be called experientia. thus being just theoretical (“Observations. in his theoretical writings. that Bacon himself was not interested in this distinction. as we shall see in this and the following chapter. What we encounter at the higher level of natural philosophy. Note.” “observations” being just notes on the margins of documents. experientia relates to experimentum as genus to species. 293). in the sense that theory starts when the necessary experience has been gathered. I already discussed the fact that Bacon’s published natural and experimental histories are composed of experience and 190 This “vulgar experience” is not the equivalent of “observation” for Bacon.190 and an interventionist form of “experience. that historia or experientia are clearly distinguished from scientia by Bacon. I should mention here that in Bacon’s case. physics. Gianna Pomata argues that from annotations in the margins. natural philosophy includes natural history. Bacon claims that historia. It will become evident. In a strict sense. represent only some of the ways in which Bacon uses experiments in Sylva. although they are indeed the most important and most frequently used. It is true. however. 192 “For I consider history and experience to be the same thing. statement. “observation” is clearly associated with speculations on the basis of experience. mechanics and magic. observational approach to nature.” n. the most basic level at which natural philosophy is carried out. of course. In summary. metaphysics. as also philosophy and the sciences” (DAS II.” the earliest instance of which dates back to 1362 (“Materials. However.” 46-49). heard. Bacon’s real distinction is between mere or “vulgar experience. 7). with the idea that the first starts when the second has accomplished its task in the process of knowledge. The three aims listed by the OED. he uses “observation” to refer to “a remark. to test a hypothesis. there has been some concern in the scholarship about the distinction between “experience” and “experiment” in the early modern period. experiments are contrived experiences. as attentive watching of objects and events (“Observation Rising.As mentioned above. then. chap. 191 In his article on Sylva. I.192 In fact. Scientia denotes a higher level of knowledge and hence of abstraction. 8th entrance). as results from the Historia naturalis et experimentalis and from his usage of the Latin word in the natural histories. in which nature is forced to reveal something about herself that would otherwise remain hidden. Katharine Park argues that “observation” in this period was not associated with those practices now ascribed to “experience” or “experiment.”191 This explains why. mechanics and magic) to be “sciences. but. The three extant Latin natural histories. natural histories started to be seen as writings containing elements of physics and mechanics. just because it is impossible to separate the two domains in the process of learning. otherwise. Bacon’s theory of experimentation becomes clearer than in his more theoretical writings. but some scholars even considered that natural history and induction can be identified. 3. where Bacon names as “sciences” the four main disciplines of his natural philosophy (NO II.193 Scientia starts when the experiences (vulgar experiences and experiments) are theorized. because otherwise the human mind risks deviating from the right path in the process of abstraction. Experience must be theorized – abstracted. 9. theory must always be confronted with experience. 3. However. However. even if in themselves are operative and not theoretical. which will make clear its reference to Sylva’s instance. in the Latin natural histories. This understanding of scientific practice explains Bacon’s famous intention of providing. At the same time. when I will use the term in reference to these instance.”194 Physics and metaphysics are sciences because they contain theory. “Experiments” and the art of experimenting in Latin natural histories Keeping in mind how little Bacon says about his theory of experimentation. 2. let us now turn to his Latin natural histories. it cannot contribute to the advancement of knowledge. with the result that theories will no longer mirror nature. not least because their method appears to deviate from the theoretical requirements specified in the Novum organum and the De augmentis scientiarum. abstracting. These not only rely heavily on experiments. metaphysics. In consequence of this terminological analysis. 5 and 1. 194 68 . aph. OFB XI.). a method for keeping the mind in check throughout the entire process of learning. some of them absolutely non-interventional. classified and explained. the term is followed by its number. 215). with his Novum organum. though neglected by scholars until a few years ago. As it was mentioned. chapter 1 (sections 1. I will use the term experiment to refer always to an intervention into nature and science to refer to one of the four above-mentioned disciplines. there is a problematic feature of the term “experiment” – its use in the title of every instance from Sylva.theory alike. Contrary to Marta Fattori’s claim 193 See above. and explaining. See the Novum organum. while mechanics and magic are sciences because they operate on the basis of theory established by the other two pairs. This is why Bacon considers all the four disciplines pertaining to theory (physics. 7. have recently become subject to more careful scrutiny and discussion. 196 Rees. 69 . 195 Fattori. does not merely record facts. “Introduction. the Latin natural histories turn out to be much more relevant to an understanding of Bacon’s conception of experiment than his other works. which is more operational than the preceding parts. because it contains fewer speculative elements than the other two histories. because in them. comparisons and measurements. these very instruments and the further experiments in which they are used serve to accumulate more knowledge on the motions of air. although it is constituted mainly by description of facts and phenomena. 197 It should be mentioned that this history. aims to improve the machines that operate with the help of winds. “Experientia-experimentum. 2. the De sapientia veterum. Bacon does – according to Fattori – not give them any epistemological status). The last part of this history. 3. For this reason. classifications. The Historia ventorum The first natural history belonging to the Historia naturalis et experimentalis is the Historia ventorum.”197 The main body of the Historia ventorum is constituted by what above I have called “mere experiences” (“observations” in the modern sense) and by a number of experimental instances that aim to falsify ancient theories. in which I will pay particular attention to the occurrence of the term “experiment” and of the usage of experimental interventions into nature. lxiii. At the same time. As Graham Rees has observed in his introduction to volume XII of the Oxford Francis Bacon. as well as to provide illustrations of Bacon’s theory and to incite further investigations. For they show clearly how Bacon used experiments. the Historia vitae et mortis and Sylva sylvarum.195 it will be shown that from a philosophical point of view.” 249-50. however. also with respect to mere experiences and to more speculative and theoretical considerations. 1. I shall in the remainder of this section provide a short analysis of the three natural histories. experience has a cognitive function. which functions he ascribed to them and what role they fulfilled within the structure of a natural and experimental history. a natural history that studies the natural phenomenon of the winds.196 and also because it concludes the historical approach with the “Major Observations” and the “Provisional Rules. Bacon talks concretely about experiments and thus does not give them an epistemological status” (my translation). this specific history comes closest to Bacon’s theoretical model of a natural history.” OFB XII. Bacon adds to this primary level a stratum of causes.that natural histories are not important from a philosophical viewpoint (because. the De augmentis scientiarum and the Novum organum. In The Advancement of Learning. while “the works on natural histories are less important from this point of view (the Historia ventorum. even if the last displays the maximum number of occurrences of this term). in reporting concrete cases. 3. OFB XII. desiderata. it is true that this one is the most widespread.. It is thus obvious that all these occurrences refer to interventions into nature. 71). 2. commentatio. 2. such as the motions of the winds. for Silvia Manzo.. the change of densities in bodies represents a basic process of nature and at the same time a key to the understanding of the transformation of one body into another. even if I do not agree that the other pairs of simple natures depend on this. the most important pair of simple natures.200 In the introduction to the Historia naturalis et experimentalis. However. monitum) 199 70 . The number might not seem important. 3. The historia (in Bacon’s sense of collections of experience to be digested201) is formed by experiments (even though not extremely complicated ones) and not 198 HV.” For the subject of the winds. one notices that the only place where Bacon reports on what we would expect him to call an “experiment” (although he does not explicitly do so. OFB XII 83). according to her. the most general of the simple natures. experiments are employed whenever mere experience does not offer the answer. or to establish a cause for a phenomenon under study. 8. 181-236). 3. The Historia densi et rari The second in Bacon’s sequence of six natural histories is the Historia densi et rari. and modification of. 200 As I briefly mentioned in section 1. 2. This priority explains.198 All the other possible instances are however explicitly announced as “experiments. and they exist in all almost individual bodies. changes in density of bodies stand at the centre of Baconian natural philosophy. Bacon explains that he had kept these histories for himself because of the subtlety of the theme. more practical part. Bacon’s quantitative vision of nature (Entre el atomismo. winds. mandatum. The structure of this history differs from the Historia ventorum. for Bacon. Bacon himself admits that this investigation of causes of the winds is more obscure and then proposes a variation on a previous experiment: “Now I found a likeness of this thing in the enclosed tower that I mentioned earlier. this occurrence had been used to prove the fact that wind is a motion of the air when dilated (Ibid. The pair of dense and rare is. and so does the use of experiments. on which all other pairs of simple natures depend. as when Bacon wishes to verify or illustrate a theory. For I varied that experiment in three ways” (HV. according to her. 71.” Their use has a strategic role in the structure of Bacon’s natural history. In his eyes.199 In the second. In my last chapter this vision will be questioned. the term “experiment” occurs in the section on the “Imitation of winds” as well as in the final “Desiderata. The first time. 201 The sense in which I used here the term historia is the division of a natural history. a history of simple natures. but it is significant to mention that all refer to interventions and not to mere experiences) is an experiment with a calendar glass. Dense and rare are.The term “experiment” appears nine times in the Historia ventorum. where historia is the experiential part upon which all the other divisions (observatio. as they indeed constitute cases of “binding Proteus.” which speak of human operations on. but on a closer look. classified and categorized. or verify. However. Winds can be discovered by mere experiences. whereby it is the role of experiments to verify or exemplify theories or to discover hidden causes. and how throughout his natural historical programme he used experiments to test his observations or to formulate practical advice. which are measured. It is exactly this interplay between a historical approach (observation and recording) and speculative elements (which are necessary when investigating such an elusively subtle subject) that renders experiment so important – and indeed more indispensable here than in a history of winds. which are not labelled as such. In the Historia densi et rari.). Admittedly. matter needs to be constrained. it also shows how important the interplay between theory and experimentation was for Bacon. listed at the end of this history. 71 . Indeed. this mixture of genres results in a very fragmentary structure. which might lead to confusions: historia being the writing and one of its divisions. and a fortiori about the changes in this relation. refute or exemplify possible explanations. while several other histories are reports on experimental results (such as the histories of the dilatation of bodies. After all. advance an on-going investigation. are based. but which are invoked at all levels of abstraction in this specific natural history. advice and speculations – a mixture that culminates in a number of provisional rules and desiderata. Bacon uses the same term at different levels. performing all kinds of functions: to provide the primary natural-historical information. directions. observation and speculation serve to discuss the results of experiments and they way in which investigation can be improved by devising different additional experiments and sometimes how practical results can be gain from the actual achievements. so that its subtle structure may reveal itself. It should be noted. it is impossible to say anything about the relation between volume and weight. however. etc. As in many other situations. while advice (monitum). Bacon only uses it in the modern sense. In the Historia densi et rari these experiments are enriched by observations. of their contractions. Bacon gives directions so as to verify hypotheses using experiments. without proper measurements. and as in the previous history. find hidden causes. the very first historia is already the result of an experiment (namely of weighing bodies).by the mostly rather rudimentary empirical reports contained in the Historia ventorum. Such is not the case with simple natures: in order to study these. in the Historia densi et rari. the term “experiment” appears no fewer than twentyseven times. incentives to practice. that this work contains many more interventions into nature. The prolongation of life was for Bacon a special type of medicine. which differed from the cure of diseases or the mere preservation of health. plants. The Historia vitae et mortis The last of Bacon’s published histories is completely different from the previous two with regard to both the subject matter and the structure. conferring to the prolongation of life a very special place among medical disciplines. the entire second part of this history is formed from experiments (with the exception of the concluding “provisional rules”). all of which Bacon describes as “experiments of fruit. but all the characteristics I have mentioned (large quantity of speculation and operative instances) make it look more advanced and mature than the other histories. the organs. The operative side of this work has. see below. Nor does he deem it necessary to provide any explanation when summing up his various speculations at the end of the text. 2. it still has a typically open-ended character. what is peculiar about this historia is that the pneumatic spirits and their activity occupy the centre of Bacon’s concern. because it is not concerned with 202 Bacon divides medicine in these three sciences in the De augmentis scientiarum (see Appendix 1 and DAS IV.) – all the operations Bacon mentions are capable of bringing about transformations in the human body. II. members. 379-96). the external air. In true Baconian fashion. As a consequence. All these aspects have a clear impact upon the use of experiments in the Historia vitae et mortis. chap. the operative part of this historia is based on speculations. or the process of assimilation of food and drink. animals and humans. The Historia vitae et mortis is a natural history that belongs to the domain of medicine. SEH IV. 3. 2.” and not “experiments of light” (for this distinction.” In an overt reversal of the usual practice. Compared to the other two histories. Sure enough. in the “provisional rules. While it opens with a detailed. A prima facie problem of the Historia vitae et mortis is that the theory on which the operations rely is not explained. 3. however. 3. This air of completeness is also made apparent by both the absence of advice and directions for further investigation and its very compact structure.2. nor are we told how Bacon discovered or established this theory. Although Bacon usually stresses that speculation ought to follow from naturalhistorical investigations. 4. section 2.202 Beyond its medical subject matter. characteristically natural-historical account of the life span of mineral bodies. an interesting consequence: this particular natural history seems to be more complete than the other two histories. the main body of this history is constituted of “operations” conducted either on a variety of vital elements such as the spirits. 72 . the speculative part of this historia is not grounded in any fieldwork. this one is both highly speculative and highly operative. the Historia vitae et mortis is very poor in experimental instances that aim at discovery rather than production. OFB XII. Except for its operative function. despite its title. always referring to “artificially constraining nature to unveil itself. formed of a mélange 203 See HVM. and mostly with a testing function. Finally.” These experiments have different functions – they might represent the base upon which the entire writing is constructed. this work should. or they are used to perform changes upon the human body leading thus to the prolongation of life. Few of the natural-historical instances are the results of experiments. to mechanics or magic than to natural history. 4. that Bacon’s Latin natural histories are hybrid constructions. The term “experiment” appears exactly eight times.investigation. Conclusion Bacon placed experiments and the history of the arts at the centre of his natural philosophy. the differences between the two operative parts are significant. to say that a certain affirmation of his predecessors has not been tested by experiment and thus it is not reliable. according to Bacon’s own criteria. once again. a detailed study of the natural histories provides information on how Bacon used experiments. 187 and respectively 223. but with operation. It had been argued that Bacon had a clear conception of experiment and this can be noticed in the way in which he used the term.203 The specific function of experiments that we encounter in the Historia vitae et mortis was somewhat prefigured in the Historia ventorum. and it seemed to be secondary to the investigation of nature. pertain rather to natural philosophy. 2. they bring new knowledge about a phenomenon. Still. the situation is very different indeed: here the operative part represents the very core of the natural history itself. they test theories and hypothesis. with the exception of the experiment to establish the longevity of life in dolphins or the freshness of air. 73 . In the Historia ventorum. 3. which also has an operative part towards the end. both of which are aspects of experience. we have seen. Even if in the theoretical writings he did not dedicate much space to the development of a theory of experimentation that could have clarified its function in the discovery and transformation of nature. In the case of the Historia vitae et mortis. this part constitutes merely the practical side of the history. It also becomes clear that Bacon distinguished between experiment and mere experiences as interventionist and non-interventionist approaches to nature. very different one from another. Colclough has discovered that Sylva was listed in the catalogue for publication at the Stationers’ Register ten days before Bacon’s death.” even though some of them contain no experimental evidence. In this light. while preparing the manuscript for the print. Bacon himself did not use English for his other natural histories. which is different from the other natural histories.” 181 and Arber. Colclough concludes. In itself. 4. Moreover. 4. a few months after Bacon’s death. it is still true that a few months did pass between Bacon’s death and the moment when the manuscript went to the press – a period in which Rawley could have made changes. and ancient authors were being translated into English. 74 . A Transcript of the Register. operations. 2. English. 4. while they are.204 These circumstances have led some commentators to claim that this book. there are some puzzling aspects to Sylva. there are the titles of what are invariably labelled “experiments. and lastly. William Rawley. Why should he have changed language for the Sylva? The second oddity is the 204 There are two letterpress title pages. of 1626 and 1627. controlled experiments. that is. However. the use of English might not be so surprising. there is the language in which it is written (English. incentives to practice.of mere experiences. The standing of the Sylva sylvarum vis-à-vis the Latin natural histories 2. 1.205 And yet. even if we accept Colclough’s conclusion. observations. at the same time. so as to make them available for a larger audience within the English speaking world. in the first decades of the seventeenth century. advice. each containing one hundred instances. speculations. natural historical books were starting to be published in English. rather than Latin). then there is its numerically accomplished division into ten centuries. However. and so the published version of Sylva should correspond more or less to what Bacon had prepared for publication. in the period when Sylva was written. One of the main features distinguishing Sylva from Bacon’s other writings on natural history is its language. Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum was published by Bacon’s secretary. “The Materials. 124. First.” 199. since. vol. See Colclough “The Materials. was in reality a notebook that Rawley published in a form that Bacon had never intended for publication. The mysteries of the book As has been mentioned in the first chapter. Let us look at these three oddities in turn. Rawley’s intervention in the text cannot have been radical. there are some arguments against this deflationary position. 205 Colclough. even though. nor between different centuries. while the last century is about the transmission of immaterial species and the work of imagination. no obvious connection between experiments within a given century. as has been shown. which. SEH II. centuries V. that one great reason why he would not put these particulars into any exact method (though he that looketh attentively into them shall find that they have a secret order) was because he conceived that other men would now think that they could do the like. many would have despaired to attain by imitation. Still.206 But even if one regards the organization of Sylva as unoriginal and catering to the fashion of the period. it is true that these two centuries in Sylva in particular display a gradual ascension in the analysis of sounds. as it does not follow the general rule that a natural history should follow according to Bacon’s Introduction to his Historia naturalis et experimentalis. they start with what is more evident to the senses and end with what is most hidden to the senses and at the same time defines the very nature of the sounds. they are very different from each other.division of the Sylva into precisely 1000 experiments. 208 Rawley. he argued. V and VI is longer). In the “Preface to the Reader. with few exceptions. most importantly. advice. and so go on with a further collection. such as those centuries specifically dedicated to sounds. There is. 207 75 . once again by William Rawley. to plants. while they end with considerations about the spiritual nature of sounds (“Experiments in consort touching the fine and spiritual nature of the sounds”). must be fragmented and ground down in order to grow. VI and VII are about plants (century VII also discusses general characteristics of animals. 48. It is true that this subject occupies a portion of the Sylva (only the discussion of plants in centuries IV. I can refer any man to his lordship's Latin book. if the method had been exact. but it cannot be considered a natural history in the proper sense. As Langman has shown. From these particular examples I mentioned. and not presented whole. it is composed only from experiments in consort. centuriate organization in the period was most usually employed for miscellaneous works – collections of epigrams. 337. In other words. this organization raises some problems. Beyond Both. subdivided into exactly ten centuries. For. SS.208 206 Langman.” he justified Bacon’s choice for a structure that was different from that of his Latin natural histories. speculations. and to the transmission of species and the force of imagination. while Bacon’s natural histories have proper structures (objections. De Augmentis Scientiarum.207 William Rawley was aware of these issues. Centuries II and III (with the exception of the last ten experiments of the third century) are about sounds and music. To the Reader. which (if my judgment be anything) is written in the exactest order that I know any writing to be. He formulated this idea in the following way again at the very end of his “Preface”: I have heard his lordship say also. They start with more general considerations (“Experiments in consort touching music”). the discussion of sounds was published several years after Bacon’s death as a natural history of sounds (Historia et inquisitio prima de sono et audito). Experience. and differentiates between plants and animals). directions). aphorisms and maxims – or occasionally for religious texts. As for his lordship's love of order. on the other. The New Atlantis presented the same method. as will be shown in this chapter. Not only that by reading and practising some of its content they can improve their lives (and this is.209 Garber’s argument groups together the Novum organum and the Historia vitae et mortis. Sylva. but 209 Garber. 1112 November 2011. In this respect. written in Latin and rigorously organized. There can be two possible interpretations for this change. 210 This idea was already developed by Garber in an article with the same title “Bacon. 76 . In the same way in which the Novum organum presented a new method to those few who could read Latin and had the training to understand such a work. on the one hand. Garber admits that this message can be understood only by a few readers.It is difficult to establish whether Rawley was right about his claim that his “Preface” would have been the same if written by Bacon. the New Atlantis and the Uses of Utopia. while the others are in Latin.210 So. Sylva was accessible to those practitioners whose activities are mentioned several times by Bacon as being very important.” a very odd episode which seems to have nothing to do with the rest of the text of The New Atlantis. was intended as a popularisation of natural history. What should follow. “Bacon. but rather for a different public. the language in which Sylva is written. and this is my argument. the New Atlantis and the Uses of Utopia. the aim of natural philosophy). is very significant. My interpretation of Sylva’s language and structure is different. concluding that. it cannot be written for the other. the spirit of Rawley’s “Preface” is certainly very much in keeping with Bacon’s own views as presented in other writings and in Sylva itself. For Garber. Dan Garber interprets it in connection with another puzzle: the structure. and The New Atlantis and the Sylva. Bacon was not interested primarily in making it accessible for a larger public (since in fact Latin could have meant a larger public – namely all of learned Europe). after all.” held at the Maison Française d’Oxford.” in which he however only addresses the comparison between the Novum organum and The New Atlantis. Garber places at the centre of his discussion the “Feast of the Family. the Historia vitae et mortis was intended for the few while the Sylva was for anyone capable of reading and of applying the knowledge it contained. by contrast. the chastity of the Bensalemites and the importance given to having a large number of descendents (within the bounds of the family) corresponds to the Baconian method – chastity of mind and the fruits of knowledge within the proper method. without discussing the natural histories. However. but relying on a fable that could be understood by everyone. Let me explain this assertion. on the model of the miscellanies that were popular at the time. Garber argues. The first oddity I have mentioned. is that only since these few readers can interpret the work in the correct way. No doubt that being written in English. my claim is that the way in which Sylva is delivered is used by Bacon as a method to select his readers. In fact.” unpublished lecture presented at the colloquium on “Francis Bacon’s Art of Discovery and the Cultivation of Mind. as a popularisation of Bacon’s method. and especially by those who had read the Novum organum and can make the connection between the two. When writing Sylva in English. This natural history is written in English. while the Historia vitae et mortis was published for a limited public. both works are unfinished. see DAS VI. with several episodes that are fragmentary and not straightforwardly connected (and which are. That majority of readers to whom the use of the vernacular will render these writings accessible are not the readers that Bacon had in mind for the continuation of the project of the Instauratio magna. can be read at different levels. Still. “Materials.211 Of course.” On the basis of the opinions Bacon voiced concerning the transmission of knowledge in the De augmentis scientiarum. see Colclough. SEH IV. 448-54. make the right connections between the different paragraphs. in a way. few readers will interpret the fable narrated in The New Atlantis correctly. these latter works are not alien to Bacon’s preferred method.” Indeed. 77 . Importantly. but requires interpretation. That is to say. and then experiment further so as to advance knowledge. and both contain knowledge that can be improved. chap. it is precisely within a fragmentary framework that Bacon’s invitation to the reader to investigate further becomes more evident: it is with such an open-ended structure that he can show how complex nature is. But this is not the group of readers Bacon aims at. it is evident that Bacon felt that 211 For Bacon’s detailed discussion of the transmission of knowledge and his various distinctions. how phenomena that at first sight seem completely different can be studied together. Bacon’s audience consists of those who can see the unity of nature even when it is presented in a fragmentary way and who are able to advance knowledge in a very serious way. “the true sons of knowledge. the first requiring a reordering and connection of the various experiments and the second the interpretation of the fable. and that a concatenated process of investigation such as this will provide more knowledge than any separate investigation could.” On the other hand. Few readers will understand the causes underlying the experiments presented in Sylva. of course the Novum organum or the Historia vitae et mortis hide esoteric meanings. but is a fable. and Clucas. lead some of the experiments further and this can help the advancement of science. II. For a discussion of Sylva as written in an aphoristic style. their meaning is not always clear.” and certainly more so than either the Novum organum or the Historia vitae et mortis. after all. but they need less interpretation than Sylva and The New Atlantis. both The New Atlantis and Sylva are initiatic. This is the sense in which I consider The New Atlantis to be “aphoristic. “Knowledge Broken. acroamatic and “aphoristic. There is no doubt that the two texts’ use of the vernacular renders them accessible to a larger public within the English speaking world. it is unfinished. as a piece of delightful literature. What is important. The New Atlantis does not have a predominantly aphoristic style. is that Sylva.” 195. the Novum organum is also written in aphorisms.they can. like The New Atlantis. with their own knowledge of nature and their craft. But this larger public will be only able to garner some practical knowledge from Sylva and to understand The New Atlantis as a fable. In the same way. however. close to Bacon’s definition of aphorisms as “seeds of knowledge”).” than to the method of the vulgar. it becomes evident that both The New Atlantis and Sylva are closer to the method of transmission that Bacon considered proper to the “true sons of knowledge. ” It is only after a careful investigation that one understands that what Bacon seeks is a unity in nature and those features of nature that at first seem very disparate but in reality are intertwined. SEH IV. “Experiment solitary touching wood shining in the dark. II. Bacon does not clearly affirm this. as it is written in a way that “discloses the mysteries of science and ask for the progression of knowledge. processes. but at the end of his list of things that “give light. some titles refer to processes such as the “Experiments in consort touching the inducing and accelerating of putrefaction” (experiments 329-340)213 or the “Experiments in consort touching prohibition and preventing putrefaction” (experiments 341-351). To give just one example here. While the use of English clearly did enlarge the readership of his works. what renders. human life could be improved. about putrefaction. 453-56. 213 78 . the above-mentioned works (Sylva and The New Atlantis) inferior – namely their use of the English vernacular. aspects of matter theory. the fragmentary nature and the use of fables allowed him to provide different messages to different types of reader.”212 in fact more so than most of his other work. by way of illustration. unless the reader studies the experiment carefully enough to notice that 352 is also. The last of the puzzles of Sylva that must be discussed here has to do with the topics and titles of the 1000 entries.” The connection between 352 and the previous discussion about putrefaction is not obvious. phenomena. their fragmentary structure and the reliance on fables – were in fact criteria used by Bacon to separate his readership. 449. 451-53 214 SEH II. In conclusion. – one is tempted to conclude that Sylva is about “everything. and knowledge might still be advanced even if those involved were not aware of their achievements. it satisfies Bacon’s own requirements for a proper transmission of knowledge.” he mentions that fish scales possess the same nature as shining wood and then offers the following causal explanation: “and it is true that all 212 DAS VI.there was a positive side to opening up knowledge to a general public: by the use of the knowledge from Sylva by many people. in Garber’s eyes. chap. In the following chapters I will show with various examples (connecting experiments which are not connected in a self evident way and also connecting Sylva with the other writings treating the same topic) how this type of reading of Sylva leads to a better understanding of nature in Bacon’s conception. etc. SEH II. ultimately. such as experiment 352. If one looks at the “entities” to which the titles refer – individual items. As far as Sylva is concerned.214 while others mention only particulars. 217 If we refer to the previous analysis of the term 215 SS exp. 217 The fact that Sylva was published after Bacon’s death leaves some unsolved problems. as some of the paragraphs do indeed contain the title word “experiment. in order to defend the coherence and strength of Bacon’s notion of experiment. This seemingly misleading titling of the sections is one of the reasons that have led scholars to conclude that Bacon did not possess a clear concept of “experiment. However. SEH II. there are several references across Sylva to previous experiments (referred to as such). On the other hand.60. 352. otherwise we should accept that Rawley’s intervention in the text is too big. after Bacon’s death.” let alone share our modern understanding of it.000 titles of the Sylva is that each of them contains the word “experiment.” while others do not.”215 In other words. classifications or speculations. It is thus possible. the manuscript does not contain the most theoretically relevant of the observations contained in Sylva. Even Graham Rees. which are probably Bacon’s own. Rees. It covers everything from experiments in the ‘modern’ sense(s) to procedural advice.” This use of the term counts as a problem because it is very evident that some of the sections contain nothing experimental. It therefore remains impossible to decide whether or not Bacon’s intention was to use “experiment” for every single instance in Sylva. has embraced the view that the sense in which Bacon uses the term “experiment” in Sylva is “loose” and also quite different from the concept as we find it in his other work: “When Bacon calls the 1. but instead have to do with definitions. the acceleration of time and so forth) and individual observations that only after a careful examination reveal themselves as instances of these processes.000 instances were added by Rawley. who defended the idea that Bacon had a clear concept of experiment. The second problem afflicting the 1. A careful investigation shows. one could claim that the subtitles for the 1. A comparison with the manuscript clarifies little in this respect. and at times not even anything experiential. it is only through this explanation that Bacon establishes the connection between these experiments.” 388. 456. even though an attentive reader will have noticed that some of the sixteen conclusions of the trial made with shining wood strongly resemble the previous trials made for “the inception of putrefaction. that the existence of the word “experiment” in the titles is Rawley’s idea. the extant manuscript does not settle this issue. assimilation. however. as well as fire or light. but only the interventionist ones.” One could offer here several further possible examples of Bacon’s discussion of processes (such as heat.”216 Of course.000 paragraphs of the Sylva ‘experiments’. he uses the word more loosely than usual. It is not clear how much Rawley intervened in the text before publishing it. Unfortunately. 216 79 . “Unpublished. in the sense of intervention. n.putrefaction hath with it an inward motion. that the term “experiment” is only used when Bacon discusses a case of an intervention approach to nature. and 97. In the last century. they are examples of the more general secret virtues of sympathy and antipathy between different objects and the human spirit. For experiments 95-97 see SEH II. as well as swarm with the countless fables and sorry fictions of misplaced ingenuity.” However. they bring these operations into play both with regard to adjacent and neighbouring bodies as well as within their own parts” (OFB XIII. some used in medicine. For example. experiment 971 (in the section on sympathy and antipathy) refers the reader back to some medical experiments from century I. and sometimes he does not. Nevertheless. seeing that they bring with them such a number of useful things.”219 The same example appears in another context in century I. 96. 651. using the knowledge of sympathy and antipathy between plants and the human body. its use differs considerably from one context to another. SEH II.218 In century I. SEH II. At the same time. or between different parts of the body.220 In this experiment. from the definition of the motion of minor congregation (motu congregationis minoris). as Rees rightly observes. and by those ill smells the rising of the mother is put down. without repeating them. 935. 664). these experiments are experiments of fruit. it could be that Bacon (or Rawley) added experiments in order to meet his “quota. Sometimes Bacon mentions the previous usage. how by Some of the instances carry the title “experiment.” or the titles are a latter addition. where they occur for the first time. is arbitrarily chosen. although a seemingly precise number. it would be difficult to assume that Bacon had such a strong concept of experiment in these texts that becomes weaker in the last work. touching the several sympathies and antipathies for medicinal use” (SS exp.000. on the other hand. If it was Bacon’s decision. Moreover. 220 The motion of consent does not appear in the list of simple motions from the Abecedarium novum naturae.” but the theoretical paragraphs. 219 SS exp. 80 . investigate the individual and particular friendships and quarrels or sympathies and antipathies of bodies with diligence and care. others in spiritual magic (to induce a certain virtue). Bacon first gives examples that are evident and then explains how this motion can be used: “Therefore physicians should ingeniously contrive. namely in a solitary experiment about a cure by motion of consent. 971. even when an experiment is repeated. 197). Experiment 935 presents an instance of the emission of spirits in vapour or exhalations: “They do use. for the accident of the mother. in order to cure some diseases. it is an undeniable fact that bodies do entice certain other bodies (and do this so that they may be united with them) but. Another argument that has been brought up is that 1. it seems that Bacon refers to the same motion with two different names: “We must.as used in the Latin natural histories. In other instances. 379-80. we should assume he must have had something else in mind and the previous sections offered a possible interpretation. to burn feathers and other things of ill odour. 218 “Vide the experiments 95. do not appear in it. and others to find criminals. keep and drive certain others away from them. moreover. or in the list from the De augmentis scientiarum. and thus it would be impossible to establish whether it was Bacon’s intention to refer to all the instances in Sylva as “experiments. Bacon does not refer the reader back to the previous occurrence of the same experiment. Given that some experiments can be found twice in the text. where Bacon gives several examples of how this motion can be used in medicine. having the knowledge of the consent between parts of the human body. It should be mentioned here that Bacon’s experiments are not mere examples of how nature works. (which is the matter of a living creature. Experiment 63 is used to show how physicians can work upon one part of the body in order to produce an effect upon another that is more difficult to be manipulated. they are used with completely different purposes.222 This is possible because Bacon’s experiments work at different levels: some study the visible phenomena and report the results. the nausea is stopped. as he always does at the end of the paragraph. This is what permits using the same experiment under different titles and with different purposes in mind. the stomach is ready to expel by vomit. and then they die. so as it seemeth salt draweth blood. they cure the rising of the mother.”221 What should be emphasized about these two instances is that although they report the same experiment. But the same experiment does not appear only in different contexts. when nature cannot expel by cough. and pat upon their forehead with another. 63. or blood. men fall into fluxes of the belly. as in the sixth experiment of clarification: it may be also. doth gather the saltness. SEH II. and thus this is not the reason they can be used in more than one experimental context. 982. 81 . experiments are reused to explain other experiments: in experiment 982 (about the secret virtue of sympathy and antipathy). or pat with both hands. This may be by adhesion. and that is commonly mortal. We see that when the spirits that come to the nostrils expel a bad scent. depending on the experimenter’s current interest.” 222 “It is reported that the white of an egg. and that they can be used to emphasize different aspects of reality. It first affects the woman’s sense of smell and through consent between different parts of her body. As we shall see later. they may excite inward motions that are not in their power. Beyond working as examples. SEH II. if they cannot be expelled by sweat. We see it is children's sport to prove whether they can rub upon their breast with one hand. although it does not explain that the effect is not caused directly. mingled with salt-water. that blood.) have some sympathy with salt: for all life hath a sympathy with salt. So in pestilent diseases. as by the stench of feathers. 637. Sylva is a book in which the distinct experiments have to be connected in order to make them 221 SS exp.motions that are in their power. one of them being nothing more than a reference to a phenomenon explained in a previous experiment. while others delve more deeply into nature and find the invisible causes of these phenomena.” When it comes to explaining the process. and the white of an egg. Bacon presents a report on making water “sweeter. they fall likewise into looseness. and straight ways they shall sometimes rub with both hands. Bacon offers two possible causes. but works through the motion of consent. and maketh the water sweeter. by consent. Experiment 935 is an exemplification of the great power vapours can have upon human body. From these examples it becomes clear that Bacon’s experiments in Sylva are complex constructions. 665-66). The beginning of the experiment is as follows: “There is in the body of man a great consent in the motion of the several parts. We see that salt laid to a cut finger healeth it. they bring in information about a certain subject and they play the central role in further investigation. We find that in consumptions of the lungs. as well as blood draweth salt” (SS exp. or the like. cold is the only one to feature more than one example of how it can be applied: “as we see in the contracting of the air in the weather-glass. What is peculiar about these experiments is that some of them are observations of uncommon plants.”223 Though it seems intuitively clear what Bacon intends with this distinction. Frequently. moreover. which the ancients thought (very probably) to be made by the version of air into water. which does not include either of the terms “solitary” or “in consort”: the “Experiments promiscuous touching plants” in century VII (experiments 610-676). 348). and by the coldness of rocks. somewhat based on the experiments in the previous two centuries. so that they could just as well have been put into a series of “experiments in consort.). but played different roles in its structure. holpen by the rest which the air hath in those parts. “Experiment solitary” and “experiments in consort” The first distinction we find in Bacon’s Sylva is related to the titles. 2. In the remainder of this section. all these instances were intended as parts of a natural and experimental history. and.” Bacon could have considered it as a group of “experiments in consort” to illustrate all the means for this basic transformation. “solitary experiments” (or those having an individual numeration within a group of experiments) actually contain more than one single operation or instance. SEH II. 4. 82 . or on common observations (which plants should be consumed raw. for there springs are chiefly generated. 4. 224 Cold is the first means used to transform air into water. a tree with red leaves or herbs that taste of salt) taken from ancient sources (the majority of them taken from Pliny). and the other instances are highly theoretical. or else refer to a series of experiments. 1. whereby it is a degree nearer to water. whereby it cannot dissipate. contains four ways to transform air into water. as will be demonstrated in the next chapter. We see it also in the effects of the cold of the middle region (as they call it) of the air” (SS exp. which part is watery and which oily.” Experiment 27. the issue is unexpectedly complex. 2. namely “experiment solitary” and “experiments in consort. frequently as the limit case of known species or singularities. for example. all of them with causal explanations. Specific to this section is that there is very little interventionism compared to other parts of Sylva. as for example 223 There is one group of experiments with another title. etc. Whereas the experiment is called “Experiment solitary touching the version and transmutation of air into water. I shall deal with the different types of instances in Sylva that appear under the title “experiment. such as a tree which has its fruit growing straight from the bark. what part is more nourishing. these different levels of complexity represent one of the criteria to establish a hierarchy of experiments. which boiled.224 as he did in comparable situations.” and shall attempt a classification.offer a coherent description of nature and. As I shall prove at the end of this chapter. Others are classifications and distinctions concerning plants. Bacon’s own distinctions between types of experiments 2. We see it also in the generation of springs. Bacon explains why the existence of these plants is possible. 2. There are only a few experiments and some directions to further experiments. each of which is exemplified by instances that are very different from each other. of all the means Bacon lists. 27. ” presented at the colloquium “Francis Bacon on Natural History and Natural Magic: The Mystery of Sylva Sylvarum. nor defraud and that “no matter what the result is. the selection within the experiments in consort seems to be done also with the nineteen “Instances of Special Power” from the Novum organum. there are no set rules on how to select these instances for the particular titles. which includes several levels of experiments. but the discovery of causes is the end of the procedure. the latter have an immediate benefit. Manzo’s interpretation is. the latter of operative philosophy. the experiments contained in the natural 225 This is the idea argued by Dana Jalobeanu and Laura Georgescu in their paper “The Modes of experientia literata. This is the reason why similar experiments can be found throughout Sylva in different research contexts. but the mechanical arts as they were performed in Bacon’s time). This is very much in contrast to Bacon’s attitude towards experimentation and the infallibility of experiments. 14-27 May 2012. however. In this context. 2. Manzo states that for Bacon the experiments cannot fail. It would be only natural to suppose the “experiments in consort” to be constructed by means of the various modes of experientia literata. because sometimes the causes are so hidden that a complex experimental set-up is necessary to find them. It is because of the 83 . 2. and consequently it cannot be his model of experimentation. Moreover. These experiments of light indeed say something about the thing or phenomenon being studied.” 59). she compares the experiments of fruit with those of the mechanics (not Bacon’s science of mechanics. I will announce when the Instances of Special Powers can be identified in the text. but other modes of experientia literata will instead take the experiment to some other phenomenon. since this is the art that goes from one experiment to another. Of course. Thirdly. sometimes a variation of a given experiment will bring us to precisely the information needed. Besides these modes of experientia literata. they do not appear in Sylva under the names they receive in the Novum organum. 226 As I have already mentioned. Silvia Manzo discusses the distinction between experiments of light and experiments of fruit.226 2. but not for the majority. The first are therefore part of speculative philosophy. they nevertheless achieve their purpose and solve the problem” (“Experimentación.in the “experiments in consort touching the inducing and accelerating of putrefaction” (329340).” The former are used to obtain knowledge of causes and the latter to produce effects. Second. First. Bacon had distinguished between “experiments of light” and “experiments of fruit. What is common to the experiments in consort is that they study the same phenomenon.227 Being part of speculative philosophy. What is peculiar to the experiments in consort is that the unity is given by the subject and not by the experimental setup. but according to Bacon mechanics produces works in the wrong way. erroneous.” held at Princeton University.225 This is indeed true in a few cases. 4. The remaining modes have the function of translating experiments from one domain to another. In the following chapter. while the former show the natural cause of something. 227 In her article about the use of instruments and Bacon’s experimentation. According to her. the experiments of light do not always show causes. only a few modes of experientia literata are suited to providing new information or adding new experiments. “Experiments of light” and “experiments of fruit” Ever since his early writings. where each experiment discusses a method of inducing or accelerating putrefaction. and search for experiments that bear light not fruit” (NO I. but also use and profit. which are presented at the end of the various experiments. and made no materiate work that day. the result of the interaction of the two. 228 “And it must ever be kept in mind (as I am continually urging) that experiments of Light are even more to be sought after than experiments of Fruit” (DAS V. and of a wick that provoketh inflammation.histories should therefore count as “experiments of light. though a subjective component. which are very complex entities. which are for discovery. or with respecting the relevant parameters of experimentation. but the analysis of the experiments on plants in our chapter 4 will adduce many more arguments in favour of this affirmation. 464). Bacon was clearly aware of this. and these have to do either with the theory. consisting of inflammable matters. The experiment is a criticism of the Aristotelian theory that birds are more highly coloured because they spend more time in the sun. of light and fruit. aph.. that the testing of provisional rules and causes. I will offer here only one example to illustrate this affirmation. experiments of light have a primacy over those of fruit. She is right in this existentialist vision. It is clear. SEH II. And this importeth not only discovery. can often deceive.229 However. In the same way. or tapers. theorizing upon them in his process of induction and developing further experimentation. as in experiment 369. 229 In several experiments. this combination does not constitute yet another deviation from the theoretical requirements on the construction of natural history. The same idea appears also in the Novum organum: “Now on the first day of creation God made light alone and gave over a whole day to it. 70. which are for use: “but now we will speak of the continuance of flames.” because their hair passes through a more delicate and finer strainer.230 In experiment 93. and the last. which are very operative and consequently can be used for profit. and yet last longer” (SS exp. 230 SS exp. chap. such as are used for candles. What is peculiar to Sylva is that many of its instances are both experiments of light and of fruit at the same time. can fail for several reasons. But even if the “tables” of the best materials to be used to keep more the flame burning are useful in practice. SEH IV. 112). SEH II. which stated that birds have more lively colours than the “beasts. according to its title. produces not only knowledge. Rather. Here Bacon distinguishes between the first experiments. Bacon acknowledges that besides shedding light upon causes. they also say important things about these materials and their relation to fire and consumption. if they can be made as fair and bright as others. 60). which have more chance to be positive after the discovery of causes. that is. but within Baconian philosophy. 421). OFB XI. if they exist are true (ibid.228 The distinction returns many times in Sylva. There is no need to prove that Sylva contains both types of experiments. and his 84 .” For that reason. This is why they have to be performed more than once and why they and their results should always be kept “provisional. Bacon clearly considered this the application of an earlier axiom. There are many similar discussions in the centuries on plants. which is one of the experiments in consort touching the continuance of the flame.” Manzo accepts the falsehood of experiments. Bacon’s criticism is based on empirical facts. 340-41. but also great effects in nature. about producing feathers and hairs of different colours. she argues. II. experiments can be actually used for profit. because experiments. we should first educe from experience of every kind the discovery of real causes and axioms. lamps. whenever Bacon wants to emphasize the difference between the two approaches. experiments. Experiment 93 is. and will also be emphasized in our later exegetical efforts. 5. 369. it is a feature of Sylva that shows how Bacon’s conception changed while performing experiments. but only as a wrong interpretation of the results of the experiments. actual state of science and man’s fallen mind that experiments. for it is a great saving in all such lights. Much the same reason is there of the plumage of birds. nourisheth and assimilateth less. but also for the disclosure of the nature of colours themselves: which of them require a finer porosity. 231 SS exp. and excerneth more. not so much heat and moisture. they have not instruments for urine. namely that the colour depends on the strainer through which the moisture passes. and so likewise doth the chin. The cause of the smoothness in men is not any abundance of heat and moisture. 680. (for whatsoever assimilateth. which are parts more perspirable. The cause may be want of perspiration. as excrementitious heat and moisture. but in the way the way experiments are used. for birds assimilate less. Bacon returns to this subject and establishes the causes of the differences between men and animals with regard to the quantity of hair. represents the results of this experimental series. though that indeed causeth pilosity. and this is what makes for the difference between white and all the other colours.Bacon changes the colours of the feathers of certain birds. though it at first seems not to be based on empirical facts. and the plumage of birds exceedeth the pilosity of beasts. Later in Sylva. But the discussion does not stop here. nor soles of the feet. the interplay between discovery of causes and production of effects being the key towards this development. 550-51). Bacon performed changes on given bodies. for much of the matter of hair. 93. We see also that hair cometh not upon the palms of the hands.) and excrementitious moisture aboundeth most in beasts. Again. and savage men more than civil. in century VII. the head of man hath hair upon the first birth. the skull being of a more solid substance. SEH II. not only for the producing of birds and beasts of strange colours. but this time introducing a discussion on the assimilation and exclusion of food. And children likewise are not hairy.232 This is just one example of the way in which experiments develop in Sylva. The distinction between “experiments of light” and “experiments of fruit” thus resides not in the experiment itself. and their flesh (generally) more dry: besides. which no other part of the body hath. and so all the excrementitious moisture goeth into the feathers: and therefore it is no marvel though birds be commonly better meat than beasts. The reader conclusion. goeth not into the hair. the same process provided knowledge about the nature of colours: the quantity of moisture is also relevant for colours.231 In other words. but there is requisite to pilosity. and also makes remarks concerning the nature of colours and the relation between colour and the quantity of moisture in bodies. goeth forth by insensible perspiration. and secerneth more subtilly. again including in the discussion the feathers of birds and again basing his explanation on the quantity of moisture and the strainers through which it passes. for that their skins are more perspirable” (SS exp. 379. in the other parts of the body. 85 . and also of perspiration and the large quantity of hair on the head of men and the presence of the skull. while transforming nature based on a simple rule. if one looks at the group of experiments in which it is included (experiments about percolation). Towards the end of the experiment. because their flesh doth assimilate more finely. SEH II. he accepts that the given experiment can be used at the same for both purposes – knowledge and operation: This is a good experiment. and men that are more savage. and besides. and which a grosser. 232 “Beasts are more hairy than men. and excern more than beasts: for their excrements are ever liquid. At the same time. this historiographic distinction is by itself problematic. see also Rees ”Unpublished Manuscript. Turning to the moderns. The main ones. thereby bringing the process of knowledge acquisition to a halt.233 However.” which appears in the De augmentis as an exemplification of the last mode of experientia literata. namely something the experimenter tries “simply because such a thing has never been attempted before” (DAS V. which again can be used for light or for fruit. argues for the idea that the experiment is borrowed from the tradition of alchemy and thus it has nothing original in it. Of course. the Problems. But there are more illustrations of theories concerning the transmission of species and other operations of natural magic (for one of these illustrations see SS exp. In fact the text also names Ficino. and Erasmus (Ellis “Preface” SEH II. 4. SEH IV. As for the other ancients. Paracelsus. Bacon’s own experiences and borrowings from sources The main distinction discussed in the secondary literature is. 86 . chance. difficult to establish which instances were Bacon’s “inventions. Oswald Croll. Telesio. Let us only mention here the experiment of “close distillation. nevertheless. Already in the nineteenth century. 986. Hippocrates.”234 Should 233 The most important influences Ellis identified in their edition of Sylva are Aristotle. Bacon’s desire to keep the two types separate lies in this alone. in his Promethean Ambitions (246).can use them to gain profit or can use the knowledge they provide to construct another experiment. George Sandys. 666-67). Sandys (28 borrowings) and Cardano (14 borrowings). Plutarch. Pliny. 420) and he is sure that “no man has yet made trial” of closed distillation (Ibid. 1. The same experiment appears in Sylva (exp. for example. Paracelsus. 4. 2. however. because some of the experiments presented by Bacon as his inventions are not. and others. SEH II. Ellis said that Scaliger and Comines were the only ones actually mentioned in the Sylva. Different types of instances under the title “experiment” 2. William Newman. were della Porta (62 borrowings). This process of identifying Bacon’s original instances is even more difficult. 99. And his advice to seek out experiments of light more than those of fruit has to do with his fear that man would be fascinated by the great effects and applications and stop using experiments for the discovery of causes. Galen. Giambattista Della Porta. chap. Girolamo Cardano. mentioned nowhere in the text. he accepted them as they were and added causal explanations or rejected them as false testimonies if he could find no natural cause that could explain such a phenomenon.” 234 Century X. 3. II. 3. with his intervention in the experiment sometimes being such as to cause him to modify the experimental report. pp. of a very different type. some 43 paragraphs drew on Pliny's Historia naturalis.. SEH II. Croll and Galileo--though these authorities were not the main modern ones used in preparation of the Sylva. and another dozen or so drew on Hippocrates. On the issue of borrowing.” 389: “About 40% of all the borrowings identified by Ellis were drawn from Aristotle and pseudo-Aristotelian sources – above all from a single text. it was pointed out by Ellis that a large part of Sylva consists of experiments borrowed from other authors. when he borrowed empirical observations. because there are experiments that Bacon borrowed but also performed himself. It is. 325-329). 420-21). 382-83). namely that between Bacon’s own experiments and those he borrowed from other sources. contains many “personal” experiences from Bacon’s own life as a natural investigator. VII. 236 Clucas. clearly the case with many borrowings from Aristotle’s Problemata. in which Bacon gives a cause different from Aristotle concerning the colours of the feathers of birds and the skin of beasts. By contrast. starting with the Historia naturalis et experimentalis. both his own inventions and the borrowings from other sources. 8).237 235 Bacon’s way of recording complicates this work even more. I will discuss in detail the problem of the borrowings in chapter 3. More important is the way in which Bacon changed and used the experiments. which become essential for the advancement of learning. Bacon included theoretical elements in his natural histories. 439 and Problemata. where I shall demonstrate that Bacon was not a transcriber of Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. Robert Ellis. Not all of them start with “It was reported” or “It is a received opinion” etc. but also because the borrowings are not always mentioned as such. for the moment I wish to limit myself to pointing out that the risk formulated by Stephen Clucas – namely that in the borrowed experiments. Of course. not only because of the absence of names. mentions this treatment of the borrowings from Aristotle: “Bacon 87 . Second. One of the reasons Bacon borrowed instances was to refute the theories through which these phenomena were explained. “Knowledge Broken. this is only one of the elements of Bacon’s originality. 1 and 2). On the first issue. in his introduction. but only empirical or experimental instances.” 168. In the end. 237 I have already discussed experiment 5. where Bacon gives a different cause for the same phenomenon under study – imitation in gaping. in order to use them further in the construction of an improved natural philosophy. where Bacon refutes Aristotle’s explanation of the phenomenon of sneezing and gives his own cause (compare with Problemata XXXIII. Graham Rees emphasized that the originality of Bacon’s experiments in Sylva are the explanatory causes added at the end of the experiments. Another illustrative example is experiment 296. but it is very important in this context. Bacon did not borrow theories.the variations of experiments conducted according the modes of experientia literata be considered “original”? Future scholarship will probably identify additional sources that Ellis has failed to identify. This is. though in some cases this is evident: details of the experimental reports and the quantitative features could not have been obtained except through personal experimentation. new sources are being presented. which he then explained through his own theoretical apparatus. First.235 In fact. there is also “the importation of those very theoretical prejudices which the collection of particulars is designed to avoid”236 – is fully circumvented by Bacon. in this very dissertation. I believe that the distinction between “own” and “borrowed” is not an essential one. yawning or stretching – because the motions themselves are explained differently by Bacon and Aristotle (see SEH II. for example. and the way in which he dealt with the Italian’s experiments is in fact truly creative. However. it is not easy to establish for each case whether Bacon performed the experiments (borrowed or not). The last example worth mentioning is experiment 687. given before the experiments testing it). “Introduction.’. 3. 529-31. that contain Bacon’s deepest considerations on matter theory: for example. as a result of it (see exp. 241 Ibid.238 It may in fact be suggested that these instances have often a hypothetical role and become definitive only after experimental testing. this represents a method used to refute his sources’ explanation. while under the umbrella of “axioms. 240 Ibid. I do not include in the category of speculative philosophy the provisional rules attached at the end of the experiment in order to explain the phenomena. However. I do not refer to those definitions and classifications that result from one or several experiments. and give his own. But it may be better sorted as a rudiment of germination.” SEH II. 340. included in a group of experiments on inducing and acceleration putrefaction: “Moss is a kind of mould of the earth and trees. but given that they are not presented as such by Bacon himself. The latter refer to specific instances. but only those individual instances.. to which we refer it” (SS exp. Theoretical and empirical instances As mentioned. which is. Bacon’s speculative philosophy is also very much present in Sylva. It is true that Bacon did not use this formulation only for the borrowings from Aristotle. 328-29).2. &c. 301. experiment 98. 239 SEH II. classifications. but after stating affirmatively the fact of which Aristotle inquires the cause. Bacon was probably expecting some of his readers to know what was refuted with this formula. I think.241 Let us also be clear that axioms are different from causes.” we encounter commonly found processes. 380-82. 88 . often introducing it by the formula. but to those which are given as a basis for the construction of further experiments.” This has led many to assert that Bacon did not have a strong sense of experimentalism. even when this is not given in Sylva. There are definitions. But we should be aware of the fact that the theoretical instances to be found in Sylva are very diverse.239 the experiments in consort. SEH II. he gives his own explanation of it. and not as the end. at least not generally. but there can be found in several other places in Sylva where classifications are given at the beginning of an experiment. one of the reasons why Bacon’s experimentalism in Sylva has not been taken seriously is the presence of theoretical instances under the title “experiment. 528-29. on the affinities and differences between plants and inanimate bodies (601-606). ‘the reason is. 453). 238 One example of a singular instance containing a definition is Bacon’s treatment of moss. SEH II. elements of speculative philosophy and axioms.240 or the experiments on the affinities and differences between plants and living creatures (607-609). 4. their presence in Sylva had been considered as problematic and a sign of imperfect natural history. When I speak of definitions and classifications here. since all his sources were very well known books in the period. In does not adopt Aristotle's solutions. for a classification of the operation of accelerating the clarification of liquors. Classifications are also very present in Sylva. or group of instances. Century X is a book about classification of the operations of natural magic. on pneumatic matter (which may be considered the most detailed account on spirits). 442. 2. not employed except in paragraphs taken from or suggested by something in the Problems” (Ellis.. “Axiom” refers also to the propositions of philosphia prima. propositions which do not need to be tested. given that Bacon makes clear distinctions between rules. SEH II. There are few reports of natural phenomena. 89 . 3. but it is referred to explicitly as an “axiom” in experiment 771. Axioms are indeed different. This axiom and the one on changing the colours of birds refer to processes less important. 4. and therefore would be severed and refined by trial” (SS exp. however simple and minimal the majority of the interventionist experiments might seem to a contemporary reader. 697. Experiment 328 does mention a distinction: in order to make gold. 80). Nevertheless. the first distinction will be the above-mentioned distinction between vulgar and experimentally sought-after experience. and often complemented by further experimentation. or predictive” (Francis Bacon. with the aim of finding out more about the phenomenon under study. SEH II 495). as the axiom on the maturation of metals (SS intro to exp. Peter Zagorin affirms that “by axiom (‘axioma’) Bacon here and elsewhere appears to mean any kind of general proposition. Zagorin’s description of axioms as “predictive” is problematic. 383-84. but which can still be applied to several individuals. because the counterpart used in operative philosophy is a “rule. 448-50) or the great axiom of vivification (SS.242 The presence of axioms in Sylva should therefore not be seen as an anticipation of nature.” An “axiom” is not predictive. 327. Together with the causes added at the end of experiments. casual and explanatory. Zagorin’s analysis of the “axiom” seems superficial. SEH II. such as the proposition concerning the impossibility of annihilation of matter. Some of these observations could have been done 242 Discussing the axioms in the Novum organum. 559). which is the basis for all processes of nature and which guarantees the success of experimentation (the axiom appears in experiment 100. which would anyway run counter to Bacon’s methodology as presented in his Novum organum. the biggest part of Sylva is composed of descriptions of precisely such experimental practices. observations and axioms. whether constative. because some refer to physics and other to metaphysics. 450). the scientist must know the causes of its natures and the axioms for them (SEH II. 3. and neither is enough by itself for the study of nature. namely interventionist experiments. It is true that many of the observations found in Sylva are taken from other authors and explained through Bacon’s matter theory. 490. This is why the material for a natural history must contain both. “axioms” refer to something common and general. moreover. Also.243 The empirical instances should first be classified according to their relation to nature. the difference being in the class of objects they refer to. Thus. Bacon concludes by stating “this axiom is of large extent. Bacon draws a clear distinction between mere experiences of phenomena and interventions into nature. refer to the most profound processes of matter. which manage to “bind Proteus. they are provisional and must be tested by further experimentation.other words. but the “rule” into which it is transformed in the operative science is. 243 When presenting the axiom on the sympathy and antipathy between plants. 2. SEH II. Vulgar experiences and experiments As shown above. But other axioms found in Sylva. phenomena are always explained. SEH II. 588-89. exp.” Both practices are important parts of a natural history. to conduct the experiment himself. 3. George Sandys travelled to France. medical instances. However. unless he considers it completely false. In all these cases. 246 Monardes. 461. it would have been impossible for Bacon to record the phenomena himself: such is the case of singular phenomena (such as the eruption of flames in Media reported by Pseudo-Aristotle244) or information about foreign countries (the various observations taken from Sandys’ Travailes245 or Monardes’ Medical History246).by Bacon himself. the complexity of their experimental set-ups and the types of result they bring. even within the realm of natural history. but are already designed as experiments producing great effects in nature. Travailes (1615). Palestine. Turkish Empire. because their theme is. the first bring light into the causes of distinct phenomena in nature. in other cases. Sinai. spiritual magic and divination Among the experiments of fruit. Historia médicinal. Even when it was impossible for him. the explanations he added to explain it were always his own. 245 90 . for whatever reason. Chapter 3 will provide a classification of these experiments. we must rely again on a previously mentioned distinction: the distinction between experiments of light and experiments of fruit. 4. even though some of the phenomena are presented as doubtful. while. When it comes to the interventionist instances. specially designed to effect changes in nature. Bacon probably used John Frampton’s translation into English (Joyful news) or Charles de l’Écluse’s translation into Latin (De simplicibus medicamentis). They do not test imperfect rules and axioms. Operative instances: medical receipts. Sandys. Cyprus and Sicily. Bacon takes on observations about several of these places. Bacon did not necessarily borrow the causal explanation together with the observation. will be the subject of chapters 4 and 5. but especially about the Turkish Empire and Egypt. according to the questions they answer. As mentioned earlier. The first class of experiments. 2. occupies an 244 See exp. separated from the simple study of the phenomenon. All of them are experiments that require previous knowledge of nature. spiritual magic and divination. 4. Egypt. 361. Experiments of fruit. a special place is given to medical instances. SEH II. In those few cases when he took the explanation together with the report. Italy. As explained earlier. it is very easy to establish how these can be integrated in his natural philosophy and become part of the system. Bacon offers an explanation of the phenomena on the basis of the records he finds in books. however. I would like to mention here those experiments that constitute the subject of special histories. but a collection of successful remedies.extensive proportion of century I.249 As with the medical instances. “Two Montpellier Recipe Collections.” 16-17. and sometimes even with black magic.247 These experiments are constructed upon Bacon’s theory of alimentation. The last century of Sylva is about the transmission of immaterial species and the work of the imagination. “Observations. Bacon starts by delimiting himself not only from “some darksome authors of magic.) will inquire with all sobriety and severity. See McVaugh. “Experiment solitary touching stanching of blood” (66). Because this practice was associated with magic. though they were not presented as the product of the author’s own experience. “Experiment solitary touching cure by motion of consent” (63). Plato and Paracelsus. The problem is that the entities upon which they work are minds and spirits. Bacon calls these experiments of spiritual magic “operations. whether there be to be found in the footsteps of nature any such transmission and influx of immateriate virtues. (lucerna Dei spiraculum hominis. Labelled ‘experimenta’.248 Many of the experiments and medical theories from these experiments are to be found in the Historia vitae et mortis. under the title “operations. thus it is more difficult to establish laws in these 247 “Experiments in consort touching purging medicines” (36-44). 249 The introduction to the last century. after criticising these schools. “Experiment solitary touching preparation before purging. these Montpellier receipt collections must be understood as claiming to assemble fortuitous practical discoveries of the professor” (178). McVaugh says: “the term did not carry its modern sense in the Middle Ages. “Experiment solitary touching Filum Medicinale” (60). They are not to be considered “anticipations of nature. that hold firm to the works of God. these are most likely not to succeed. the author’s own practical experience.” The second special class of experiments of fruit is spiritual magic. ideas from traditional medicine about the effects of certain plants. but to an event lying outside that rational order. ends with this affirmation: “But we. “Experiment solitary touching cure by custom” (61). which in turn is based upon experimentation and also upon some general. “Experiments in consort touching meats and drinks that are most nourishing” (45-59). “Experiment solitary touching change of aliments and medicines (67). and not to be either contemned or condemned. see also Park. either upon the body imaginant or upon another body.” but must be seen as the result of this alimentary theory. it should be noted that in the Middle Ages. which could be known only by directly experiencing it and which could not be rationally foreseen. any thing that is clean and pure natural. and what the force of imagination is. including published collections. which is God’s lamp. “Experiment solitary touching cure by excess” (62). 91 . 641). Experiment solitary touching diets” (68).” but also from authors like Pythagoras. And although we shall have occasion to speak of this in more places than one. and to the sense. wherein it will be like that labour of Hercules in purging the stable of Augeas. widely accepted. About the frequent use of the term experimentum. it referred not to an event planned to illustrate the rational order of nature. which can react in several ways (and may attempt to resist the experiments). 248 Though not experimental in a strong sense. to separate from superstitious and magical arts and observations.” These two collections had the title of experimenta added by a later hand and were attributed to some professors of medicine at the University of Montpellier. yet we will now make some entrance thereinto” (SEH II. For the association between the term “experiment” and medical receipts. and setting of the body afterwards” (65). sometimes containing information from a wide range of sources. “Experiment solitary touching cure of diseases which are contrary to predispositions” (64). or the oral tradition.” Among all experiments or operations performed by the natural philosophers. An ‘experimentum’ was an event which was purely contingent. the term “experiment” was used in the titles of medical receipts. e. the century is highly classificatory and exemplificative. SEH II. represents a premonition of the mind of things to come. even those that do not possess senses (i. will. has not so far been addressed in the secondary literature. but because the human vital spirit is much more complex. 5. However. SEH IV. chap. In fact. Divination by influxion is an illumination concerning the future. 399. at the end of the division of the soul of man. received from God. which supposes the mind to be separated from the body (and which appears more often during sleep. introduction to exp. all bodies have perception. the operation becomes more difficult. None of these divisions is made explicitly in Sylva. These signs are given by “perception. 801. being also filled with advice on how the techniques can be improved. these faculties can have the power to diminish or even to stop an operation coming from the exterior. On this see section 3. the very subtle signs need to be read by someone knowing their significance. where mind and signs work together. in ecstasies and in proximity to death). having also imagination. which is very important for Bacon because it is what individuates bodies. Briefly.”251 Natural divination itself has two subdivisions: primitive divination and divination by influxion. 251 DAS. The last class of experiments that pertains to this group of special instances requiring previous knowledge is natural divination. inanimate bodies and plants). and which can also work at a distance. Artificial divination is concerned with the knowledge of the future by way of argument (forming conclusions on the basis of signs and tokens). In other words. without the help of signs. and in which a kind of divination called “natural” is presented (at the beginning of century IX). The former is presented in the De augmentis scientiarum as having two sides: artificial and natural. III. 3.cases. Bacon mentions two sciences that cannot be included in any branch of philosophy of the soul. Perception is more subtle than the senses in those bodies that have both. I take this to constitute a separate class because in De augmentis scientiarum. These two sciences are divination and fascination. but are appendices to both the “Substance and Faculties of the Soul” and “Use and Objects of the Faculties” (see Appendix 1).” which is the quality of bodies to accept what is agreeable and to exclude what is not.250 This is why Bacon starts with admonitions and requirements that could help the performance of these operations. 92 . 602-03. This requires knowledge from the interpreter in order to understand the subtle signs existing in the objects. 250 The appetites of matter which they manipulate are the same. The notion of perception. where the distinction between natural and artificial is abolished. natural divination “forms a passage from an inward presentiment of the mind. Primitive divination. 252 See SS.252 The great advantage of this science is that it can read the future before actual signs appear and can discover what is hidden in nature. before the proper effects to become manifest: the experimenter must know when the perfect time has come to perform the experiment. II. and reason. There is however one last characteristic of his instances and of his writings in general which has yet to be analysed in detail. This pedagogical function of experiments takes many forms in Sylva. looking at his early writings. 4. Conclusion: Sylva’s variety of instances This section has provided a classification of the instances found in Sylva. 4. Bacon started to be more concerned with the transmission of knowledge than with its discovery. the same instance can (and has to) be put under more than one title. His detailed records also have the function of teaching the reader how to use this knowledge for the performing and recording of further experiments. these texts “form an extended reflection on the best way of establishing and retaining textual authority while avoiding the deceptive or ‘magistral’ modes of instruction which Bacon deplores in the philosophy of the ancients” (83). Of course. Bacon was more concerned with heuristic and propaedeutic aspects than with epistemological ones. In doing so. OFB XI. 469). many scholars have argued that. and also so that their industry will be stirred up to look for more exact ways (if possible) of doing the experiment” (PAH aph. Cogitata et visa and Redargutio philosophiarum.253 In his late writings. The pedagogical function of experiments As we could see in the second section of this chapter. Bacon agrees that each experiment must be validated before its inclusion in a natural history. so that the reader is enabled to perform the experiments himself. However. It also makes it less difficult to connect it with other instances spread over Sylva. in the end. in the author’s words. or. 254 Bacon places the detailed description of how an experiment has to be performed among the five extra features of a natural history in his Parasceve: “in the case of any new or more subtle experiment. it is true that Bacon seems very preoccupied with the recording of the experimental procedure. experiments studying different phenomena will have different procedures. 9. but also at the macrolevel of constructing grouping instances and constructing natural histories. 5. and this is their pedagogical function. of his natural philosophy.” argues that in the three early texts Temporis partus masculus. the problem of authority has to do with both the way in which Bacon uses authority and the way in which he should differentiate himself from these authors with respect to the transmission of his own ideas. 3. By using this classification it is also easier to establish Bacon’s originality and the complexity of his natural histories and.254 Of course. during the last period of his life. 2. it will be easier to establish what Bacon’s intention was when writing and including it in his Sylva. 93 . 4. but Bacon’s experiments teach the reader how to identify the relevant parameters and how to record what is essential in the results. Of course. the way of performing it should be added so that people will be free to make up their minds whether it is trust worthy or not.2. he appeals to others 253 Colclough. to be found at the micro-level of single instances. one can already find transmission among Bacon’s preoccupations. Thus when he admits to not having performed an experiment borrowed from elsewhere. in “Non canimus surdis. but gives indications on how to perform them. there is no conflict to be seen in Bacon’s writings. or upon another. But if one notices the pedagogical function of these experiments. I say. SEH II 507-08). producing a “temperate heat. Bacon gives advice on how to develop the experiment in order to bring more light upon the given phenomenon. take silver. let the heat be such as may keep the metal perpetually molten. there are experiments designed by Bacon himself in order to be performed by others. by weight. that we have set down particulars untried. there must be added some “oiled substance”: Let there be a small furnace made. and generally. OFB XI. which is the metal that in nature symbolizeth most with gold. This feature of Sylva has so far been interpreted negatively. The experiment calls for the use of a small furnace. that there be at some times an injection of some oiled substance. and this is to lay the parts more close and smooth. using a similar experiment. 469). of a temperate heat. wanting instances which do occur.” For the material used Bacon prescribes silver. I wish also. while Bacon constantly accuses previous philosophies of including untried particulars and theorizing upon them as if they were certain. Bacon was aware of this feature of Sylva and that it might be considered a weakness of the book. and no more. we shall give directions of the most likely trials. for contrariwise.255 More interestingly. which is the main work. 546. both these to quicken and open the body of the metal. or at least mentions why they are important for a given subject. we account such particulars more worthy than those that are already tried and known. on the manufacture of gold. He does not base his theories on these unperformed experiments.to perform it. to prompt and encourage further investigation” (PAH aph. For the material. which by vexing with separations hath been made churlish. but facts) should be added. for these latter must be taken as you find them. Moreover. but the other do level point-blank at the inventing of causes and axioms” (SS intro to exp. put in also with the silver. Another way to involve the reader is by using experientia literata: after the description of an experiment. he explains that the invention of these new experiments is positive in itself. and a twelfth part of nitre. The process must be done for six months. or think that it is an over-haste. for that above all importeth to the work. in our own estimation. is a very good example of how the function appears in the experiments collated in Sylva. 94 . a tenth part of quicksilver. with a tenth part of quicksilver and a twelfth of nitre. 9. The charge has been that Sylva contains many untried experiments. we would not have those that read this our work of Sylva Sylvarum account it strange. even when they have not been performed yet: “Wherefore. such as they use in the recovering of gold. and so let the work be continued by the space of six months at the least. For gold (as we see) is the 255 This is presented as the first extra feature of a natural history in the Parasceve: “questions (not about causes. During the process. In century VI. Experiment 327. Note. Next to silver. Bacon starts with an introduction in which he first criticizes the alchemists for vain imagination and wrong theories concerning the transmutation of metals into gold. the experimenter should allow for enough time for the fulfilment of the work. because it is the heaviest. and the means to do this is by the separation of grosser and finer parts. and is likewise the most flexible and tensible.”257 These axioms of maturation were partly presented in previous experiments (those concerning the maturation of drinks and fruits). 327. each of them being present in the proper construction of the experiment. SEH II. and lastly. though some parallels can be easily drawn between these processes. 316). for quicksilver will not endure the manage of the fire. there is the necessity of the congregation of spirits together because they digest the grosser parts more perfectly (exp. In order to construct the experiment. that to think to make gold of quicksilver. the space of six months of six and the oiled substance of 256 257 SS exp. silver for five. Again. introduction to exp. the equal distribution of heat and the refining of the spirit. the grosser parts are digested (exp. 95 . When it comes to the description of the experiment proper. The axioms of maturation of metals do not follow from these or from the experiments constructed so as to put them into practice.256 The entire instance is much longer than the report of the experiment proper. Bacon’s attitude is legitimate given that the alchemists were considered to be authoritative on this issue and that it was necessary to show their opinion to be false before offering a different solution. 327. SEH II. 312). quicksilver and nitre of axiom two. because gold is the result of “a perfect good concoction or digestion or maturation of some metals. Here the theory is only sketched.closest (and therefore the heaviest) of metals. All six axioms are to be put into practice in this experiment: the temperate heat represents the application of axioms one and three. all the parts of the spirit must be detained in the metal. the metal used should be the most similar to gold. In the case of metals. Bacon first writes down the axioms of maturations. Bacon explains all the details of the process at length. I think copper were fittest to be the material. the spirit of the metal has to be quickened and the parts opened. is a thing not to be hoped. the calling forth of its spirits and their smooth spreading are needed. For liquors. 449. but not all of them rely on the knowledge of the maturation of drinkable liquids and fruit: a temperate heat must be used (because it digests better). the spirit must be uniformly spread and must have a regular motion. there are six axioms to be known in advance. 450. For fruit. SS. axiom four. imperfect rules and axioms. Conclusion: Sylva sylvarum in the context of natural and experimental history In the previous section. and not with the intention of laying down the law. For they are useful if not altogether true. speculations (provisional causes). or at least so far undiscovered which fall under the 96 . Bacon included operations that require previous knowledge of nature. It becomes clear that under the title “experiment. But starting to write his natural histories for the Instauratio magna. Many other experiments are however developments of previous experiments. or imperfect axioms. Even within the fully experimental instances. I outline and establish rules (yet only provisional ones). incentives to practice (advice on how certain topics should be further investigated by the readers). As we will see in chapter 3. I set out works and things deemed impossible. 2. 5. I tried to cover the entire realm of instances in Sylva sylvarum. Bacon specifies the entities which are part of a natural history. which crop up in the course of inquiry. and are fully exploratory. without having a theory-testing function. for men’s attention and memory (…). It is true that many of them do test a hypothesis – either Bacon’s own or the hypotheses of a different author. Bacon changed the description of natural histories and enlarged both the variety of components and the functions of the histories. certain imperfect attempts at the interpretation of causes. a list of those things which could and should be discovered. are open-ended with respect to possible results. In any case. I put forward speculations and. (…) I subjoin incentives to practice. not all experiments require the existence of previous axioms in order to be successfully designed. I do this sparingly. but only provided the experimental setup so that his readers could execute it. as it were. and a list of things already discovered: I append my observations on the history and experiments so as to make the interpretation of nature readier. it is clear Bacon did not perform the experiment.” Bacon included many non-experimental and even non-empirical instances. In the introduction to Historia naturalis et experimentalis. and this seems to be in conflict with his general opinion on natural histories as stores of data used to build up a natural philosophy. besides history (mere experience) and experiments: observations upon the body of the history. more to hint at what might be the case than to present it cut and dried. ” 260 “[…] as. but that every one is spherical. the three special operative instances covered in section 2. without which his natural history would be no different from prior histories. that Venus never moves more than 46 degrees from the Sun. given in the previous section of this chapter.258 It seems almost unnecessary to emphasize that all of these items pertain to our classification of instances. namely medical receipts. Indeed. Mercury never more than 23. Parasceve 9. 3. OFB XI. like Delta. Crown. This necessary inclusion of theoretical elements is emphasized also in the Parasceve: “it would be a good idea to intersperse observations now and then as C. that we do not find any oblong or triangular star. in the history of the heavenly bodies. and that the planets above the Sun move the slowest. or that the stars are scattered with no order whatever so that we find no quincunx or rectangle or any other regular shape (despite the names they give them. The Historia vitae et mortis is a medical history. This theme in fact occupies a great deal of space at the end of the respective chapters. and hardly even a straight line except perhaps in the belt and dagger of Orion” (Parasceve 9. spiritual magic and natural divination. Bacon states the importance of having theoretical observations attached to the history.. Cross. The inclusion of operative instances might also seem misplaced for a natural history.individual titles. Importantly. that the shape of the land masses relative to the seas is (according to current knowledge) narrow and tapering towards the south but good and broad towards the north. in the history of the heavenly bodies. which were. Pliny has done. without providing a basis for a philosophy to be built upon them. for instance. OFB XI. 469. as it were. 261 “There is also another kind of observation that we should include which has never yet been brought into use though it is of no little importance. and together with them. as covered in section 2. This is what I mean: that we should add those things which do and do not exist – as. OFB XI. the main part of the text being 258 HNE. or looks hirsute but is spherical in the middle like the Sun.”259 Rules must also be included. whose aim is to be used for the discovery of causes.”260 The third type of observation that should be part of a natural history is of those things that do and do not exist.). far distant from the Earth as they are. are all to be found in the Latin natural histories. whereas the planets beneath it move fastest”( Parasceve. but what Bacon understands by “rules” are “general and catholic observations. it will become obvious that Bacon is keenly interested in applying the discoveries of his histories to the improvement of human life. whereas with the shape of the seas the opposite is true. I subjoin things already discovered and lying within human power. either plain spherical like the Moon. if we look at the published natural histories. 3. 5.261 that is. Bacon’s example is from a possible history of earth and sea: “as in the History of Earth and Sea. except perhaps in the highest polar latitudes. OFB XII. Chariot etc. 471). 3. gathered for themselves. and that the great ocean basins divide the lands from north to south and not from east to west. 471). or looks spiky but is spherical in the middle like the rest of the stars. because they bring valuable information about what is impossible and can therefore not be created by operative philosophy. 9. aph. Bacon insists on the importance of their inclusion. of those things or phenomena that cannot exist. 259 97 . 15-17.. And yet. 4. 98 . as the Historia ventorum clearly shows. The Latin natural histories. 245: “If a man could arrange to put into an old body spirits of the kind characteristic of a young one. For the first. we may state that those instances that made Sylva seem so very different from a natural history are those that Bacon himself decided to include in the histories “kept for himself. OFB XII. and where he also formulates many desiderata and gives a great deal of advice for further experimentation. At the beginning. Bacon explains how divination works and why is important to use in respect to the winds: “natural divination is sometimes more certain. 107-21. along with the theoretical works. it is one of the ways in which the discovery of winds can be used.” 263 See HV.” The differences between the Latin natural histories and Sylva reside in the latter’s lack of structure and the fact that the various instances carry each an appropriate title in the Latin histories. lesser wheels into reverse. which will show that the experiments of light must be interpreted in order to understand the role Bacon assigned to them in the production of knowledge. then. OFB XII. 262 See HVM. But if that subject be of a constant and regular nature. Moreover. in particular. where Bacon offers a full account of the way in which experiments are designed and results are reported. it is likely that this mighty wheel might put the other. I mixing in some prognostics of rain and good weather which could not well be separated from them” (107). spiritual magic is found in the same text. Bacon was aware of the importance of the experiment for the progress of knowledge and of the many functions it could have. the pedagogical function of experiments can be found. the prediction may let you down. so we hear that the transmission of young spirits can prolong the life of an old man.). are proof of this. it makes for certain prediction. In conclusion.formed by operations (upon the body. By the same token. in the Historia densi et rari. Some of these functions will be analysed in the following chapter. and sometimes more slippery according to the subject under consideration.262 As for natural divination. the existence of the term “experiment” in each title should not mislead us into concluding that Bacon did not have a strong and clear sense of what “experiment” is. and turn back the course of nature. upon the blood. etc. while all are indiscriminately called “experiments” in Sylva. I have argued that this fragmentary structure is used by Bacon as a method to select his readers – only the prepared ones are able to see the connection and the unity between separate phenomena. but if it be variable and a mixture as it were of the natural and accidental.263 Finally. (…) So l will now set forth prognostics of winds. e. My proposed classification cannot aspire to offer a complete and comprehensive system. Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to explore the variety of experiments in Sylva sylvarum. 1. there is a class of experiments that are used as simplified models of natural processes.” Furthermore.Chapter 3: Types of “Experiments of Light” in Sylva sylvarum 3. with a particular focus on what Bacon calls “experiments of light. The fourth class is that of experiments constructed to explore the changes in the properties of bodies during a certain process. According to the role they play in the production of knowledge. evidence exists that Bacon himself performed them. At any rate. Experiments in the fifth class are directed towards establishing correlations between visible and invisible properties of bodies. In the second. one can distinguish between at least six different types or classes of experiments “of light. It will be claimed that among these. from the way in which the “experiments” are designed. experiments directed towards the production of knowledge. I place those experiments that are directed towards testing experiments. direct. I propose to place Bacon’s experiments into six classes.” i. trials or observations that have been proposed by ancient or modern authors. it becomes clear that Bacon intended them to serve different functions. The previous chapter has shown that among the one thousand so-called “experiments” of Sylva sylvarum there are experiments properly speaking. or else because the extant manuscript mentions such details even when they are absent from the published text. In the first class. I place experiments directed towards the illustration of Bacon’s matter theory. but can certainly serve as a provisional and tentative attempt to clarify and understand the diverse roles played by the different types of experiments in Bacon’s Sylva. which is why it seems useful to render these differences evident by means of a classification. either because of the details and quantitative features that are recorded in the text of Sylva. It is also clear that Bacon was aware of all these differences. in the case of some of these experiments. instrumental and controlled interventions into the course of nature. I catalogue in a third class experiments that are designed so as to refute a received theory or opinion. Further research into this relatively under-examined text might generate additional 99 . that is to say. And lastly. since commonplace books typically had teaching as their main purpose.” The first to emphasize the connection between the rhetorical tradition and Bacon’s scientific method was Paolo Rossi. For the influence of the rhetoric tradition see 135-51 and 186-223. such as “Francis Bacon on Natural History and Natural Magic: The Mystery of Sylva Sylvarum” (Princeton University. This line of interpretation is not very different from the view of the nineteenth-century editors of Sylva sylvarum.264 Following this trend. It is only recently that this work has attracted serious scholarly attention. “Quantifying.). but merely devices to illustrate. According to a recent trend in Bacon scholarship. such as the refutation of old theories and the establishment of facts.classes of experiments. As we have seen in the previous chapters (sections 1. 325-29. in his preface. 2). for example. 2015). 2012). Indeed. 268 Graham Rees. most discussions of Bacon’s concept of “experiment” in fact ignore Sylva and tend to focus on Bacon’s more theoretical writings. and “Bacon and Rhetoric. Rees has particularly emphasized the role played by experiments in a general programme of measuring nature. several workshops have been organized recently with Sylva as their subject. 266 Sylva sylvarum will be republished in the Oxford Francis Bacon (forthcoming. Dana Jalobeanu has discussed other functions of Baconian experimentation and has used examples from Sylva to show how experiments can play a role in the classification of 264 This is Brian Vickers’ reading of Sylva and of Bacon’s natural histories in general. some scholars have claimed that Sylva does not contain any experiments properly speaking. little has been done so far to disentangle the various meanings of “experiment” at work in Bacon’s Sylva. only identified a few of the types and classes of experimental activities that are actually found in this work. 210). Graham Rees has underlined the important role experiments played in Bacon’s philosophy and the long process that some of the experiments reported in Sylva have undergone. and more specifically his theory of the appetites. teach and persuade the reader. the experimental discourse in Sylva sylvarum should be read in the light of strategies of rhetoric and persuasion. and 2. According to Guido Giglioni. for whom Sylva is “one of the most literary and unscientific books produced in the first half of the seventeenth century” (Francis Bacon.266 The recent scholarship that has examined the role of experiments in Sylva sylvarum has.” 501ff.268 Continuing in the direction of Rees’ view of the matter. See “Francis Bacon and the Progress.267 In a series of articles.265 This verdict was influential in diverting scholarly attention away from Sylva. With respect to Giglioni. 265 SEH II. 6. the experiments in Sylva are used to illustrate Bacon’s matter theory. besides illustration of matter theory. Rees accepts additional functions for experiments. Robert Ellis described this work as a compilation of second-hand material borrowed from other books. however. 14-27 May. 267 See “Mastering the Appetites.” 100 . Moreover.” Bacon’s experimental activities are seen by Giglioni as “a programme of conducting experiments on the primordial appetites of matter” (ibid. After all. Because of the twin ordering criteria of complexity and result-type. 3. including the level of theory involved in its construction. I discuss these classes in ascending order. “Redefining the Role of Experiment”. limited themselves to the Latin natural histories. however. there has been recent research into the various ways in which particular experiments reported in Sylva were received. in concept formation and in the modelling of natural phenomena. Dumitru. “Mersenne Translator”. for two reasons.” See Georgescu & Giurgea. Marin Mersenne. “Learning. In order shed some light on this complexity.270 I will begin this chapter with a critical discussion of this recent secondary literature.” 271 Both Manzo. reproduced and continued in the second half of the seventeenth century by Isaac Beeckman. in the third section of this chapter I shall discuss in detail these six classes by offering relevant examples for each. René Descartes. They go from a description of natural phenomena (even when nature is forced to unveil itself. 270 101 . appropriated. Gemelli: “Isaac Beckman as a Reader”. “Weighing Experience” look predominantly at the Historia densi et rari.269 Finally. Scholarly views on the function of Bacon’s experiments in Sylva sylvarum The path opened up by Graham Rees’ analysis of Bacon’s natural philosophy and the role experiments play within it has been further explored over the last years by a small number of scholars.phenomena and processes. Gabriel Plattes. with the aim of showing that it does not give credit to the complexity of Baconian experimentation. to interpretation of the phenomena of matter in terms of the inner processes of matter at the other. which they took to be a mere second-hand collection of materials. “Crucial Instances. Entre el atomismo y la alquimia and Pastorino. They become more complicated as we advance through the hierarchy of classes. ignoring Sylva. Bucolini. most of whom. the different classes of experiment also have different places in the construction of a natural history. I will claim that one can distinguish in Sylva hitherto unrecognized classes and types of experiments. The classes of experiment are also ordered by the types of results they bring about. The classification starts with experiments that are simple with respect to the entire experimental set-up. and others. and mere experience could not have brought the information provided) at one extreme.271 Let us take a closer look at the few exceptions to this rule. First it is important to notice the complexity of the experiments. 269 Dana Jalobeanu. Robert Hooke. Matei: “Husbanding Creation”. 2. It would seem that for Giglioni. nor with the latitude of meanings that the term “experiment” possesses in that work.). entitled “An Unpublished Manuscript by Francis Bacon: Sylva Sylvarum Drafts and Other Working Notes” and “Quantitative Reasoning in Francis Bacon’s Natural Philosophy. “Mastering. But this type of experiment takes up a very small portion of Sylva’s one thousand “experiments. Graham Rees has never subjected the functions of experiments in this particular work to scrutiny. in documenting his claim. This is because his article is mainly concerned with the appetitive nature of pneumatic matter and because it takes experiments to serve only as illustrations of Bacon’s view. However. Rees ascribes to Bacon’s experiments many more functions than Giglioni does.”272 However.” Sylva resembles the Latin natural histories. Ibid. Bacon invoked experiments only so as to exemplify and describe. According to Giglioni. his article about the functions of experiments in the Latin natural histories is also useful for our current purpose of establishing the functions of experiments in Sylva. Giglioni does not do justice to the variety of entities out of which Sylva is composed (classified in our previous chapter. Despite being the first to have brought Sylva to the attention of scholars.” Moreover. to test fundamental aspects of theories and to eliminate – through 272 Giglioni. “Mastering the Appetites of Matter.One of these is Guido Giglioni’s article.. Still. As for the experiments reported in Historia densi et rari.” which starts from the assumption that Bacon’s view of nature was grounded on ontological realism: the activity of nature precedes the knowledge of man. the thematic scope of Sylva is much larger than the pneumatic matter with which Giglioni concerns himself. The idea that Bacon brought experiments to bear on the sensible aspects of his matter theory had already been formulated by Graham Rees in two articles.273 Admittedly. Bacon does in several instances use experiments in that way – as exemplifications of his matter theory.” 273 102 . and its main purpose is to experiment with them. Bacon chose against “writing in the abstract. as the previous chapter has shown. for example. section 2. Sylva deals with appetites. especially because he points out that with respect to its “experimentalist nature. So as to expose his views on material appetites. 4.” However.” preferring instead “describing and performing experiments that aimed specifically to disclose the appetitive nature of matter. 152: “Bacon’s main aim in his experimental study of nature was therefore to provide a description of the basic appetites of matter at work in the most common operations of nature. Francis Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum.” 150. whether Bacon’s view on pneumatic matter was shaped or modified in any way by the experimental evidence remains unclear from Giglioni’s article. Rees discerns several functions: to establish facts. theoretical interventions play an important role and influence the experiment o a greater extent than is presupposed by variation of parameters. A caveat is needed here. The first such function is that displayed by “exploratory experiments” – experiments that conjoin phenomena that at first sight pertain to different realms. however. experiments could serve a multitude of functions has been further developed by Dana Jalobeanu. who has individuated additional functions. Rees’ notion that. depends above all on the interaction between experimental set-ups and quantitative reasoning. I shall indicate a number of problems affecting the previous classifications and propose some adjustments. These experiments play an important role in concept formation. In this case. the “experiments” or instances presented in Sylva are very diverse.” 103 . for Bacon.274 The thrust of Rees’ argument. 6. Moreover. Jalobeanu does not explain how the transfer of knowledge is permitted and what the role of Bacon’s matter theory is in the construction of such experiments.” 48. studying the same phenomenon in different domains of knowledge and with different experimental set-ups. Jalobeanu’s examples go beyond what Steinle considers “exploratory experiments” in to be “systematic variation of experimental parameters”275. Besides which. The final function that Jalobeanu distinguishes is modelling. 3.).” see Friedrich Steinle. I shall propose a more finely grained taxonomy by adding new functions. In what follows. and less on the function and importance of the experiments themselves. 3.” However. This is not the only way in which experiments design models. I will come back to this later on in this chapter (3. “Experiments in History. Even those experiments that come closest to our modern understanding in proposing interventions into nature are 274 275 Rees. from a number of points of view. “Quantitative Reasoning.falsification – competing theories. they have more of the attributes of a natural history. 3. What Jalobeanu calls “exploratory experiments” are what Rees called experiments “establishing facts. the secondary literature ascribes a number of functions to the thousand so-called experiments contained in Bacon’s Sylva. As we have seen. experiments that fall into this category study on a smaller scale what cannot be investigated through experimentation on the normal scale. as definitions of phenomena are given in term of parameters identified during the experimental procedure. For a definition of “exploratory experiments. Experiments directed towards the production of knowledge As should have become clear in the previous chapter. explain or refute a theory or an experimental result reported in the earlier literature. My purpose shall now be to offer a classification of those experiments that deal specifically with the production of knowledge.themselves diverse. which contains a list with the pairs of simple natures. (6) models of natural processes. and the results are less for further use in the advancement of learning than to confirm. namely their complexity and the type of results they generate. which discuss the principles of things – Sulphur and Mercury – or else to the introduction to experiment 840. (2) rejection of experiments proposed by ancients and moderns. 1. the six functions I assigned to Bacon’s experiments in Sylva sylvarum are: (1) illustration of matter theory.” scholars have tended to refer mainly to the speculative instances of Sylva: they have pointed to experiment 98. In fact.” I shall do so according to two characteristics. whoever wishes to understand Bacon’s complex vitalist matter theory would be well advised to look at the instances where Bacon records adequate experimental procedures. In this vein. However. The first function of experiments: illustrations of matter theory As we have seen. The other three classes display an ascending level of complexity in their construction and in their results. when discussing the allegedly illustrative function played by “experiments. in particular those complex experiments that pertain to the last three classes. These passages are. (4) exploration of the properties of bodies during the development of a process. and their functions and aims. 104 . Sylva has often been regarded as an illustration of Bacon’s speculative programme.” under which everything in Sylva is placed. the presence of causal explanations. Note also that from a methodological point of view many experiments could be included in more than one class. the level at which these explanations work. according to their respective subject matter and structure. (3) refutation of theories or opinions formulated by Bacon’s predecessors. 3. The experiments from the first three classes are often simple constructions. they are not experiments properly speaking. (5) establishment of correlations between those properties of the bodies that cannot be observed by the senses. that is to say. of course. As already mentioned. 3. but speculative instances placed under the same general title of “experiment. important for the structure of Sylva. in which Bacon distinguishes between the tangible and the pneumatic and gives a definition of pneumatic matter. It has already been mentioned that Bacon often uses the same experiments for different purposes and while investigating distinctive phenomena. or to experiments 355-59. those that Bacons labels “the experiments of light. Bacon illustrates his notion of “perception” in plants. chap. being based on a superficial knowledge of nature (external similarities between things). for it “discovereth perception in plants to move towards that which should help and comfort them. it perceives the disruption of its continuity. which yet is reputed the normal measure of heat and cold” (Ibid. This phenomenon is presented as an instance of sympathy. but he only completed the preface. 280 After enumerating some activities of which perception is the source. 279 DAS IV. 489). which. A body perceives the passages by which it enters.276 or action at a distance. and avoiding what is hostile and foreign. it perceives the removal of another body which held it fast. And air perceives heat and cold so acutely. its appetites and simple motions. when it recovers itself. if it be true.” (HSAR. it will grow that way. The ancient tradition of the vine is far more strange: it is.280 Thus it becomes clear that by means of this particular experiment. according to Bacon.). SEH II. though it be at a distance. Let us take a look at some such experiments that illustrate the theory of matter. Bacon illustrates a specific feature of his theory of matter. even though the level of explanation varies from one experiment to another. 105 . the cucumbers “drink” the water: they grow so much towards the pot as to touch it.”278 “Perception” is. Sylva stands in a close relation to Bacon’s speculative philosophy. Bacon planned to write a natural history of sympathy and antipathy as one of the six histories in the Historia naturalis et experimentalis. It is. that if. but this of the stake seemeth to be a reasonable discourse” (SS exp. that if you set a stake or prop some distance from it. “a kind of choice in receiving what is agreeable. However. 278 Ibid. and of the conjunction of what is active with what is passive. Bacon concludes: “For what need is there of enumerating such things? Since no body when placed near another either changes it or is changed by it. to be sure. unless a reciprocal perception precede the operation. 462. you set a pot of water about five or six inches distance from it. SEH IV. and not on the knowledge of hidden qualities of matter. in short there is Perception everywhere. OFB XIII. 276 According to Bacon. namely the existence of “perception” as a source of activity in matter. it must be noted that Bacon criticized the Renaissance theory of the sympathies and antipathies as being “fantastical” and untrue. These two actions are “the spurs of motions and keys of works. which is far stranger (as is said) than the other. III. 277 “(. it is an experiment of an higher nature than belongeth to this title: for it discovereth perception in plants to move towards that which should help and comfort them. 135). though it be at a distance. He claims that if we put cucumbers at a distance of five or six inches from a pot of water and leave them there for twenty-four hours.”279 It is the major cause for the interaction between bodies and hence generally a major source of activity in nature. of the mixture and separation of parts. that its perception is far more subtle than that of the human touch..) it is further reported. for example. 402. as cucumbers “perceive” the water and are attracted by it. which for a time it resists. it perceives the force of another body to which it yields. These notions come back several times in Sylva.Because of the provisional causal explanations that are offered at the end of most experiments. it will in twenty-four hours shoot so much out as to touch the pot. when a cucumber is grown. the sympathies and the antipathies represent the cause of the union and flight of bodies.. The most challenging explanations are those in which Bacon provides the causes of a visible process that has been subject to a controlled experimental procedure involving what he takes to be the basic activity of matter. for that water may work by a sympathy of attraction. In experiment 462.277 This claim is presented in an experiment which illustrates an important element of Bacon’s matter theory. “Mastering. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (s. the Cucumbers will grow backward and crooked. the list of simple motions appears in the “Instances of Wrestling” (or “Instances of Ascendency”). 284 The “appetites” are the primary desires of matter. the simple motions are listed as letters of the alphabet of nature and are grouped in four classes. metals or flames (SEH II.282 The underlying idea is once more that wool “perceived” and “attracted” the verjuice with such a force that it brought about the evaporation of the liquid. several interventionist 281 MN 3. namely the appetite of a thing to unite itself with other bodies.” through percolation) and its eventual condensation in the pores of the wool.285 In fact. Bacon describes how some newly shorn wool. In this instance there is (upon the by) to be noted. and their desire to change.not a particularly sophisticated experiment. 191- 106 . as a condiment. This motion (which Giglioni also calls “appetite”) is. 79. the percolation or suing of the verjuice through the wood. According to Bacon. see Giglioni. if there be no water in the vessel. chap. so as it seemeth it must be first in a kind of vapour. The “simple motions” are the consequences of the appetites of matter. drank all the liquid.” where Bacon theorizes upon a theme that he had illustrated in several previous experiments and observations. 373). and had not the bung-hole open. In section 5. Here.” 282 “It is reported also credibly. 285 In the Novum organum.281 A similar and more interesting experimental instance that illustrates the same basic feature of matter is given in experiment 79. its passing through the wood of the vessel containing it (in the form of “spirits. in dry bodies. SEH IV. XIX. formerly much used in cooking. together with the motion of liberty.). All activity in nature is the result of conflicting appetites in bodies and of their interaction. placed on the top of a vessel containing verjuice. SEH II. 3. In the Abecedarium novum naturae. for verjuice of itself would never have passed through the wood. experiment 800. one of the fundamental types of motion found in matter. expressed and formed into a liquor. Della Porta’s explanation is less sophisticated than Bacon’s: “because Cucumbers have such a great delight in moisture. even though the vessel was tightly closed. “verjuice” is “the acid juice of green or unripe grapes. or other sour fruit. or even in the body itself. 600-601).284 These two items occupy a very central place in theoretical writings such as the Novum organum. the De augmentis scientiarum or the Abecedarium novum naturae. Bacon there draws attention to stronger and weaker motions (OFB XI. for example. 356-57). I offer a reinterpretation of the Baconian theory of matter. So that. as the consequence of an interaction. IV. The list of simple motions in the De augmentis scientiarum is presented a part of abstract physics (DAS III. They are a kind of response to changes in the surroundings of the body.283 These experiments on “perception” lead to particularly important items in Bacon’s matter theory. Below. hath drunk up a great part of the verjuice. or for medicinal purposes. that wool new shorn. and it is difficult to determine whether Bacon actually carried it out himself or simply borrowed it from Della Porta and offered an explanation of the phenomenon based his own matter theory. according to Giglioni.v.” 153-54. For a discussion of this motion. though the vessel were whole without any flaw.” 283 See. each corresponding to one of the four fundamental appetites (OFB XIII. found in air. and they also explain natural changes and processes. They give the reason that things in nature differ so much. in liquids. 383-417). This experiment offers a clearer example of how Bacon took “perception” to work and how he took appetitive matter to act more generally. namely the appetites of matter and the simple motions. See the list of appetites and simple motions in Appendix 3. entitled “Experiment solitary touching the restless nature of things in themselves. 108. some bodies are unsatisfied with the state in which they are and have a great appetite to unite with other bodies and thus change their current state. before it pass” (SS exp. crab-apples. being laid casually upon a vessel of verjuice. However. after some time. 287 Ibid. and although it is caused by the body’s appetite to propagate its own nature. It should be mentioned that the list of simple motions differs from one work to another. This “motion of excitation” is present in Sylva in other experimental or theoretical instances. which takes place by “consent of one body with another. In the middle of a piece of melted lead. and also in the list of simple motions (403-405).289 The conversion of water into oil can similarly be brought about through the “motion of 203). but one hidden and dormant. Entre el atomismo. it continues to present a great challenge for Bacon scholars. Without this consent. 847. 288 ANN. in fact it will have become so rigid that that it can be hammered out flat. 107 .experiments in Sylva are accompanied by the explicit claim that they have been designed to illustrate one of the simple motions. when it beginneth to congeal. 451) and 863 (SEH II. “Francis Bacon and the Art–Nature Distinction. namely that there must be in the body a hidden nature ready to embrace a specific nature in order to produce a change in the body. and in the midst of it. the motion of excitation will struggle with other motions and appetites within the body and no change will be produced. this motion is produced by a thing’s appetite for propagating its own nature. it becomes clear why the motion must be preceded by consent. In fact. 441-43). this is an instance of “induration. who continue to differ over the activity of matter. These clarifications make it easier to understand why the quicksilver acts as it does when placed next to lead: the lead excites an already existing hidden nature in quicksilver. According to the Abecedarium novum naturae.” 286 “Take lead and melt it. “Mastering. one puts quicksilver wrapped in linen. namely fixity. rendering it manifest. 199. nor does it change the body it affects completely. and put quicksilver wrapped in a piece of linen into that hole. and motion of excitation to imitate. Weeks. 289 SS exp. it is not as powerful as the motion of assimilation. although the differences are not very significant. Bacon tells us that one way to induce putrefaction is by excitation.”287 As in the previous instances. make a little dint or hole. As for Bacon’s matter theory. the consent between bodies must be present before the action takes place. as some motions disappear and others are added. but changes only one of its natures. OFB XIII. for example. and the quicksilver will fix. the hardening of a body. Experiment 847. these illustrations are experiments properly speaking. 330 (SEH II. Excitation appears in the Novum organum as a “Magical Instance. 627). SEH II.” Giglioni. and endure the hammer” (SS exp. The quicksilver will been seen to stop moving. aph. The experiment works as follows.” that is. 619). 51. and run no more.” the twenty-seventh class of the “Instances with Special Powers” (NO II.286 According to Bacon.”288 In the light of this definition. See Manzo. “Motion of excitation” is defined in the Abecedarium as a motion that does “not so much subdue bodies (which is what assimilation does) as appears to insinuate itself into the other body and excite within it a nature to which it previously had some inclination. this is not one of the most important motions found in nature. is an illustration of the motion of excitation. In some cases. For example. OFB XI. 460.excitation. instead. natural histories must be established on the basis of collections of experiments.” see exp. 296. Parasceve discusses at length the issue of selecting instances for compiling natural histories. 3. The fact that Bacon is making use of them becomes evident only after a thorough analysis of the instances and of the theoretical considerations attached to them. However. will reject experiments (NO I.” see exp. 791. in the present section. In The New Atlantis. and the same point is repeatedly emphasized in Sylva sylvarum: experimental reports should not be accepted on the author’s authority. the largest group of members of Solomon’s House deals with collecting experiments. SEH II. to examine things to the bottom. or reject upon improbabilities. for “motion of gravity” and “appetite to rest. has a special status is Sylva. until there hath passed a due examination” 291 108 . Let us therefore turn to our next category. I talk about those experiments that are either rejected by other experiments or rejected because their results are shown to be mistaken. 177). they should be but mentioned as untested. Bacon emphasizes the importance of verifying them before including them in natural histories. are not even explicitly mentioned as appetites or motions in the records of the experiments. Bacon emphasizes that axioms. which deals with natural magic.”290 Indeed. Bacon defends himself by stressing that he does not include any experiment that has not been tried out: “And we have set it down as a law to ourselves. The selection of experiments seems to be the most important aspect in beginning a scientific enterprise.294 290 SS exp. 294 Century X.” see exp. 293 and 845. 207. yawning or stretching. 118. In the Novum organum. 553. 24. OFB XI. for the “motion of union. For a treatment of “violent motion. in which case they do not need any axioms to be proven wrong. so that their validity can be established later. 2. 791. Revolutionizing the Sciences. moreover.” see exp. For a discussion of Bacon’s attitude towards antiquity. SEH II. aph. many also aim to explain the artificially manipulated phenomena in terms of matter theory: the activity of the minutest parts of matter. nor should they be rejected on the basis of their mere probability. Where those experiments were conducted by others. 292 It would be very difficult to offer an exhaustive list of appetites and motions appearing in the experiments of Sylva. the effects of this motion can even be observed in humans: there arises in man an inclination towards imitation when his nature is excited by another performing certain actions. 63 and 800. according to Bacon.292 It is thus clear that not all the experiments in Sylva have the aim of simply describing phenomena. Second function of experiment: rejection of experiments proposed by ancients and moderns For Bacon. 359. 3. 92. and not to receive upon credit. The necessity of “trying out” experiments is explicitly discussed in Bacon’s theoretical works293 as well as in his natural histories. like gaping. SS exp. see Peter Dear. 57-64. 293 Bacon’s rejection of reported experiments (and of theories) is related to the problem of sources and authority. 92. be accused of containing fables. once discovered. 9. 439. Many of them are not mentioned in the titles and. and also exp. 685. SEH II. Natural magic could. for the “motion of consent.291 This selection of instances from Sylva in which experiments are used to illustrate appetites or simple motions should suffice to establish the first category (experiments as illustrations of matter theory). which are to be tested by their colleagues before they are accepted. As I have stressed in my previous chapter. SEH II. SEH II. as they otherwise compromised the advancement of science. 911.”295 The questions that arise are why Bacon introduces experiments he considers to be false and why he does not construct his natural histories only upon those experiments that he considers “of fruit” or “of light. 469). for these latter must be taken as you find them. 4). This does not mean that Bacon chose the experiments that he reported uncritically. introduction to exp. whereby the ways in which they failed could help establish the right experimental parameters. OFB XI. According to his rule. or think that it is an over-haste. let us turn to our second category of experiments: experiments that can serve to refute other experiments. that we have set down particulars untried. wanting instances which do occur. they could never truly be tested: their reliability will be established only after the theory which can explain it is validated by proper means (as emphasized in the previous chapter. 508). One possible answer might be that he felt that certain influential experiments had to be explicitly disproved. and of great use. 645). experiments had to be “tried out” before rules and axioms were drawn from them. and to produce final axioms. To sum up. 25. I receive it. 296 “The rejection which I continually use of experiments (though it appeareth not) is infinite. it seems that for Bacon. For I want this primary history to be written up with the most religious care. even though they did not help in the discovery of causes or in the performance of “works. we account such particulars more worthy than those that are already tried and known. 4. since this is the book of God’s works and (insofar as we can compare the Majesty of divine things and the insignificance of mortal) another kind of Holy Writ” (Parasceve 9.296 Yet other experiments could be useful for their methodological characteristics and could thus serve as models for designing experiments. on Bacon’s own admission. 109 . 295 “Wherefore. according to Bacon. However. not been “tried out.” could be useful for building up a natural history. I would not at all want it to be suppressed or kept quiet but to be put in writing plainly and clearly by way of a note or advice. SEH II. but yet if an experiment be probable in the work. whereas others seemed doubtful but had to be mentioned for verification in order to have the certainty of their falsity. As we (SS exp. but the other do level point-blank at the inventing of causes and axioms” (SS.297 With this preamble out of the way. But since Sylva does not claim to be a finished enterprise. but deliver it as doubtful” (SS exp. Sylva is both open-ended and yet highly methodological (section 2. as if the truth of every single detail had been given under oath.” while others proffer methodological advice for further experimentation. for contrariwise. or considered at least probable.” which are already established as valid. because these instances are personal stories to justify provisional rules. Bacon emphasizes once more the importance of not omitting doubtful or worrisome instances: “If there is anything in any narration which is doubtful or worrying. it requires more knowledge of nature that was available to him). 297 In Parasceve. 526. the as yet untried experiments are an important part of it: they are “what must be further done. we shall give directions of the most likely trials. 347). in our own estimation. Experimental falsification is an important feature of Bacon’s philosophy and especially of his experimental practice. some experiments. and generally. we would not have those that read this our work of Sylva Sylvarum account it strange. This is the reason many of the experiments presented have. spiritual magic has a special status and. Bacon declares that the experiment in the form in which it has been reported does not work to confirm the theory and needs to be redesigned. according to Bacon. 17: “Why is it that substances enclosed in inflated skins and closely covered vessels remain uncorrupted? Is it because things which are in motion become corrupt. rust of metals (See SS.shall see in the following section. SEH II. between negative experimental results and theories. introduction to exp. it could be that some relevant parameters had not been taken into account. and these vessels are full?” See also XXV. and things which are full are without motion (for it is impossible for anything to be moved without there being a void). shining wood. putrefaction is caused by the motion of the innate spirits that try to get out of the body in which they are imprisoned. Once the innate spirits find a channel through which to get out. as much for the speculative aspects (preservation is an action contrary to the normal activity of nature) as for the practical ones (the study of the preservation of various bodies is crucial for the prolongation of human life). where it is stated that fruit and meat are better preserved when placed in tightly inflated skins. which is its connatural. 2. motion is confused and inordinate and destroys the consistence of the body. and he considers quicksilver to do the same. and all things that are full are without motion. the result of this motion can differ: this desire of spirits to get out of bodies can also lead to such processes as melting. motion within the skin and hence the putrefaction of the body are more difficult. but only for very thin objects. while agreeing with the theory used to explain the experiment. rotten fruits. In his eyes. paper or parchment. SEH II. Bacon believes that its density might prevent the escape of the spirits – with the result that putrefaction is retarded. like leaves. The experiment in question is the last in a group of experiments on the acceleration of putrefaction. In putrefaction. 4: “Why is it that fruits and meat and the like remain uncorrupted if placed in skins. such that things that are in motion are corrupted more easily. and it is supposed to serve to validate the ancient theory that condensed air (which results from blowing air into a recipient) preserves bodies longer than normal air. 301 Bacon was highly interested in the preservation of bodies.299 Bacon accepts this connection between putrefaction and motion. But let us take a look at some examples to see what relations exist. Aristotle. after all. Ellis has identified the origin of the experiment in the pseudo-Aristotelian Problemata. a well-designed experiment can refute an entire theory. when these are tightly inflated. maturation.298 The explanation offered in that text is that there is a connection between corruption and motion. vivification. Experiment 351 presents an instance that is interesting in this respect. 329. n. as also do substances placed in closely covered vessels? Is it because all things become corrupt through being in motion. In experiment 100. Given that in an inflated skin everything is full. they move all over the surface of the body. because otherwise they can “alter in their 299 110 . he explains that amber preserves the bodies of flies and spiders because it does not permit their motion.301 298 Ellis. Bacon’s examples are putrefied meat. 356. and such skins and vessels are full?” 300 Any spirit captive in a body will try to get out and unite with air. while an experiment that is proven wrong does not necessarily falsify the theory on which it is based. 451). Problemata XXII. There.300 And although condensed air does not prevent the motion of the body. Depending on the surrounding conditions. thereby transforming matter and provoking what we observe as putrefaction. the colour is stronger. 93 (SEH II. 383-84). 502-05). Bacon does not reject the underlying theory. but that even after six weeks. and thereby more resplendent. Bacon’s strategy can be summed up as follows: testing the previous versions of experiments. stop the hole close. but only the way in which the experiment had been performed.”302 This is an interesting example of the general way in which Bacon deals with experiments collected from books. 716 (SEH II. 378-79). 291 (SEH II. in Bacon’s view. Within a series of experiments concerning the effects of the burial of various objects in earth. is the following. 588-90). 851 (SEH II. His alternative is to propose the same experiment to be performed in a deep well or in snow. which does not have the disadvantages of the bladder: “the way were therefore to blow strongly with a pair of bellows into a hogshead. SEH II. while putting meat and flowers into an inflated humid bladder will not retard putrefaction. rather than because the theory was wrong. 437). 469). he does not accept its experimental setup. SEH II. Examples are wax. or completely redesigning the experimental set-up. and rejecting the inappropriate elements of the experimental set-up in order to formulate an improved version of the experiment. 771. for him. as happens in the contraction of bodies. There are several other experiments in Sylva where Bacon searches for substances which do not allow spirits to escape by closing the pores of the body in which they are enclosed. If the spirits are congregated towards the surface of the object. 340-41). balms. recovered their colours after being buried for a while. Since he agrees with the connection between a body’s putrefaction and its ability to move. 380. 620-21). 303 SS exp. he proposes another device to test it. gums or quicksilver (See for example exp. corals and stones. amber.”303 own body. the object’s surface colour is very pale. and in the instant that you withdraw the bellows. but if they are diffused into the body. For discussions of colours. which had lost their colour. SEH II 467-68. The colour of an object is given by the activity of the finer spirits. honey. 506-516 (SEH II. it will change the body anyway (SEH II. Bacon reports on the ancient tradition according to which pearls. 111 . 351. Another example of an unsuccessful experiment. or concentrated in its centre. 5 (SEH II. putting into the hogshead (before) that which you would have preserved. Bacon writes that he has tried this experiment himself. The experiment from the Problemata is not the only experiment Bacon rejects as unsuccessful because the experiment was ill designed for demonstrating the validity of the theory. as the humidity of the bladder will itself trigger putrefaction. He states that dry bladders cannot be inflated. Bacon’s statement about the impossibility of inflating dry bladders might suggest he performed the experiment from the Problemata himself. 302 SS exp.” Even if quicksilver does not permit the spirit to evade the body. As the example shows. As in the previous example. the agent that brings about the restoration of the colours) is “more constringent” so that the body becomes “more united. 456. the stones and pearls had not recovered their original colour. see exp. where the cold (which is.While Bacon accepts the explanation given in the Problemata. because he specifies that the vessel filled with ashes can old one fifth less water than if it had been empty. cloth. Or do the ashes take up the water. if anything then be added. drink in waters and liquors: so that (as it was well said by one of the ancients. For there are apparently many empty spaces in ashes. and he specifically mentions water and ashes: “Water and all liquors do hastily receive dry and more terrestrial. and its bulk when mixed with water. its result still cries out for an explanation. SEH II. will lie in less 304 “The same vessel can hold the same quantities of ashes and water together as it can hold of each poured in separately. at the same time absorbing the liquid because they contain hollows. and so the water. on the other side. as this takes place. 8). as we see that ashes alone. being thinner. for when ashes are sprinkled water is attracted to any spot where they are sprinkled. for apparently some air occupies the space excavated. but from the way in which he formulates its rejection we may infer that he did. drink in liquors. which tests experiments before including them in a natural history. which means a total quantity of matter which is double for that attributed to a single vessel. but.) And the same thing happens if the water is poured in first and the ashes put in afterwards. 305 In experiment 800. and not comminuted. though themselves be entire bodies. (But ashes thrown into water while still hot cleave the water and cause it to evaporate. There is a parallel to this in the fact that trenches do not hold all the earth which has been dug out of them.) Or does this process not occur if the water be poured in first and fill the vessel to the brim. as it remains startling how one vessel can contain 180% of its own volume. the ashes gradually sink. &c. this can be illustrated by an experiment. if they be hard pressed.. because the saturation takes place in one part after another (for a thing always becomes more thoroughly saturated if the process takes place little by little than all at once). Parchment.Our last example is once more a borrowing from Aristotle’s Problemata and it is used as an instance for the rejection of both the experimental set-up and its theoretical implications Bacon starts his report by criticizing the ancients for accepting experiments on pure credit and building theories upon them. The experiment that follows upon this admonition is in fact very simple: a vessel is first filled with ashes and then the same quantity of water necessary to fill an empty vessel is poured into vessel filled with ashes. (Further. and. then it does occur. However. 112 . as sand and ashes. Bacon does not state that he performed this experiment and found it to be false. does it overflow? But if the water once overflows and the ashes settle down.304 It turns out that the vessel can hold both the ashes and the water at the same time. nor apparently porous” (SS exp. of earthy and watery substances) one is a glue to another. sinks in more and saturates the ashes. skins. so that they become dense. which is the contrary of his own method. it contracts so that it occupies less space: And I suppose that that fifth part is the difference of the lying close or open of the ashes. bodies. 600-1). and for this reason it does not hold all the earth” (Problemata XXV. so that the water also would seem to contain hollows and empty spaces.305 In the first case. for it was the ashes which took up the water. Bacon’s explanation relies on the difference between the bulk of a body when only air is intermixed with it. 800. but when water is mixed with the body of the ash. whereas the contrary would have taken place if it were the water which takes up the ashes. proportionable: and dry bodies. Bacon speaks about the desire of bodies to receive other bodies. In his report. even if the experiment was properly performed. and not the water the ashes? For it is only natural that that which is composed of smaller particles should be that which finds its way into something else. ashes by themselves need more space because air occupied all spaces in between its parts. Once again. experiments represent a significant aspect. According to Bacon. ashes having neither of these effects upon water. It can also be observed that the density of water is not changed by this mixture with ashes. This does however not happen when water is mixed with ashes. for example. a second side. for Bacon. Despite his declaration that the phenomenon had not yet been explained with certainty. in disproving the reported experiment on the basis of clear experimental counterevidence and precise measurements. the ashes as well as the water. After all. Given that the result is the same no matter if water is poured in ashes or ashes are added to a vessel of water. however. Bacon seems to be sure about the cause of this apparently strange phenomenon: it is the body of the ashes that shrinks and thereby creates the extra room for the added body of water. 307 113 . However. nitre or salt. 34. water is digested and changes its properties (a process that represents one of the magnalia naturae).room. Aristotle considers that the substance of the vessel in which the second substance is poured is the one containing holes and receiving in the other substance. and that it is the impact of the ash that makes the water contract. of snow. Bacon in this case also rejects the theoretical explanation offered by pseudo-Aristotle. the construction of natural histories must start with collecting experiments. ash does not have the required nature. as neither of them disappears from the vessel. while the water remains the same and does not shrink.306 The final affirmation refers once more back to Aristotle. SEH II. The reason Bacon rejects this experiment is obvious: the experiment reported by pseudo-Aristotle implies that both bodies. and so the ashes with air between lie looser. To be transformed into an oily substance. such a contraction only occurs when water is transformed into ice or an oily substance. will shrink or draw into less room. however. that the water itself. To be transformed into ice. together with the theories that they purportedly verify. This process has. by mixture of ashes or dust. which is creative and constructive: by starting from received observations and experiments which he 306 SS exp. The first is critical and involves the refutation of theories and the rejection of wrong or badly designed experiments – an exercise that provides useful material for the construction of natural history. must shrink. the presence of a cold nature is needed. including those proposed by earlier natural historians. before being admitted into Bacon’s natural history.307 However. from which it can later be separated so as to returns to its own nature. and with water closer. For I have not yet found certainly. This process of selecting reliable experiments has. two aspects. his conclusion is that both substances must have holes. for whom it seemed possible that both ashes and water contained hollows and empty spaces. For Bacon’s programme of the reformation of natural philosophy. 354. they must first be tested. 3.” as the intellect does not have to decide between two very similar solutions. 308 One of Bacon’s main criticisms of previous natural histories is that one finds “nothing in natural history duly examined. Didier Deleule considers this testing function to have been far less important and common that the exploratory one.subjects to a rational or experimental examination. to mention just a few important cases. 36. Cardano or Della Porta. but this does not constitute a rule. Bacon creates new experiments. 321. It is true. This is the first aspect in which he believes that his own natural histories differ from those of his predecessors. counted. 157). 98. weighed and measured” (NO I. 3. sometimes maintaining the theory as true. and in his experimental accounts. it is not necessary to have another. 2.). provisional theories are used to replace the one proved wrong.308 We have already seen how Bacon sometimes rejects experiments. some of which assume new functions. aph. and second. especially in Sylva. Graham Rees has signalled the presence of this feature of experiments in the Historia densi et rari. “crucial instances” are used for the rejection of theories. The issue of how to deal with the sources is very present both in Bacon’s theoretical writings. Paracelsus. two important things should be mentioned: first. Experiments used to refute theories or opinions formulated by Bacon’s predecessors As has repeatedly been emphasised in the secondary literature. though he does not take into account either Sylva or the Latin natural histories.309 But “crucial instances” are unsuited for the establishment of the validity of all theories irrespective of the context and their place in the process of induction. OFB XI. when there are two concurrent theories and the intellect is uncertain about which is correct. At a basic level of natural histories. 3. Bacon’s programme for the reformation of natural histories includes the verification and refutation of common opinions and incorrect theories held by earlier natural historians such as Aristotle. concurrent theory in order to design an experiment that can reject an existing theory. which will be examined in the course of this chapter. Within the framework of Bacon’s process of induction.” 45-46). sometimes rejecting the theory along with the experiments. though. OFB XI. Thus.” see NO II aph. verified. We will now turn to a class of experiments in which the opposite occurs: the successful repetition of a reported experiment leads to the rejection of an explanatory theory. 114 . an experiment does not necessarily have the formulation of a new theory as its end: it can leave the research open for further investigation by eliminating some previous errors. that in the majority of cases. showing how Bacon deconstructs the Aristotelian theory of densities with the help of his tables of weights (“Quantitative reasoning. As we saw in the previous chapter (section 2. 309 For the “Crucial Instances. theories can be checked and validated by means of experiments that are not “crucial instances. Of course. which both include flame. Moreover. 312 Though Bacon does not explain in this experiment what relation there is between flame and air. 311 “Take an arrow. the comparison between the sublunary and celestial globes 115 . he borrows an experiment from Della Porta. that heat of fire is greater and more “violent” and “furious” at the surface of the flame. that the pure elemental fire. that if there were a sphere of fire that encompassed the earth so near hand. 313 The Descriptio globi intellectualis deals with similar questions. that heat or fire is not violent or furious but where it is checked and pent. in the second. SEH II. and go out”. in his own place and not irritate. or itself to die. more generally. which is more. it becomes violent and its appetite of consuming other matter in order to transform it in itself becomes very powerful (in fact. make it clear that according to him. According to the table which can be made of the results of this experiment. at root. flames and air do not commix (except.”311 Bacon draws two conclusions from the experiment: that flame burns more in the margins than in its centre. they answer. it is the very same appetite of uniting with connaturals. SEH II. Bacon’s table ranging from 4 pulses to 116 (See Appendix 5 below). where the fire encounters air. dipped in spirit of wine. as by victory. and when it cometh forth.313 As will become clearer further on. because the aim of the experiment was not to measure the time in which a flame “devours” the wood.I will provide here two examples for this class of experiments. you shall find those parts of the arrow which were on the outsides of the flame more burned. of the moon. namely less in the middle. 463). flame has a calm nature. it will be surrounded by the same natures). this 310 Counting the pulse was one of Bacon’s methods of time measurement. This is an instance of great consequence for the discovery of the nature of flame. whereas that in the midst of the flame will be as if the fire had scarce touched it. And therefore the Peripatetics (howsoever their opinion of an element of fire above the air is justly exploded) in that point they acquit themselves well: for being opposed. 10 pulses is very short time for burning. because the appetite with its connaturals is satisfied. in the vital spirit of plants and animals). 353). In the first. of the interstellar body. it acts differently from at its margins where the vicinity of air activates its predatory nature. In the first case. Experiment 800 also explains the relation between flame and any other bodies (not only air): “flame doth not content itself to take in any other body. Experiment 32 argues against a traditional theoretical anti-Aristotelian argument regarding the placement of the four elements in the sublunary sphere. which held that the fire in the outermost circle would have to consume everything within its orb. where fire is surrounded by similar matter. In the centre. Bacon proves this objection to be wrong. but either to overcome and turn another body into itself. Bacon criticizes the theory of certain anti-Aristotelians concerning the position of the elements in the universe. and turned almost into a coal. and turned almost into a coal whereas in the midst of the flame will be as if the fire had scarce touched it. it were impossible but all things should he burnt up. but shorter). but when this appetite is activated (as it is by air). the result of the burning process is carefully described: the extremities of the arrow are said to be “blacked. the two previous experiments. because by transforming other matter in flamy substance. but to examine how the flames burn wood. and more at the extremes. but uses the experiment to refute Della Porta’s explanation of it. A piece of wood (which is very similar to that used in the present experiment. and. blacked. burnt for 94 pulses. By means of the following experiment. namely with the substance of the heavens – of stars. and. 32. An arrow held into a flame and then withdrawn will be found to be unequally burnt. for an instant. as well as some of his theoretical considerations about matter. 601). The pulse is also used to measure the time a flame takes to burn in experiment 366 (SEH II.312 These observational conclusions allow him to reject the anti-Aristotelian objection. Bacon describes the experiment in detail: the arrow is left within the flame for a certain amount of time (“ten pulses”310). our experiment here had to last for a shorter interval of time. and sheweth manifestly that flame burneth more violently towards the sides than in the midst. and it appears across Sylva several times. and hold it in flame for the space of ten pulses. is but of a moderate heat” (SS exp. an experiment which also exists in Sylva. 315 SS exp. 352-53). It should be pointed out. Although many instances have an anti-Aristotelian thrust. etc. For example. in that in the present case. which is filled with a mixture of wine and water. For Bacon the experimental device mentioned above will “unmingle the wine from the water: the wine ascending and settling in the top of the upper glass. “Francis Bacon’s Semi-Paracelsian Cosmology. but the thinking takes a dialectical form that is quite similar to the experiment under discussion here: Bacon presents contrary opinions and then gives arguments for one of them.314 It is true. however. Jalobeanu.” 314 In the first book of the Novum organum. Though Bacon clearly states that the only way to draw conclusions about the heavens is by analogy with the earthly sphere. Bacon claims that the water from the glass above will go down. “Francis Bacon’s Semi-Paracelsian Cosmology and the Great Instauration. these allow his procedure to qualify as “experimentation” properly speaking. of course. the contrary theories are tested by means of an experience. as a consequence. motion. In the course of the entire series of experiments.” idem. the concluding theories are not based on experimentation (the only experiment is the flame-in-a-flame. The difference is. however. while the wine from the lower vessel will go up. which presents an example of the separation of bodies by weight. that it represents only one experiment in an entire series (a group of “experiments in consort”) devoted to the study of the properties of burning. Moreover. in a few. 14. This experiment demonstrates how Bacon could deal with inherited theories on a case-by-case basis and in a problem-related way. but of course not all of them are. not only as a description of facts. 99). However. he rebutted anti-Aristotelian arguments. 31. SEH II. 54. Bacon offers a great number of details. 62. concluding concerning eternity.” idem. “Francis Bacon on Verticity. Problemata is one of the main sources for Sylva. filtered through the clear water. aph. when discussing the Idols of the Theatre. such as the one just analysed. This means that the mixture in the lower vessel will be separated in the process. 89). Aristotle is chastised for making his natural philosophy the slave of logic (NO I. even though Bacon never mentions its title. It is true that many of Problemata’s experiments and the theories they rely on are criticized in Sylva. OFB XI. Another example of how theories are refuted by their confrontation with experience is found in instance 14 of century I. for corrupting his natural philosophy by fashioning “the world from categories” (NO I. 116 . aph. SEH II.” idem. Aristotle is often presented as an example of a inferior philosopher. Aristotle is mentioned as a member of the rational family of philosophers.inference is possible within Bacon’s methodology because it allows for the use of models and. that the experiment of burning an arrow is not particularly sophisticated. A glass recipient with a belly and a long neck is filled with water and placed upside down in a large-mouthed vessel. when discussing the Idols of the Cave. OFB XI.” 381-86. allows for the transfer of conclusions from one domain to another. This is precisely what he does here in applying a conclusion drawn from an experiment on earthly fire to the celestial sphere. “Learning from Experiment. Bacon’s cosmological views have only attracted scant attention: Rees. “Unpublished Manuscript. inclinations of matter.” idem.”315 Bacon carefully describes both the experimental device and the result obtained with it. explanations and quantitative features. exp. “The Fate. 343. the discussion in the Descriptio seems to be highly theoretical. and the water descending and settling in the bottom of the lower glass. it is that which setteth the motion on work: for water and wine in one glass. in terms of natural places. that the world would sooner be pulled asunder than any vacuity can be admitted.316 Ellis has identified this experiment as a borrowing from Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. 382. with long standing. so that place emptied by the water will be filled again. and the heavier body must ever be in the upper glass. will press the mixture. book 18.with an explanation of what is going on and why it occurs in this way: because of the form of the glass. something else must ascend and 316 SS exp. in some cases. 1. and there being a great weight of water in the belly of the glass. 343. In his version of the experimental series. Della Porta claims that the wine will all rise towards the upper glass. I. but he explicitly uses it to criticise Della Porta’s theory and to illustrate his own theory. 318 MN 18. again in an Aristotelian vein. or else it worketh not. in order to avoid a vacuum. Della Porta first places water in the upper glass and wine in the lower vessel and claims that after a while the two substances will completely swap places. SEH II.317 However. 317 117 . chapter III. sustained by a small pillar of water in the neck of the glass. The mixture will give way and. 15. that is. with heavier bodies sinking below the lighter ones. while the water will gather in the lower vessel – this happens. Heavy and light are defined by Della Porta in a thoroughly Aristotelian manner. for it must be of bodies of unequal weight. make heavy things ascend and light ones descend. He furthermore assumes. being heavier and tending to descend. the water is suspended and presses the wine within the mixture: This separation of water and wine appeareth to be made by weight. SEH II. Della Porta explains that the water. will hardly sever. Ellis. As for the separation of water and wine. contrary to their nature. 343. In a second experiment. again. n.”318 The horror vacui might. he places water in the upper glass and a mixture of wine and water in the lower vessel. that “Vacuum is so abhorred by nature. what happens in this experiment can be explained through the Aristotelian principle according to which heavy bodies descend and light bodies ascend. because bodies wish to be as close as possible to their natural places. But then note withal. not only does Bacon change the construction and the explanation of the experiment. that the water being made pensile. while the horror vacui determines the supplementary ascension of wine in the upper glass. According to Della Porta. And let the upper part of the he vessel turned downwards. that is mingled in the other vessel. weakenned by our sinful state.. Bacon also gives a detailed iled description of the conditions of operating this “in “instrument” of separation: without the long neck ne of the glass. Then fill the said vessel with water. 382. l. And if it be all Wine. He agr grees that motion is initiated because a heavy body ody presses upon a lighter one. And if we know not the quan antity. which may easily be known by thee smell sm and taste. 384). we must Conjecture at it. leaving ng pure water in the vessel. who draws the experimental in instrument. are not subtle enough) and m measurement. However. while the present device has the virtue of creat eating a phenomenon that does not occur otherwise.319 Although Bacon borro rrows from Della Porta both the device and nd the procedure of separation. that so air may enter. the water would not be suspended ed and the motion would never start.320 Fig. No Wine will stay with the water. 118 . see Manzo. that is mixed with water. and th the absence of the image does not imperil a good reproduc uction of the experiment. Giambattista Della Porta. and the he water will sink down.occupy the upper place otherw erwise left empty. OFB XI. If anything stay tay behind. On the use of instrumen ents in Bacon’s natural philosophy. how much it may be. if you do it as it should be done” (MN N XVIII. tthat is full of Wine and water. 18. But first there mus ust be a vessel that can receive all the Wine. 4. he offers a differen rent explanation and at the same time formulate lates the experimental procedure in such a way ass to t undermine Della Porta’s theory. Mag agia naturalis. touch the upper part of the lower Liquor. the wine separates and ascends. his description is as accura urate as Della Porta’s drawing of the instrument. For then the water w will presently descend into the vessel underneath. “Emperimen entación. 320 Bacon sees the introduction off images into natural histories as useless (see Parasc asceve 3. Manzo only examines experiment ents to increase precision (in cases where our senses. oof something less. However. and we should sho separate the water from the Wine. and se set it with the mouth downwards on the other vessel. 319 “Let there be underneath a vessel sel filled with Wine. it will all ascend. 457). I.” However. but does 3 not mention that the phenomen enon will only occur with this specific set-up. Since the mixture is compposed of something heavier and something lighter ter. This ind indeed constitutes the first important departure from m Della Porta. Bac acon emphasizes the role played by the particular ar geometry of the instrument: it is becausee of o its form that the water in the upper glass presse sses on the mixture. X 3. you must know that so much mater was mingled m with the Wine. and nd the lighter part of the mingled Liquor will ascend. Bacon replicates both the instrumental setting and the experiment. see Manzo. A final difference is constituted by Bacon’s attention to the parameter of time – the time that it takes for this process of separation to occur – which is not mentioned by Della Porta. Dear relies here on Paula Findlen’s analysis of Della Porta’s Natural Magic as a “joke of art” (see Findlen. it is enough for it to be the illustration of a theory. Since knowledge begins. “Jokes of Nature”). More precisely. the separation is produced by pressure: the heavy body presses on the lighter one and initiates the motion. but it is obvious that the procedure is far too complex for a simple exposition of a “curiosity. On this. 322 Peter Dear compares Bacon’s use of this example to Galileo’s and Mydorge’s. it is not necessary for the experiment to constitute a crucial instance. this is a “curiosity. by using previous theories and experiments in a critical and creative manner. 321 In the Abecedarium novum naturae.A more important difference between the ways in which the two authors deal with this experiment concerns the interpretation of its results.” 69. or getting friends drunk). these experiments and theories first have to be tested and discussed. 213). This function is fully consistent with one of the key functions that Bacon ascribes to experiments in his theoretical writings and with his emphasis on the critical character of an experiment-based natural history. keeping what is useful and eliminating what he considers untrue. For Dear. then.” not an “experiment.321 In sum. pace Della Porta. In fact. 119 .” Della Porta’s intention is to “demonstrate” that the substances can be separated. Dear limits himself to the observation that Della Porta uses it to get friends drunk. no complete separation is achieved. it ceases when the clear water in the vessel below reaches over the mouth of the upper glass. just as scholastic natural philosophers drew on empirical materials in the authoritative texts on which they commented” (Discipline.322 There are many other instances in which Bacon uses experiments in order to criticise or eliminate a theory. all are key to the understanding of a process. but on the basis of its outcome. “Experimentación. or intensity of action. public stock. because any change in these features will lead to a change in the process so as to make it disappear or transform in something else.” because it was a “piece of experience available from a common. For Bacon. or quantity of substance. as we have seen. Bacon offers a special place to the measurements of motions (OFB XIII. leaving aside all the metaphysical and physical presuppositions necessary for the understanding of the process itself. and he uses metaphysical assumptions to prove this. The motion ceases when a situation of equilibrium is attained. as Bacon observes. Time is particularly important for experiments of light. for Bacon. 147). he manages to reject Della Porta’s experimental report as well as the theory that was meant to explain it. Quantitative features: time. who had both borrowed it from Della Porta. This quantitative feature will come back several times in the analysis of several experiments. It is true that Della Porta’s aim is practical (discovering when a salesman is cheating by mixing water into wine. As has been mentioned earlier. such experiments can undergo a development and become more complex. They also serve more complex functions. 323 Parasceve 7. relating to their role as “experiments of light. Bacon’s experiments in Sylva do not only have the role of illustrating matter theory or of verifying or falsifying experiments and theories. Experiments exploring the properties of bodies during the development of a process Let us now move on to more complex classes of experiments. not series of experiments (in Bacon’s sense of “experiments in consort”). “Quantitative. Graham Rees has called such cases in the Historia densi et rari “fact-establishing experiments. nor do they elaborate on experiments reported in the existing literature. “Learning from Experience. 4. the explanation of this process is omitted or left to be given at a later stage of investigation. nor their general function for the production of knowledge.” 325 Jalobeanu. we will see that. In some cases. Interested as he was in quantitative reasoning. weighed. One such function is what I propose to call the “exploration of the properties of a body during the development of a process. as the relevant parameters for the phenomenon under investigation become essential for the development of the series. be they bodies or virtues. 456. when he demands that in a natural history “every thing to do with natural phenomena. but they engage with a specific question and are specifically designed to investigate the transformations of various properties of bodies in a given process. Dana Jalobeanu.325 I will start with exploratory experiments that are singular instances.” that is. in turn. of shedding light upon the activities of nature.324 Looking at similar cases. The singular-incidence experiments in question do not begin with a theory.” The tables of densities found in that historia are the results of such fact-establishing experiments.”323 As discussed at the beginning of this chapter. Only later will I turn to groups of experiments with variable parameters. which constitute series. successively. counted. Rees did not study the further development of these experiments in other Baconian works. has discerned a class of “exploratory experiments. If in general the first experiment tends to be very simple and aims at nothing more than at answering a question. 3.” Bacon emphasized this function in the Parasceve.” which proceed along an ordered variation of experimental parameters with the aim of arriving at classifications and concept formation. OFB XI. Rees.” 324 120 . measured and defined.3. should (as far as possible) be set down. a flame needs nourishment in order to live. 74-75. which in turn are placed in boiling water.327 As the effects of heat on different bodies can be very diverse. how they are affected by heat – some of them burn together with the spirit of wine. introduction to exp. 1. One of the first exploratory experiments to be discussed is found in century IV. Experiment 88 on the “induration” of bodies is highly relevant in this respect. This experiment investigates.This kind of exploration is very common in Sylva sylvarum. water. Those bodies that extinguish the flame are considered its “enemies. in those cases where the body is not entirely consumed by flame. 376). where it is not surrounded by its connaturals. This process has three causes: cold. as it gives us clues as to how Bacon understood this exploratory investigation of natural phenomena and processes. 121 . bay-salt. wax. Here. it was explained that on earth.” Bacon means the condensation or solidification of soft substances. 328 In experiment 87. 326 Bacon’s theory of flame has been explained above. The starting point of this experiment is once more of Aristotelian extraction: in order to render bodies more robust in the process of induration. gunpowder. 2. In the first category there are also many differences. which bodies are more “adverse to flame” and thereby provides Bacon with information concerning the nature of flames and about their “natural enemies. 83.”326 The aim of this experiment is to discover an essential feature of the given body: how much it “feeds” the flame before extinguishing it. as well as the quantities of the substances in the mixture.” 327 See SS. in other words. and he accurately measures the time taken by each to burn. in section 3. Bacon distinguishes between the various effects of heat. The other bodies either extinguish it or else become its nourishment. in connection to experiment 847. which Bacon tells us has the longest burning time of any single substance). 3. while others do not. 3. heat and assimilation. Induration had been explained in section 3. conversely. By “induration. SEH II. they have to be studied in great detail. It is more complex than the burning experiment with respect to the exploration of the bodies involved. depending on the consistency of the body itself. by measurement and comparison.328 Because the heating of bodies often results in their destruction through burning or melting. are mixed with a spoonful of spirit of wine. above. induration being only one of them (see SEH II. the burning experiment is concerned with a more complex question: the nature of flame. experiment 88 presents a type of heating of bodies in specially designed recipients. starting with the differences in burning time and in the body left after burning. milk. pebble and wood. There. but it also give information about the nature of bodies during burning phenomena. instance 366. we read in the Problemata. including nitre. Bacon describes the process of burning different substances (all of which. The table that can be made according to Bacon’s record of results has as its aim to discover the “friends” and “enemies of the flame. Bacon records the experiment as follows: different bodies are first placed into individual earthen vessels. that this is the case only for bodies that are watertight. Bacon’s objective there is to establish an ascending list of densities of matter. as they will otherwise become moist and soft. the consistency (hardness) of the bodies and their colour (in their “initial” and “final” states). what Rossi emphasizes is not the process of induction. but in such a way that the water cannot get inside them. This is why Graham Rees considers the first table from the Historia densi et rari as “by far the most extensive constructed up to that time. 122 .329 One can tabulate and thus compare the properties of substances before and after boiling – and the table can be extended by adding the properties acquired if one increases the boiling time from 12 hours to 2-3 days (which is what Bacon seems to suggest in the text. the tables in experiment 88 are more complex. stones. Rossi noticed the difference between the philosophical tradition and Bacon’s induction. evident from Bacon’s use of “topic” and “table” synonymously (Francis Bacon. while Bacon’s methods leads to universal elimination of wrong solutions and unfounded theories. the pewter. It should be mentioned that the manuscript discovered by Graham Rees contains a reference to this experiment. not only density. The bottles are kept in boiling water for twelve hours. into boiling water.” even though it was not the first such table – Marino Ghetaldi had earlier published 12 tables for determining densities (see Rees.one should decoct them in water for two or three days. which cannot absorb water. 329 The tables from the Novum organum are compared by Paolo Rossi with the aids to memory from the rhetorical tradition. uncovered. while the chalk and the free-stone also suffered an increase of “hardness. However. or in the second book of the Novum organum for the study of heat. To be sure. The first table is made in the following manner: bodies with the same bulk are weighed. in a second bottle a pellet of clay and pieces of cheese. however. chalk and free-stone. became hotter and much less flexible. when he explains that his own experiment did not respect the initial requirement of 2-3 days and that further experiments would be needed). as in the Historia densi et rari. given that Bacon investigates various types of change. there is a list of how much weight was lost at the end of such a boiling experiment involving eggs. Bacon specifies. it had turned hard “like a stone” and whiter. in the tables of densities. with the aim of finding the correlation between their weight and their density (given that the volume is the same for all of them). on these tables or topics is based Bacon’s entire process of investigation of nature 330 The Historia densi et rari starts with two tables listing densities of bodies. the probable reason for this being the absorption of some water. However. which resides in that the first proceeds by simple enumeration and lacks evidence. but Bacon’s indebtedness to the Renaissance rhetorical tradition. As for the clay. At folio 44r. which are then put. Bacon’s detailed reports of the outcome state that in the first bottle.” One can witness in this experiment the origin and basic pattern of a typical Baconian table such as those given in the Historia densi et rari. Bacon reports having carried out this process on the following bodies: free-stone and pewter in one bottle. chalk. The cheese also became very hard.” 43). “Quantitative Reasoning. However. 202-7). a spoon (possibly of pewter).330 Bacon’s relevant parameters in this experiment on induration are the boiling time. the free-stone became softer and easier to scratch than previously. By contrast. two different tables can be inferred. / The Freest. Dense and rare are contained in all bodies and the other natures depend on them. on the one hand. 332 This idea is stated several times in the Historia densi et rari. For example. / The cheese lost. Those substances that made the wheat sprout in six days (which is the fastest) are furthermore tabulated according to their capacity 331 “The Egg lost in the weight 11d peece. or in other words. its epistemic aim is clearly to establish a relation between the time of germination and a number of different fertilizers. free stone and cheese. in this case. gr.” 406). lost nothing. Experiment 402.331 It is clear that all these objects were weighed both before and after the process.332 All in all.” 333 This is a very important innovation of Bacon’s scientific method and it appears in several other experiments. 805. according to Silvia Manzo.333 Interestingly enough. can be seen as another instance of an exploratory experiment in the sense established in this section. “Weighting Experience. However.” (Rees. and heavy and light. there are good reasons – notably the fact that the lists of bodies tried is almost identical – for assuming that they have been boiled and that experiment 88 reports the results of the same experiment as this folio page. 316-326. out of this experiment. 446-48). It has already been mentioned (see above section 1. The process itself is not described or named. after the table of densities of tangible bodies. The scope is to establish a clear connection between characteristics. After all. if there be all 38. although it runs through practically all the other natures. As in other cases. Entre el atomismo. for comparison’s sake. For a discussion of the tables of densities from the Historia densi et rari. 8. where one piece is kept in conditions in which putrefaction is very slow in order to compare it to those pieces kept where the condition for putrefaction are better (see exp. 181-236). 123 . Bacon explains what the relation is between dense and rare. the manuscript reports an interesting quantitative aspect about this experiment on induration – the differences of weights. / The Stone lost nothing / The spoone lost about 10. but as Rees convincingly argues. Although Bacon introduces it as an experiment that can yield profit. in the experiment he uses to search for the best substance for the preservation of apples. the source of all transformations in universe (see Francis Bacon. see also Cesare Pastorino. which will further lead to the inner processes of matter in each of these bodies. gr. is not run by their rules but seems only to have close consent with heavy and light” (OFB XIII. this experiment is a clear example of how bodies must be studied when one of their characteristics (in this case heat) is changed.) that the transformation of density is. / The chalk lost nothing. then sows the seeds and subsequently records the time needed for germination. SEH II. / The clay lost 23. some seeds are not fertilized. 2. which is not present in the record of experiments from Sylva. gr. the comparative measure of weight loss is highly relevant given Bacon’s belief that the weight and density of a body are directly correlated.clay. The experiment is constructed as follows: Bacon soaks wheat seeds in different substances for twelve hours. In the beginning. “Manuscript. The same holds true for the experiments on the time of putrefaction of meat. The results of this experiment can also be easily tabulated. he condenses two tables into one. about the process of germination. on the other: “The nature of dense and rare. Bacon keeps one apple in what he considers to be “the normal circumstances” as a basis for his comparison (see exp. 53). 604). Bacon sows them untreated so as to have a control sample. SEH II. ” 405: “Wheate / and parsley seed <steeped> in water mingled with chalke. In other words. this experiment.” and the melioration of the soil before planting. his comparative study goes beyond the economic aspects of their application (although he does not exclude these). / Try sowing in Earth water twice in a Day. in such a way that eventually. the experiment goes beyond the initial question concerning the speed of germination. But while Della Porta only names them as examples of how to accelerate growth and produce better plants. there would have to be separate tables for each plant. soot. the best are (in descending order): urine. it is mentioned as a mere desideratum. This time. / The like in Urine. and / seuerall Irrigations. but there was no acceleration of germination (in fact. 124 . chalk. there was even a retardation). ashes. the acceleration of germination and the spirits of the plants which are responsible for germination. The majority of the experiments in which fertilizers are used are borrowed from Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. 476-77). He does not mention why some fertilizers are better for certain plants and not for others.of producing a healthy and vigorous plant. as well as the season of the year for planting. in favour of my claim that their interests are very different. 43r in Rees. Malmsey and spirit of wine did not permit germination at all (SS exp.334 In other words. Bacon is above all interested in understanding the process of germination itself and the relation between the fertilizing substances. is that Della Porta is not concerned with a comparative approach. the “melioration of plants.” The presence of this experiment in this manuscript as something Bacon was planning to conduct. namely their effect upon the growing of the plant. comparable to the one for wheat. relying mostly on ancient opinions. watered wheat. and couerings. It is true that the simple mentioning of 334 Among the substances that help the wheat to sprout in six days. are strong evidence for believing that Bacon indeed performed the experiment. which are recorded in centuries V and VI.335 It should not surprise us that the substances that produce good results as fertilizers are subsequently used in other experiments. / Tile like Water with Horse-Dung / The like in water with soote of the chimney / The like in water with a little salt. such as variations in seeds and roots. “Manuscript. 402. / The like water with pigeons dung: / The like in water with Cow-Dung. appears in the extant manuscript containing entrances also found in Sylva. / The like in water with a little Ashes. together with the detailed quantitative features. claret wine. / The like in some Hott-water. / Also earth in a warme roome in ports. The resulting table would obviously have been even more complex. however. / Try all Mixtures and confecting of Earth. book 3. divers types of dung. but correlates this with a further characteristic of fertilizers. SEH II. / The like in wine. 335 See fol. / Try seed of Onions within the Body of another Onion. in the context of the acceleration of germination. too. clearly having a more theoretical and exploratory character. where we also encounter all the fertilizers that Bacon mentions. as Bacon conjectures that various seeds and grains will respond differently to the same fertilizing substance. As in our earlier example (experiment 88). The plant was vigorous for unsteeped and unwatered wheat. The experiment ends with suggestions concerning different directions that further research could take by varying and adding parameters. A further difference. He does not have a comparative group either. Manzo accepts that the absence of mathematics is not due to the methodological conviction that there can be no place for mathematics in natural philosophy. “Experimentación. even incomplete and imperfect. That this is indeed Bacon’s intention is clear from the advice he gives about the further development of his 336 Rees. with a heuristic that permits variations of various aspects. and the reason for this change resides in the use of distinct substances or techniques. to have shown by the examples I have just discussed that this vision of Sylva and of Bacon’s natural histories in general is mistaken. however. but was rather determined by circumstantial fact that Bacon composed his natural histories in a race against time. this explains why his experiments lack the precision that he would have wanted for them. as there is in Bacon’s case (the quantitative side being specific to Bacon’s experimentation). then. which are specifically created to give and compare the relevant changes of the characteristics of a body undergoing an experimental process (for a model of the tables drawn out of these experiments.” 35. We recall from above Graham Rees’ and Silvia Manzo’s emphasis on the role played by mathematics and quantification in Bacon’s natural philosophy. In all these experiments. This information can be arranged in tables.337 I hope. see appendix 5). In conclusion. pace Rees and Manzo. there can be no measurement.fruits accelerated in their germination or retardation. Meanwhile. because very accurate – often quantified or quantifiable – descriptions of the experimental results are often present. of course. In this sense. In some cases. But without this comparative group. “Quantitative. Rees states that it “contains very little research conducted on quantitative lines. With respect to Sylva. the experiments themselves end up determining the relevant parameters in the process under study. wanting to offer posterity model of natural histories. something that cannot be realized in Della Porta’s type of science.”336 while Manzo laments the significant difference between Bacon’s theoretical requirements and his actual practice. Moreover. Manzo. it is fair to say that the resulting tables are provisional and “open” to further development by the introduction of new parameters. 337 125 . it must be obvious that a well-defined methodology is at work in these exploratory experiments. these tables and measurements allow Bacon to compare and classify the substances or techniques. However. we are entitled to say that this category of exploratory experiments is used to provide new and accurate information about a certain phenomenon. the results of which can be put into tables similar to the ones that are given. so that the further development of the experimental set-up is influenced or even decided by the results of the first experiment. quantity and measurement occupy a very special place.” 72. as well as fruits made bigger or sweeter implies a comparison with how thing behave when they are not changed deliberately. claiming that measurement and quantification are absent from Sylva and that there are almost no quantifications of spatial and temporal relations. ” The two following examples belong to the second class of the instances of the lamp. spirit and all kinds of things that are too fine and subtle to be seen or felt. However. namely the model of the anatomical study of matter. given that tangible matter is inert and only the pneumatic is active. Indeed. and in Sylva (therefore in both Latin and English). Bacon himself carefully distinguished between the two terms. 40. in every process it is the pneumatic matter that should be studied. heat or 338 I have changed the translation from the OFB. In the way they are recorded can be found how the experiments must be developed in the further investigation of nature. They can be found at the beginning of century IX. with Bacon’s speculative philosophy and with the ancient atomist theory. 3. I prefer to use the terms “sensible” and “non-sensible. Moreover.” which is translated as “the second reduce the imperceptible to the perceptible” (OFB XI. Others require much more sophisticated instruments and relevant theoretical assumptions in order to enter the realm of the invisible. 340 In “Atomism and Subtlety. 3. where he discusses the various qualities of air. The Latin texts says “Secundae deducunt non-Sensibile ad Sensibile. The development itself is suggested by the results themselves.” instead of “perceptible” and “imperceptible. 339 NO II aph.experiments. one should remember that the simple motions and their appetites are also always invisible. 347. these properties or the processes themselves are often not visible to the naked eye. Experiments directed towards establishing correlations between those properties of the bodies that cannot be observed by the senses Let us now turn to the fifth category of experiments of light in Sylva sylvarum.338 specifically the third and the fourth cases of this class: “because the object is incapable of making an impression on the sense. as Rees rightly emphasizes. both in the De augmentis scientiarum. As has become clear from the previous section. or because the size of the object will not let the impression be carried to the sense. Five of the “Prerogative Instances” from the Novum organum define and discuss the process of reducing the invisible to visible under the name of “Instances of the Lamp. Bacon mentions as examples of such objects air. such as humidity. 342-43. has a very special meaning in Bacon’s philosophy and it is so different from “sensible”. 5. which served as a model for the investigation of nature. As we have seen. OFB XI. one should keep in mind that there are several degrees of “invisibility” in the study of nature and of the effects produced: effects can range from visible to fully invisible. 126 . associating it with the pneumatic theory of matter. some properties resulting from these motions can be studied quite directly by observation or by a simple measurement with instruments.” Rees discusses the idea of subtlety in Bacon’s natural philosophy.”339 In the Novum organum.” because the term “perception.” as mentioned earlier. namely those that reduce the insensible to sensible.340 Some examples concerning air will clarify how Bacon designs special experiments in order to discover the hidden properties of the bodies. But Rees mentions as an example of subtlety only the latent configurations of matter (569-71). The problem of investigating the invisible was among Bacon’s chief preoccupations. However. Bacon uses experiments in order to investigate those properties of bodies that change during certain processes. in fact. but longer periods and larger spaces – meaning that one can only predict the temperature for entire years but not for each day. The other statement is that they do not influence small amounts of time or narrow limits. In fact. even in difficult conditions. heats. the quality of the air can be establish by means of two pieces of meat. 8-57. such as when it is required that water passes through the wood of a sealed cask in order to come in contact with the wool (thus it must first transform into vapour and then back in water. pp. 344 We have seen in the previous sections that wool has a special sympathy with water and attracts it. it is interesting to notice how the members of the Royal Society were asking the very same questions as Bacon and. One of them is that the motions of heavenly bodies affect masses and not individuals (in the sense that they have the same influence over everyone. which explains 127 . one placed on the ground and the other on a stick without touching the ground. he also took dryness or moisture. The experiments proposed at the beginning of century IX are either a substitute for astrology. in which it would be salubrious to live. but from his presuppositions it becomes evident that the piece of meat placed on the ground will putrefy sooner if the air contains pestilent vapours. because that is the right time to study the effects of the winter. through comparison. were using very similar instruments and methods of measurement. among other things. draughts. on the one hand. Bacon does not explain how we must interpret the experiment. establishes the dryness and moisture of air. but depending on individual characteristics. Bacon criticizes and redefines the task and operation of astrology. When describing what “Sane Astrology” (cleaned of all impurities and fancies) is supposed to do. Bacon also provides a special piece of advice: this experiment must be done at the end of March. see Hasok Chang. which are not visible by mere experience. arising from the ground (as Bacon assumed) could not touch it as much as outside. to be relevant factors. 342 SS exp. 604. so as to see when it would start to putrefy. on the other. to be used until true predictions have become possible. 349-55). or the equivalent of these for the areas where astrology is not competent. epidemic diseases. There are two main assumptions (Bacon calls them rules) important for the discussion of this section. the quality of air. great winds and rains.341 Bacon was especially interested in the properties of air. Though the author does not discuss the early seventeenth century. Bacon was also interested in finding the healthiest air. Besides the factor of corruption. 343 For a history of the concept of temperature. materials described elsewhere in Sylva as capable of retaining water – in various places and checking after a while whether they gathered water or not. moreover. only some of them are truly affected). and the temper of air (heat and cold). Bacon then develops his experiment further: as the vapours causing illness come from the earth. (SEH IV. for example.342 What has just been described is only one among many experiments designed to determine the qualities of various types of air. he placed a piece of meat outdoors. Accordingly.344 341 In the third book of the De augmentis scientiarum.343 Experiment 810. A second experiment involved the comparison with a similar piece of meat placed in the open air the previous year. chap. A similar piece of meat had to be placed inside the house. in open air. such as the temperature of a given day or epidemic diseases that will spring up or the general quality of the air in a certain circumscribed place. SEH II. Inventing Temperature. Bacon mentions the predictions of. etc. plaques. where air.corruption. changes in the quality and type of air were studied with the very same “instruments” that could “feel” these changes. 805. I. by placing different materials – wool and sponge. The aim of this set-up was to establish. frosts. An experiment can be tried with a hank of wool to see whether it loses weight when put out in the air for some days. 259. especially when it is more perfect. the collaborative feature necessary for such projects are evident – a single person cannot possibly collect all these data. The weather-glass in which the water is lowest is situated in the warmer place. or' with a calendar glass not rising and falling by much. 128 . However. is so great.). If their sympathy. After a certain time. and thus their power of attraction. she recognizes the originality of the way in which Bacon uses instruments in his experimentation and affirms that in the Novum organum.A characteristic that good air should possess. is a factor in longevity” (OFB XII. where it is used in order to prove that wind is air in motion and the cause of it is a dilatation of the air. 223). wool or weather-glasses might look extraordinarily simple.346 More precisely. or with a piece of meat lasting longer without going off.” The properties of the air are too subtle for human observers. namely the weatherglass. Borrelli also mentions the Novum organum and Sylva as places where the weather-glasses are mentioned. once they have been calibrated. as it will otherwise be harmful to man’s health. are much more “sensitive” to changes in the air. and if the water level is different. 27. 355).” 116-17). as well as a comparison between the results obtained in different years and in different places. For both sponge and wool as material that attract water and transform air into water. and left there for a certain amount of time. although he probably had seen them and although they were already known in Europe a few years before the publication of Sylva. It is therefore not surprising that the very same experiments from Sylva are those mentioned in the Historia vitae et mortis to establish the quality of the air: “The Wholesomeness of the air. However. he recommends the use of two identical weather-glasses. then it is evident why Bacon suggests that these materials have to be used as instruments. Cornelius Drebbel and Giambattista Della Porta. the bigger the inequality of the air. 269. see exp. 71-73). they are extremely complex projects. this means that the air is not constant in the region. which require prolonged investigation in several places at once. Bacon explains both experiments through his theory of “perception. Arianna Borrelli suggests that this part of the Historia ventorum was very much influenced by Giovanni Battista Benedetti. SEH II. Bacon proposes the use of an instrument. is to be constant with respect to heat and cold. but even meat or wool. Bacon establishes several connections between the quality of a type of air and the longevity of the inhabitants living in it: “The equality of the air. 235. These must be positioned in two different places. they must be checked simultaneously. In fact. 249-251. 279. Look into these and the like more closely” (Ibid. Experiments investigating the properties of the air with the help of raw meat. “A temporary experimental set-up was transformed into a more or less permanent device” (Borrelli. 348 and 76-80. Given this. instruments such as the weather-glass. without discussing the experiments in detail and concluding that Bacon did not mention their sensitivity to weather changes. and not just its goodness or purity. SEH II. as has already been mentioned. 372-74. both in the open and exposed to sunlight.” in Rees’ translation) is given as an example of transforming insensible to sensible among the Prerogative Instances. inanimate why the force of sympathy is so great: it makes things change their form as a consequence of their desire to unite with each other). The bigger the difference between the water levels in the two weather-glasses. “The Weatherglass. The weather-glass also appears in one of the experiments in the Historia ventorum. 345 In the Historia vitae et mortis. caused by heat (OFB XII. is a tricky matter and 'better sorted out by experiment than by talk or guesswork. 346 The weather-glass is mentioned several times in the Novum organum as performing experiments concerning the nature of heat and cold (See OFB XI.345 In order to measure these properties. The most important for our topic are those where the weather-glass (or “calendar glass. But in reality. according to Bacon. than the senses of human beings. SEH II. while the moisture of air can be detected in wool. or the like” (SS intro to ex. 348 In this respect. but aids for “perception. OFB XII.bodies have “perception. We must also mention here a further element. however. namely the recording of the measured results. it is evident that a simple table recording changes will not suffice. 801. The following example was however already more complex. Bacon’s example is “the aptness or propension of air or water to corrupt or putrefy.. but are both corrections or aids for the senses and for perception.” which has become occult as a consequence of the dullness of our senses.” and this perception is more sensitive to a certain transformation of those bodies they are in contact with. which relied on meat to discover the corruption of the air is based on a simple correlation between the number of days that the meat takes to putrefy in March and the possible arrival of plague in the summer. Apart from its practical use. 603). (no doubt) is to be found before it break forth into manifest effects of diseases. More spectacular. but require some kind of map displaying the results for each sub-region and the variability of the quality of air. This conviction is linked to Bacon’s theory of divination. is the case of the weather-glass. only visible indirectly through the movement of the water in the glass. We recall from above that the recording of results is one of the characteristics according to which Bacon’s experiments can be classified. The first example. by means of “perception. because it allows for the insensible object or quality sought after to become directly or indirectly sensible in the instrument. 107 and ff.”347 This ability of instruments to render the insensible sensible fascinates Bacon. Bacon values the weather-glass because the relation between two simple natures – heat and rarity – becomes manifest in it: the change of temperature of a body (such as air) leads to a change in its density (which is shown through its expansion). Bacon’s use of instruments is completely different from the way in which instruments are described in Manzo’s “Experimentación. because it is indirect. 129 . see also the Historia ventorum. It seems that the results of these measurements cannot be put into tables.” the quality of bodies to accept what is agreeable and to exclude what is not and which can also work at a distance. These signs are given by “perception. which indicates a change in temperature in terms of a change in the volume of air which is. However. On natural divination and the qualities of the air. as the determination of the quality of the air in a given region required the comparison between the measurements taken in a number of places. blastings. which he defines as the property of bodies to perceive some effects of a process before it becomes evident. 3. the only two functions that Manzo acknowledges (63). where this type of divination called “natural” is defined as the science in which mind and signs work together.348 Meat renders the putrefaction of air apparent. Instruments as described by Manzo are designed for neither precision nor measurement. 4. From the way in which many experiments are designed. the subsequent example with wool displays further strong quantitative 347 I have already discussed the presence of the science of divination in Sylva in section 1. Besides its similarly statistical virtue. even when mediated over a distance. improvement of senses would not be enough to discover the activity of perception. 3.” They are not aids for the senses. he concludes that stars. in which Bacon studies the relation between two flames and the form of the inner flame – an exercise that he believes allows for conclusions about the celestial fire and the form of the stars.”350 Jalobeanu draws attention to the experiment with the flame-in-a-flame. Bacon had measured how much water sponges and wool can absorb (“drink”) upon being placed in a glass with liquids. 372) offers also quantitative measurement of wool that had been allowed. 373. Bacon’s method there relies on instruments (from the simple pieces of meat to the weather-glass) that have been specifically designed for their respective aims. according to whom. 80. and the results yield statistics or maps of data. “we can see. 151). The design of the instruments demands little previous knowledge from the experimenter. Experiments as models of natural processes The last category of experiments listed at the beginning of this chapter is concerned with using models of natural phenomena. to gather water. after having taken measurements at a number of individual places. 352-53. days or individual places. nor simple tables of changing qualities. 3.feature. Experiment 76 (SEH II.” 351 SS exp. 130 . for a night. 350 Jalobeanu.349 Having established the maximum quantity of water that a body can absorb. I already briefly discussed Bacon’s cosmological ideas in section 3. “Learning from Experiment.2. This experiment and its conclusions are used also in the Descriptio globi intellectualis (see OFB VI. in the ethereal region. These particular experiments are used by Bacon to replace predictions of astrology. Bacon’s conclusion in this experiment is that the form of a flame within another flame is globular (it becomes pyramidal only in contact with air). on a smaller scale. 6. will have exactly the same characteristics as the inner flame in the experiment with a flame-in-a-flame.3. From this. The construction of such instruments and the reading of the results is not theory-free. but with the table of maximum absorption. This is done not by comparison with another “instrument” placed somewhere else. still. SEH II. In conclusion. with the help of experiments as models. Bacon is not engaged in theory-testing either. Bacons finds it easy to establish. experiments have the role of transforming these properties into something that is accessible to the senses. and that the inner flame rotates and has the colour and “splendour” of a flame. not correction or refutation of theories. Bacon concluded that its weight had increased by a fifth. The role that Bacon’s experiments play as models has been emphasized by Dana Jalobeanu. so that the experimenter can record the results. 31. In previous experiments. in these experiments. SEH II. when it comes to phenomena and processes with invisible or insensitive properties. where the latter fails because it does not predict for individuals. 3. what Bacon claims to be the case in nature. for example.351 349 SS exp. the quantity of moisture found locally in the air. This phenomenon was reported by Pliny. because he takes the relevant parameters to be identical in both cases. such as snow. 396. The experiment starts with an observation taken from Pliny to the effect that in some caves empty vessels were found to contain water in a form almost similar to ice: “which is a notable instance of condensation and induration by burial under earth (in caves) for long time. as in the case of stars) to which Jalobeanu has drawn attention. exp. Bacon creates an experiment in which inflated bladders are placed in different substances. not from an ontological point of view. we must be clear that Bacon could only rely on this specific model because of a clearly metaphysical assumption. for example. What Bacon studies here is how air can be converted into water. Bacon was convinced that he had acquired additional information about celestial flames. The conditions existent in a cave can easily be replaced by a bladder buried in certain substances. However.353 A second way in which Bacon uses modelling in Sylva relies on downscaling. which are known to have a cold nature. See SS. 372. The observation is also reported by Della Porta.” In order to test this experiential report. as in the case of stars and flames discussed by Jalobeanu. and the like in quicksilver. make clear how these models can be used to transfer information from those objects under study to others. or quicksilver. XXXI. But there are more reasons for Bacon’s use of models. nitre. Bacon claims: “Try therefore a small bladder hung in snow. as it would be in a cave under earth” (Ibid. and of version also (as it should seem) of the air into water. SEH II. apart from the case (where models are used as a replacement for an impossible direct experimental investigation. She is right in affirming that this experiment is not a “mere illustration” of a theory. the condensation of air into water in deep caves. but claims that “the relation between Bacon’s speculative philosophy and his modelling experiments is not straightforward as usually assumed” (“Learning from Experiment”). MN XX. 1. and if you find the bladders fallen or shrunk. you may be sure the air is condensed by the cold of those bodies.). In the other case.354 The difference between these two types of model-experiment is that in the first. such as. but simulates what he takes to be the same conditions by using a bladder filled with air which he exposes to a cold environment. Bacon views the cave and the bladder as analogous. He interprets the result of this experiment as relevant to the explanation of the phenomenon reported by Pliny. namely that earthly and celestial fire is of one and the same substance – an assumption that not many contemporaries would have shared. 77.352 In order to explain it by experimental means. Historia naturalis. however. and the like in nitre. There is no doubt that through these experiments. One such case is where modelexperiment is employed to study phenomena that are difficult (but not impossible) to be studied directly in nature.Jalobeanu does not. but in terms of the conditions that bring about a certain phenomenon. the flame-ina-flame example. the analogy relies on the substantial identity between terrestrial and celestial fires and hence on an identity of appetites and motions. 37. 354 Jalobeanu agrees that the process of modelling was not theory-free. That Bacon believes terrestrial 352 See Pliny. Bacon does not seek a cave. 353 131 . Bacon claims that he will discover the truth about the heavens through “observation of the common passions and desires of matter in both globes” (DGI V. Bacon’s aim when discussing plants is to transfer his observations to the animal realm. repulsion. the question of how nourishment gets assimilated in the body. for certain it is. namely the restoration of what is easily repaired and through this. OFB VI. OFB XI. and inteneration of the parts. and parts that nourish and repair hardly. fire is purer than on earth (see Ibid. 113). giving way. In order to clarify this use of simplified models. also nourish the older parts of the plant. I will present some examples. in a series of experiments. emphasizing how much the view that the two substances are different prejudiced the advancement of sciences and how many theories could have been drawn up by the identification of fiery and stellar matter (NO I. but the one to be simpler than the other one. since it is quite certain that many effects. however. but also in the heights of the heaven and in the depths of the Earth.experiments with fire to have explanatory power for the stars is made clear in the Descriptio globi intellectualis. The idea here is to render the investigation easier and thereby facilitate the conclusions and their transferral to complex objects or phenomena. assimilation. 159-161). One of the ways in which the process of assimilation is slowed down is when parts of a body cannot draw in the nourishment rapidly and vigorously. Once again. impression.” Moreover. on the basis of the similarity of the appetites and passions of matter. in these cases. union and the like. they need to rely on a different method. like expansion. and you must refresh and renew those that are 355 In the Descriptio globi intellectualis. attraction.355 A third use of experiments as models is as a simplification. that there are in living creatures parts that nourish and repair easily. aph. He further argues against those who considered the two spheres to be ontologically different: “For these supposed divorces between things ethereal and sublunary look like fabrications and rash superstition to me. with the only difference that in the sky. 75. later in the same book. metaphysical assumptions are necessary. congregation in masses. In the context of his discussion of nourishing foods and drinks. The same idea also appears in the Novum organum. when passing. But given that it is impossible for animals to grow anything analogous to new branches. which. prolonging their life. for the prolongation of life.. hold good not only here Where we live. 132 . Bacon addresses. Bacon. restoration of some degree of youth. they do not require the two objects of study to be identical. Bacon argues for the identity of the two fires. The new branches have more force to draw nourishment. contraction. presumes that the conclusion drawn from the experimental model can be applied to the more complex natural phenomenon because the complexity of the latter is of no consequence for the basic characteristics he is investigating. This time. the revitalization of what is not: Transfer therefore this observation to the helping of nourishment in living creatures: the noblest and principal use whereof is. 121). Paraphrasing Aristotle. Bacon explains why plants live longer than animals: because they continuously grow new leaves and branches. His conclusion is that water alone. The series of experiments concerning the absorption of water is a part of the “Experiments in consort touching the acceleration of germination” (SS exp. or a combination of both substances) that plants live on. After analysing some other methods. 401-412. either from a seed or through spontaneous generation – is the same as in perfect creatures. Assimilation is however not the only process that can be studied by means of simpler models. the only difference being that for more complex animals the spirit has a 356 SS exp. SEH II. and save it from over-heat and over-cold. namely that “the most admirable acceleration by facilitating the nourishment is that of water. He even considers the “capon-beer” to be a kind of “chylus.47879). 357 133 . Bacon refers here to his experiments with meat and drinks which are more nourishing (exp. After proving through a series of experiments357 that it is water (not earth. Indeed. that the other may be refreshed and (as it were) drink in nourishment in the passage. and that the earth doth but keep the plant upright.” It is important to mention here that the same recipes appear in the Historia vitae et mortis. SEH II.” which is proved by several observations and experiments. 358 “It seemeth by these instances of water.) will nourish more easily than meat and drink taken severally” (SS exp. Bacon explains that if food is consumed in a form closer to the already digested one. that for nourishment the water is almost all in all. which are subsequently transferred to more complex circumstances. In Sylva. SEH II. as the best foods for the prolongation of life. Bacon starts the discussion about water with a presupposition.358 It is evident that for Bacon. as well as the mixture of fertilizers with water. and therefore is a comfortable experiment for good drinkers. oils. 58. but the rules that the assimilation of food must follow is always the same. that drink incorporate with flesh or roots (as in capon-beer. creams. and thus that nourishment is more easily assimilated from liquids. but also with the best way to consume them with respect to the digestion: in soups. Every experiment from this group deals not only with the most nourishing substances. Bacon shows that plants kept in water or treated with water fertilizers had accelerated growth. 363. the more complex its food has to be. after he has demonstrated that plants nourish themselves only from water. Bacon assumes that the basic process of vivification – the process through perfect being develops. 358-62). There are many places where Bacon attempts to apply knowledge obtained from the study of plants to animals and even to humans. he offers a number of “recipes” for better nourishment in liquid form. for example. &c. the process is made easier for the human body (the vital spirit does not have to work for the transformation of food and the body can go straight to the assimilation of its nutritive parts). help the process of assimilation. The more the complex an organism is. It proveth also that our former opinion. 45-54. SEH II. the process of assimilation is the same for all living beings.easy to nourish. 411.356 This kind of transfer of knowledge from one class of beings to another is very commonly found in Bacon’s natural historical work. 475-79). In the study of insects. too. Bacon extends these findings to the human diet and suggests that dissolving meat and other hard substances in water renders them more nutritive and easier to assimilate. and some think that their very name was derived from that. To this day the Brazilians and Virginians paint their bodies. 361 Experiment 352 proves that “Part of the wood that sinned was steeped in oil. 557). 351). there exists a continuum between the two processes. and (because they can be most conveniently put to use) oil and fat. may be so used as it may be a great help to health and prolongation of life” (SEH II. Bacon concludes that the same rules are available for plants and animals and even for spontaneously generated beings (OFB XII. myrrh. One can see this by painting a piece of wood with an oily dye. OFB XII. The same kind of transfer of knowledge is made to work in the case of inanimate models displaying the same processes as those found in animate bodies. In fact. reported in experiment 740. paints and that sort of thick. 362 “But yet certain it is that bathing. The differences between putrefaction and vivification consist in the fact that the motion of the spirits is more ordered in vivification. more complex beings come about. 134 . 478). However. and that complex animals appear only after a process of vivification. One of the methods that will achieve this goal is “cold baths. SEH II. this transfer of knowledge from an inanimate body (painted wood) to the human body is made possible by 359 “The nature of things is commonly better perceived in small than in great. SEH II. such as mastic oil. This paint can be a sort of (unspecified) oily ointment. in such a way as to cover its pores and prevent the exhalation of humidity and the flight of the spirit.359 Whenever there is more ordered motion and figuration. intro to exp. in the Historia vitae et mortis.360 in the sense that even a barely ordered motion can produce vivification and the appearance of a new creature. 696. That there were (believed to be) plants and animals bred of putrefaction suggests that in some situations. which require a seed. Oils are used also to fill in the passage through which spirits could leave the body: “10. after distinguishing between putrefaction and vivification.better-ordered motion. and were very long-lived. it will “figurate” it and create a new individual (see introduction to exp.).362 The same instances – oily substances to cover the body. which will prolong its life. as in the form of the “Indian” custom of painting the body. conserve the substance of the body no less than oil-based paints and varnish preserve wood. then. which means that instead of discomposing the tangible matter that contains it. so much so that live years ago the French Fathers encountered some who remembered the building of Pernambuco in their maturity 120 years before” (Ibid. Here is an interesting example: one way to delay putrefaction is by covering the body with an oily substance. As for filling up. 451). so the nature of vivification is best inquired in creatures bred of putrefaction” (SS. and are (the former particularly) extremely longlived. these are “superadded” to the basic structure of bodies. out of putrefaction only very simple imperfect beings result. 275). and in parts than in whole. the confused motion of the spirit can become ordered and can figurate matter.363 Again. which in turn provides a further argument for studying simple animals in order to study the entire animal reign. 363 Bacon explains that the exclusion of air is important because it keeps the innate spirit of the body in and because it softens the parts. with more and better-specialized organs. to the skin” (HVM.361 In the same way. and especially anointing. as well as the reference to “the Indians” – recur in the Historia vitae et mortis. 457). The Picts did the same. The ancient Britons painted their bodies with woad. For Bacon. It is true that both plants and animals bred of putrefaction are simple compared to the others. and retained the shining a fortnight” (SEH II. 11. and by applying astringents. it will be found that painting a human body is conducive to the prolongation of life. close its pores and keep the spirit within the body. 360 In century IV Bacon draws a distinction between the diverse actions of the spirits kept inside the bodies despite their wish to escape. and in unperfect than in perfect. and myrtle. greasy matter. 12. 329. but because putrefaction can never become highly ordered. without these “superadded” organs. Of course. which is why the experimenter can apply insights gained in studying a simpler case to the more complex ones. 135 . and more diligently again into the softening. we pass to animals other than man” (HVM. but not ontologically. concerning which pay attention to the points which follow. in degree of complexity. To be sure. thereby provoking putrefaction. desiccation or death. OFB XII.365 That means that the activity of the non-living spirits of the body would act the same. but it is more difficult in animal bodies because motion inside them is directed towards the circumference” (Ibid. and also the activities of the individual organs. contained only in animate bodies. For this kind of operation is easier on inanimate things because they draw and suck in the liquors. and consumption of inanimate and vegetable bodies. this operation can likely be satisfied by baths. 365 See HVM. but their activity can be sometimes manipulated by the vital spirits (either direct or through the organs and tangible parts which are “whetted and stimulated” by it). 353. when Bacon presents its sections. Now from the inquiry into inanimate and vegetable bodies. The upshot of all this is that Bacon clearly believes that one can begin with a simple model and proceed from there. But we should not conduct a perfect or detailed inquiry even into these things. anointings. he explains why it is important to study inanimate objects and plants in a book that is about the prolongation of human life: because some of the processes are the same: “Inquire more diligently into the desiccation. 364 At the very beginning of the book. additional and more complex factors are at play. factors that we do not encounter in the case of inanimate bodies. moves differently than the inanimate spirits and thus the process is not as efficient: “3. Here Bacon explains that the vital spirit. in the human body. and in addition into the prevention and retarding of the same.Bacon’s particular strategy of using simplified models for complex processes. and the like. 151). rarefaction. since these ought to be fetched out of the proper title of Durable since they are not the main issues in the present inquiry but only illuminate the prolongation and instauration of life in animals. by adding increasingly more factors to the equation. As far as Bacon is concerned. the experimenter must remember that the chief difference between inanimate and animate bodies consists in the types of spirits they contain and their distribution within the body: the inanimate spirits are airy and not continuously distributed through the body. inanimate and animate bodies as well as plants and animals differ only qualitatively and quantitatively. and into the ways and process by which they happen. 319).364 In the very same way in which the spirit of wood tries to escape. These factors are the processes caused by the vital spirit of the body (which does not exist in inanimate bodies). the most important being assimilation of nourishment. and into keeping bodies in their proper state.. the human body is subject to the same process of putrefaction as an inanimate body and hence can be studied first as an inanimate body. 4. Now if we have any power to achieve it. And in these things (as I have said) the same effects occur but in their own way. According to Bacon. mellowing. OFB XII. too. and revival of bodies once they have started drying out. We must not build too much hope of achieving our goal from the fact that we see the job 'being done when inanimate things are steeped and macerated and so become tender--of which I have given examples above. provoking putrefaction. so the inanimate spirits of the human body wish to escape. all of which have effects upon the tangible parts. The same idea is repeated when substances used to soften inanimate bodies are suggested for the softening of the human body. c) living creatures nourish themselves from their upper part. 367 There are eight secondary differences as a consequence of the two primary ones: a) plants are fixed to the earth. furthermore. and an aerial substance. Baconian experimentation created artificial imitations of natural processes. plants from below. We have seen. f) living creatures have a greater diversity of organs and inward figures than plants. 601606. plants do not.366 Within the realm of animate things. have in common the appetites of matter. The last type is the model as simplified case. Bacon finds seven other differences between plants and inanimate bodies: firstly. inanimate bodies not. and are branched in veins and secret canals and “the spirits of animate bodies are all in some degree (more or less) kindled and inflamed. the simple motions and the simple schematisms. pp. to do with the quality of the spirits and their organization: in plants these are less flamy and more airy and organized in channels. But inanimate bodies have their spirits no whit inflamed or kindled. while inanimates do not have it. and have a fine commixture of flame. whereby the continuity between the various realms of nature permits the conclusions drawn at a lower level to a higher one. animate and inanimate. and produce fruitful results as long as the experimenter respects the relevant parameters. 366 There are two main differences between animate and inanimate bodies. while inanimate bodies do not. and we have indeed encountered several types of models. plants are determinate and figurate by the spirit. Fourthly. 528-29). they are holly subterranean (SS exp. plants do nourish. in a very basic sense. A second type of the experiment-as-model is when a phenomenon is studied through its representation at a smaller scale. 136 .” As a consequence of these main differences. plants have a period of life. why it could be that Bacon’s natural investigation was “helped” so often by experiments conducted on models. while plants do not. Thirdly. 529-32). the difference between plants and animals has. g) living creatures have sense. but in animals they are more flamy and. h) living creatures have voluntary motion. pp. while plants do not (See SS exp. secondly. b) living creatures have local motion. e) living creature have a more exact figure than plants. d) plants have their seed and seminal parts uppermost. They facilitate the study of inaccessible phenomena. while living creatures are severed from it. consisting in the qualities of the spirits and their organization: spirits of animate things are continuous with themselves. they are more solid and hard and lastly. The transference of observations and theories from one case to another is justified by the assumption that matter and its appetites and simple motions are the same in the entire universe.367 However. then. they have a main cell. which are everywhere the same. The last three differences are: metals are more durable than plants. besides the channels. all substances. It should have become obvious why.while animate spirits are more flamy and organized in braches and channels. 607-612. they have a succession and propagation of their kind. while living creatures have them lowermost. I have emphasized the use of instruments for Bacon. with the results being applied to more complex objects or processes. it does allocate to experiments an essential function. fulfilled several functions for Bacon. Even though such a verification or falsification constitutes just a first step towards the construction of a natural history and does not bring more information. If we take into consideration only the “experiments of light. they can be classified according to the different roles they play in the construction of a natural history. Instruments are not only suppliers of information for the senses. In such situations. theories and opinions of others had to be verified before they could be included in his own natural and experimental history. the advancement of science would be impossible without them. This is when special experiments are designed in order to render those changes accessible to the senses.” that is. Though sometimes very simple. From the recording of the results. Specially designed for this aim. In other cases. the experiments. According to Bacon. Some experiments explore the qualities of bodies that change during a certain process. Although such a classification might not cover the entire range of Baconian experimentation. they are also artificial devices that make what is not manifest by nature manifest 137 . such as a piece of meat or of wool. instruments play a significant role. The last class of experiments uses simplified models to study a process. the changes happening during a process are not easily observed by the experimenter or are even impossible to be observed. Bacon’s experiments are capable of falsifying both experiments and theories. Continuing forward in our hierarchical scheme. my classification has a hierarchical structure. 4. further experiments can be developed that will delve even more deeply into the causes of the processes of nature.3. it does represent a necessary enlargement and refinement of previous. insufficient classificatory schemes. A further function was that of testing. we turn to three types of experiment that are directed towards exploring and discovering. being artificial manipulations of nature. As should have become clear. During the exemplification of these functions. those that are supposed to bring light into the hidden causes of nature. I started with those experiments that do not produce additional knowledge. but function as an illustration of Bacon’s matter theory as elaborated in his speculative writings. This is why the experimenter must know the qualities of these instruments so that he can discern which one is suitable for each particular experiment. Conclusion Experiments. the results are not always described the way one would expect to find them. however. inanimate and animate.experimentally. as the basis of a comprehension of the phenomena in animals and humans and moreover of their transformation with the help of “art. as we have seen. that there is a quantitative aspect to almost each experiment discussed. namely to more complex ones. in the form they assume in Bacon’s other natural histories. is granted by the metaphysical assumption that the basic processes of matter are the same for each subject. The last class of experiments has results that can be easily transferred to another class of objects. Moreover. the results involve just the acceptance or rejection of an experiment or theory – an experimental result that might possibly lead to further experiments or to the improvement of the given experimental set-up.” 138 . in our first chapter. they have the virtue of creating an artificial phenomenon that does not occur otherwise. as we have already done in our Appendix 5. it is not difficult to imagine how the tables of densities from the Historia densi et rari could be applied to several experiments from Sylva. This transferral. I have shown. which explains Bacon’s special interest in a philosophy of plants. which can be recorded in the form of statistical results or maps. In this chapter. and not only to just the few mentioned. We have seen. Admittedly. that Bacon’s style of experimenting has often been accused of a lack of rigor. We have also drawn attention to the importance given to the recording of the results. However. How this upward move from simpler to more complex organisms works will become clearer in our next chapter. Even if Sylva as a book seems at first sight not to satisfy Bacon’s own requirements for scrupulous natural histories. Other experiments have more complicated results. We have also seen that even those who applauded his attempts at quantitative measuring never viewed Sylva as a part of this programme. and only become more complex as one rises through the scale of being. the individual experiments or groups of experiments are very close to these requirements. In the first classes of experiments. which were published in translation in the following years into Italian (1560). We have seen that. however much Bacon may have relied on the work of others. It was translated into English in 1658 and had several editions in the second half of the seventeen century. 139 .” as its title might suggest and as has frequently been alleged in the secondary literature.” capable of performing changes upon nature. that are much more useful than any descriptive approach to nature. Giovan Battista Della Porta. cookery. Orsi. Sylva contains a plethora of possible examples. “Dalla Magia naturale alla taumatologia”. which make Della Porta one of the most used sources. by knowing the secret agreement and disagreement of things (MN 1. medicines. see: Muraro. and it would be redundant to examine them all. hunting or invisible writing. I. passing through all the arts and crafts. A considerable portion of Sylva discusses plants. we have shown that Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum is not a simple “collection of collections. distillations. but the highly operative character of his book. plants. Ingegno. Introduction In our previous chapters. As we could see. 1. Giovan Battista Della Porta. Balbiani. In 1589 Della Porta published an enlarged version of twenty books. metals. Paparelli. Defining magic as “the practical part of natural philosophy. “Cardano e Della Porta”. The aim of the present chapter is to examine more closely how Bacon used sources in the construction of his own natural and experimental history. A second reason has to do with the last class of experiments discussed in the previous chapter – experiment using simplified models. 1-3).368 The reason for choosing it is not so much the great number of borrowed instances. Giambattista Della Porta. ”Della Porta et Bruno”. Della Porta includes in his book observations and experiments about animals. he did not simply transcribe what they said. This source will be Giovanni Battista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. which went through several editions and was very popular all over Europe. but reworked the experimental records of Antiquity and Renaissance in creative ways which betray a thematic and methodological purpose. Bacon was much interested in those practices that transformed nature. with the aim to transfer the knowledge to animals and humans. 27-113. A particularly significant theme will suffice to demonstrate the point – that Bacon’s use of sources is highly creative and original.Chapter 4. French (1565) and Dutch (1566). About the Magia naturalis and Della Porta’s concept of magic. A great portion of the experimental setups invoked in this 368 Della Porta’s Magia naturalis was published for the first time in Naples in 1558 and was formed of four books. Piccari. La Magia Naturalis. A Case Study on Bacon’s Use of Sources: Experiments with Plants in Sylva sylvarum and the Magia naturalis 4. Vendrine. we will introduce a further author into this dialogue. Appendices 6 and 7 will give the full list of textual correspondences. This chapter will try to fill that lacuna. even more than other centuries: experiments from centuries I and IV are discussed by Jalobeanu in “Learning from Experience”.context are taken from the second. changes. Finally. “Music in Francis Bacon’s Natural Philosophy. whose positive as well as negative reactions to Della Porta can be proven to have been integrated by Bacon into his own complex discussion of the experiments proposed by the Neapolitan author. critiques and sometimes even refutes Della Porta’s experiments or conceptions. We will. continuing the illustration started in the previous chapter – how Bacon uses plants as a model of animals and human beings. the place experiments with plants play in their respective treatises. enlarged edition of the Magia naturalis. for this reason. we will introduce a number of novel elements into the discussion of Sylva. it will be shown how Bacon used Hugh Platt’s experimental reports to change or criticize Della Porta’s experiments and theories. It will become clear how some experiments used to gain knowledge about the basic processes of nature are borrowing from Della Porta’s book on plants from the Magia naturalis. I will start with a short overview of the current discussion on Bacon’s use of sources. we will document the fact that Bacon used Della Porta even more extensively than has hitherto been understood. First. centuries II and III on sounds and music are discussed in Gouk.369 Second. despite their great importance for Bacon’s overall purpose. 369 As I have already mentioned in the previous chapter. This will make it clear why a compared analysis of Bacon’s text and those of his sources is so necessary. comparing individual instances. Moreover. examine closely why plants in general are so important for Della Porta and for Bacon. a usage that is more important for Bacon than might seem at first.” 140 . plants are used as models of animals and human beings. I will then place the experiments with plants within Bacon’s overall natural philosophy. we will show in which methodological and theoretical ways the two authors differ in their treatment of plants. transferring knowledge from one field to another. Fourth and finally. In so doing. namely Hugh Platt. emphasizing the various methods Bacon used to change and modify Della Porta’s experiments. Third. I will analyse in detail Bacon’s use of Della Porta’s experiments.” and century X was analyzed by Corneanu and Vermeir in their article “Idols of the Imagination. and how Bacon copies. an author on horticultural themes. However. it should be mentioned that the two centuries on plants have hitherto received little scholarly attention. the centuries on plants are neglected in the secondary literature. ”372 Was this not a fair charge? After all. Despite its great popularity in the seventeenth century. one in the second century concerning sounds. 328. Previous Scholarly Views We have already had occasion to refer to the tradition of scholars who have described Sylva as a somewhat random collection of observations and experiments borrowed from other authors (see above. However. of which 54 are contained in Sylva’s fifth and sixth centuries. that is to say. 2. about the force of imagination. in his “Preface. as Bacon cited even more experiments from the Magia naturalis than has hitherto been recognized. 2. Bacon at times refers to “one of the ancients” for one of his experimental reports.” he wrote. and two others in the last century. seems to have consulted the original Greek and Latin sources). one of the editors of the nineteenth century edition of Bacon’s works.”370 Ellis not only recognized that on the subject of plants. modern scholars have usually regarded Sylva as a collection of second-hand material irregularly intermixed with Bacon’s own theoretical considerations. but he only mentions the instrument of hearing at distance (A History of Magic. Ellis could not hide his disappointment: “Unfortunately. All the others are to be found in the fifth and sixth centuries. among these 62 instances. 326-27). vol. we will show in detail why Ellis’ dismissive conclusion is not warranted. Sylva] is copied from the most celebrated book of the kind.4. on looking into the Natural Magic. As will appear from my Appendix 6 (below). 2. Ellis’ list is furthermore incomplete. including grafting. Despite all quantitative appearances. Having compared the two authors. where causes are explained in such way that they can be understood by everyone. We recall that its lack of originality was for the first time stressed 150 years ago by Robert Leslie Ellis. Lynn Thorndike also mentions that Bacon “probably” owed something to Della Porta. and not any of the other borrowings.” SEH II. VI. this is the place to express our bafflement that this evident and very straightforward link between two important figures of Renaissance natural philosophy – Della Porta and Bacon – has not been investigated in the 150 years that have 370 As already discussed in chapter 2.). when in truth the whole experiment is directly taken from Della Porta (who. Ellis had identified 61 borrowings from Della Porta. 372 Ellis. Della Porta was Bacon’s major source. 371 According to Ellis. as a book that looked like a typical Renaissance commonplace book or a book of wonders.” Ellis states that Sylva belongs to the category of books of wonders. we find that Bacon was in this case simply a transcriber. It was also Ellis who first identified Della Porta as a key source: “In truth. 141 . specifying that “Natural Magic contributes more than any other book. that formed the common topic of interest. 421-22). a considerable part of it [sc. in turn. Porta’s Natural Magic. “Preface.371 As he pointed out. there are a few experiments taken from Della Porta in the first century (4 borrowings) about percolation. but also that it was the production of fruit and modes of cultivation. but it is far from being a perfect Baconian natural history (SEH II. contains an article by Graham Rees.375 A comparison between the above mentioned manuscript coded “Additional Manuscripts. 374 Rees “Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum. 377 Rees. For a different opinion of the way in which Bacon dealt with the theoretical items of the borrowed material see section 2. entitled “Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum: Prelude to Remarks on the Influence of the Magia Naturalis. “much of the empirical content of the Sylva may have been borrowed. the two authors and their respective books stand for a crucial development in Renaissance natural history and natural magic. it limits itself to introducing the Sylva to his audience.”376 As he argued in another contribution on the same theme.” rendering this work more than just “another Late-Renaissance compendium of the disjecta membra of hollowed but inert erudition. 376 Ibid.373 As for Rees’ article.” As the title suggests. It is indeed one of the principal aims of this chapter to fill this lacuna – a lacuna. September 2012). Rees concludes that “some of the materials drawn from Della Porta’s work may 373 Professor Fattori unfortunately could no longer find her lecture on this theme.374 Many of the experiments in Sylva are “complex.” it isn’t. Fattori never wrote up her lecture into the expected chapter. “Unpublished Manuscript.passed since Ellis first drew attention to it. according to Rees.. The collection of essays. was intended as a collection of experiments that were to back up his natural histories and supply them with axioms. discussing Colclough’s analysis from “Materials for Building.” After all. Giovan Battista Della Porta nell’Europa del suo tempo of 1990. this article is designed as a mere “prelude to remarks”. both Rees and the editors of the volume presumed that Marta Fattori would complement Rees’ chapter with one that would discuss Della Porta’s influence on Bacon. though Sylva might be mistaken for a “farrago of credulous and untested particulars derived not from experience but from books. for example.”377 The Sylva.” 142 . that has been mentioned by other authors who.000 experiments personally. that the materials derived from “classical or modern sources were frequently set into an explanatory framework that has no immediate source other than the system of substantive theories to which Bacon devoted so much of his energies. and moreover added the results of his own experimental and observational work. delivered at the Della Porta conference that preceded the book. furthermore. were unable to fill it themselves. 2. But alas. but the theorizing associated with it was certainly not. It stresses once more that.693” and Sylva shows. As it would have been impossible to conduct all of Sylva’s 1. according to Rees’ interpretation.” 269. After all. in fact. Bacon amplified the material he borrowed. multifaceted entities. it must have seemed to Bacon more expedient to borrow some experiments reported in other sources.” 391. 375 Ibid. just to arrive at this number. however. 38. (Personal communication. It is precisely in this context that grafting – a process that we will have to examine in great detail – emerges as the technique par excellence. his detailed criticism.”378 But exactly where we would have expected Rees to give evidence for his claims. some of the materials drawn from Della Porta’s work may only have been introduced into the text as a make-weight” (Ibid. and to discuss the transformation of Della Porta’s materials in Bacon’s hands. did not take it over. we must understand why Della Porta and Bacon were interested in plants. also seeds) are inserted into those of another. since Della Porta was pressed into service nowhere more extensively that the Sylva. and in the case of Della Porta and Bacon. For Della Porta. in such a way that the two tissues join together into one living plant. he breaks off. 143 . and the care with which Bacon regrouped and combined Della Porta’s chapters. and this fact should certainly be born in mind when looking at the sources raided as Bacon compiled the Sylva. 3. In what follows. generalizing these characteristics of Bacon goes as follows: “Bacon quite enjoyed stretching to achieve totals plucked from the air (as is evident in the Abecedarium).” 271. they at the same time demonstrate an engagement that goes much beyond the act of transcribing and tell us a great deal about the true purpose of Sylva. being a technique whereby tissues from one plant (branches. Irrespective of whether he desires to accelerate and retard germination or to make the fruit 378 Rees. roots. and in which ways their interests overlapped as well as differed.only have been introduced into the text as a make-weight. is the creation of new plants – “new” in the sense that either their form. The entire quotation. Della Porta’s aim. cannot thus be found in nature. bark. as has already been mentioned. first established by Ellis one and a half centuries ago. his omissions and additions. All in all. I shall try to address this task. I shall disprove Ellis’ original view that Bacon’s numerous borrowings make him a mere “transcriber.” interested in arriving by any legitimate or illegitimate means at the magic number of 1. or that they are made to bear fruit earlier or later than under natural circumstances..000 experiments. but has not been explored. 270-71). leaving the torch to Fattori who. in his Magia naturalis. While all of these aspects certainly document Bacon’s great debt to Della Porta. Plants in Della Porta and Bacon: the case of grafting First of all. I shall furthermore document the large number of changes that Bacon brought to Della Porta’s experiments. experimentally produced. 4. has provoked curiosity. “Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum. It is obviously possible that he plundered some sources just to help make up the numbers and that. grafting was the most important technique for altering plants. the Della Porta-Bacon link. then. Yet I deny it not. 144 . by grafting into one fruit.sweeter or else compound its taste. All that Della Porta believes that he needs to know about the matter is which trees are better suited for the type of grafting he has in mind or the type of objective he wishes to reach. he invariably takes recourse to grafting.379 Elsewhere in his treatise. as well as by grafting. According to Della Porta. by copulation. here it is almost infinite. 63. And if diversity of creatures are made in Africa. but one tree can be adulterated with them all. that they might be mingled into one. grafts are fetched and sent. if need be. and not only every tree can be engrafted in every tree. but there are other means whereby this may be effected. For grafting is in plants the same that copulation is in living creatures. after a wonderful manner. III. so now we will show also how to contrive diverse kinds of fruits. Living creatures of divers kinds cannot be easily produced. Della Porta compares the production of new animals in Africa with the production of new plants. as happens with the mule or with other combined animals. and ground to grow in. in his native Italy: And if nature be always admirable. As a consequence. grafting is most praiseworthy. here in Italy. and those that come from other countries were hard to get: here is no difficulty at all. And just in the way in which new animals are generated by copulation. by their copulating when they meet at the river. by means of grafting. where the air is always calm. which is the mother and nourisher of all. grafting is for plants what copulation is for living creatures. as being the best and fittest means to incorporate one fruit into another. strange and wild plants find a good harbour. and the climate very indulgent. and 379 MN 3. we encounter grafting very prominently in each of his chapters on plants. except in the chapter dealing with plants generated by putrefaction. and so of many to make one. Copulation was but one in kind. to any parts of the world. so one can also create new species of plants by means of grafting: As we heard before of diverse living creatures. But above all other. that so new creatures are newly produced. she will seem more wonderful in plants. but there is no theory involved.. 385 MN 3. his 380 Ibid. III. following his advice. its subject being plants generated from putrefaction. and that they “did not seem to know or care to draw any line between the practical and the fantastical. as was required in living creatures. the logic and mechanism behind the results obtained are hardly addressed. though not in the field of plants. Indeed. and the main objective of producing “new plants” is explicit. 381 145 . He is not concerned with explanations of the working of grafting. Della Porta deals with theoretical questions rather casually and light-heartedly. After providing the examples of cherries. his examples of retardation by grafting contradict even his first general rule. 384 MN 3. In fact. he quickly contradicts himself: first he prescribes that “we must engraft forward fruits into later trees. he mentions grafting as a method to make plants degenerate. he concludes: “To be short. on the contrary.382 he specifically mentions three rules that we must follow in grafting: the two trees to be grafted on each other should have the bark of the same nature and should furthermore display similar cycles of growth. that both of them should have the same time of breeding their young ones” (MN 3. X. shooting and blossoming. it is in fact the later fruit which is engrafted into an early tree (an amarendula into a cherry). In his first chapter on compound fruits (chapter III). 382 As I mentioned above. 251-73. when he tells us how to proceed with this type of grafting. chapter I is the only chapter where grafting does not appear. while one should. 63-64. see Kodera. Green Desire. in his chapter on retardation of germination. starts with a theoretical discussion about grafting. 63). Bushnell. In chapter II.380 These passages would confirm Rebecca Bushnell’s comment that for Della Porta and his readers. the grafting should be carried out at the purest place of the stock. he quickly forgets about them. Chapter III.”385 But when he presents his first experiment.383 But contrary to this. 386 “And both of them must have the same time of growing and shooting out of their sprigs. X. all kinds of fruits may be made to grow later by this kind of engrafting. For a different vision on Della Porta’s magic. III.”381 While the general analogy of grafting with copulation is clear. then.so fruitful to produce new and diversity of plants. Disreputable Bodies. grafting was a kind of “magical copulation” between different species of plants. and the trees must be of a fruitful kind and both young. pears and roses. that as can hardly be exhausted. 383 See MN 3. namely that the two trees to be combined should have the same period of blooming and bearing fruit. 58. which first introduces grafting as a technique. 79.”384 Yet. have engrafted the cherry into the amarendula so as to obtain later fruits. 80. he mentions grafting as the most important technique in making fruits or flowers develop late. 144.386 Overall. and even when he sets down some practical rules. Bacon compared the case of grafting in plants with eating cooked food for men. Recall. His argument went as follows: The better the nourishment is prepared. but this does not mean that Della Porta blindly accepts every report of their works. his selective and critical usage of Della Porta’s reports is nothing if not a reflection of his own desire to produce a natural history of plants that could yield a theoretical framework. for example. could produce important results for the animal and human realms. And furthermore.explanations and rules are ad hoc. according to Della Porta’s own rules. This contradiction is not as innocent as it may seem. This is precisely why he thought that an experimental study of plant life. and the more do animals fatten. grafting cannot possibly be responsible for either retardation or acceleration. Sometimes he hints at his own trials and explains that previous methods didn’t succeed. ash. might easily take his experimental reports as proving that. that Bacon thought that the process of nourishing was similar in plants and animals. because it reveals Della Porta’s lack of the type of theoretical underpinnings that we will see Bacon to be searching for. Sometimes he criticizes ancient authors for their methodology and chastises them for their false results. when discussing alimentation. We saw that he considered them a type of simplified model of animal life. and so on. and particularly of the ways in which nutrition could lead to longevity and fertility. For no slip or cutting stuck in the ground gets fed as well as if it were grafted on a stock which agrees well with its nature. OFB XII. In his Historia vitae et mortis. we have analyzed Bacon’s interest in plants.388 387 It is true that some of these methods are borrowed from ancient authors. oak. like elm. as well as the careful experimenter or the careful reader. for example. However. there is little by way of theory that can be learned from Della Porta. 146 . Bacon was precisely such a careful reader. where it finds nourishment digested and prepared. Neither too (as they report) will an onion seed or the like produce a plant as big when planted in the ground.387 The contradictory statements about how to retard blooming and fruit-bearing shows that Della Porta has not settled the fundamental issue of whether the force of retardation lies in the stock or instead in the scion. 388 HVM. In chapter 3. as when it is set by a kind of grafting on the root of another onion beneath the ground. it has been discovered lately that slips of Wild trees. Men too are better fed on cooked rather than raw meats. 195. and the nearer it approaches to the substance of the thing nourished. In fact. set on stocks produce much larger leaves than if they had come up without grafting. The sceptic. the more productive do plants become. 445. While Della Porta had put the seeds next to a sea-onion. 76-77). This I conceive to be as a kind of grafting in the root. because the body can focus only on assimilation of the nutritive substances and not anymore in their transformation. SEH II. This initial. SEH II. he adjusted it in two ways.) and they will come up much earlier than in the earth itself. Della Porta puts the seeds next to the sea onion.390 is quite directly taken from Della Porta. as they do not have to digest and concoct the water extracted from the soil.389 The example of the seeds of a fig. simple example shows a number of things. Theophrastus says you may procure it by setting the same Into the sea-onion: for if a fig-tree be set but near it. who in turn attributed it to Theophrastus. It is true that the examples are not identical. And here comes the clue: Bacon must have noticed the contradictory rules and explanations with which Della Porta surrounded his experiments using grafting. but they form part of a group of borrowings. or a plum-stone. as we will see later. as they can nourish themselves on the already concocted substance of the sea onion upon which the tree has been grafted. by reason of the strong inward heat which that herb is endued withal” (MN 3. Century I contains several experiments about how to prepare this kind of “nutritive” food. Bacon is interested in it because he is convinced that the figs on the grafted tree will be bigger than they would have been otherwise. 485-86). there is nothing set in the sea-onion. but will more easily and speedily shoot forth. While Della Porta explains the greater size of the resulting figs by the “heat” of the sea-onion. if men eat concocted food. 358-365. or a peach. grafted in a sea onion. Bacon integrates it into his model of nourishment. as the digestion of the food itself has already taken place. for as the stock of a graft yieldeth better prepared nourishment to the graft than the crude earth. some of which will be discussed further. it will cause the speedily ripening of figs. and put them into a squill. pears. he adds the following “warning” against a “common opinion”: Men have entertained a conceit that sheweth prettily. he modifies the experiment itself. &c. To begin with. that if you graft a late-coming fruit upon a stock of a fruit-tree that cometh early.. 45-59. This in turn will help to prolong life and bring about health. oranges. without making it clear why heat would make fruits bigger. this will facilitate the process of assimilation of the nutritive substances.According to Bacon. And to be brief. “Take seed or kernels of apples.391 Whatever the meaning of this experiment might have been for Della Porta. so the squill doth the like to the seed” (SS exp. namely. But the more important difference lies in the theoretical use that is made of the experiment. (which is like a great onion. 391 “Moreover. However. an experiment that is discussed in great details in Sylva. Della Porta uses the method of engrafting seeds into the root of plants in other instances. 390 147 . for in the last section dealing with techniques of delaying natural plant rhythms. VIII. Bacon speaks about grafting them directly upon the roots of the plant. where a number of consequent instances are taken. the graft will 389 SS exp. if you want to have anything to bud forth very timely. While it is obvious that Bacon took his example from Della Porta. grafting adjusts the way in which the scion takes from the stock nourishment that has already been concocted. and giveth aliment. that have male and female. grafting must be compared to the assimilation of food in animals. as a peach upon a cherry. as the mule. that is generated betwixt the horse and the ass. and the stock is but passive only. SEH II. he does not cite Della Porta by name. 480. but the “common opinion” and “conceit” is clearly Della Porta’s (whose view he. But these are but imaginations. but no motion. The cause is.392 We have earlier cited Rebecca Bushnell’s verdict that Della Porta and his readers. as a cherry upon a peach. This experiment is the last of the section on retardation of germination. in the two centuries of his Sylva. and contrariwise. One of the desired consequences of these techniques is that the fruit will grow bigger than usual. if an early coming fruit upon a stock of a fruit-tree that cometh late.” which is a mixture of the two “parent” plants. to the graft. and some other compounds which we call 392 SS exp. with plants exchanging properties and producing a “new plant. and the role played by the “new” African beasts: We see that in living creatures. the graft will bear fruit late. grafting. who does try to tease the fantastical and the factual asunder. as in the example of the figs engrafted into the sea onion. moreover.393 Bacon’s own suggestion is that the time when the tree is supposed to bear fruit is not transmitted to the scion. Instead. by contrast.bear fruit early. That he has Della Porta in mind when insisting on this point so much emerges from the way in which he reverses the analogy between animals and plants invoked in Della Porta’s introduction to the third book (quoted above). Given that Della Porta is the main source of Sylva concerning plants and that grafting was so significant for Della Porta. While the other techniques used by Della Porta can be recognized in Bacon’s own section. and untrue. 421. but never change it. the main method used by Della Porta. that grafting can only improve the fruit. clears of its original selfcontradictoriness). does not appear. it is very likely to believe that Bacon’s criticism was directed towards the Italian. and so compound creatures. for that the scion over-ruleth the stock quite. grafting is the plant equivalent of animal copulation. Bacon represents a reader. Once again. While both Della Porta and Bacon believed in some type of analogy between plant and animal life. 393 148 . For Bacon. there is copulation of several kinds.” did not care to distinguish between fictitious and true reports. grafting cannot be used either to speed up or slow down the time of fruit-bearing. considering grafting a type of “magical copulation. the difference between them lies thus in this: for Della Porta. He repeatedly insists. For this reason. however. for otherwise it dulleth it. Grafting is particularly meaningful as well as successful when an inferior stock is over-ruled by a young. always provided that it be somewhat inferior to the scion. 492. 396 MN 3. It can be used only to make fruits bigger or sweeter. One is with the scion of a musk pear. in regard the nourishment is better concocted. &c. the Apple will have a Relish like Honey. SS exp 467. for that their lust requireth a voluntary motion. 477. X. Which kind of fruit the Athenians do therefore call Melimela. which nevertheless. For if you do Engraft an Apple into a Quince. Bacon once more responds to Della Porta. for that the fountains of waters there being rare. the choice of the stock doth much. Africa semper aliquid monstri parit? cometh. if it be possible. and it is held that that proverb.. and many times with several kinds. and so being refreshed. XVII.monsters. 490. the fruit of which becomes tastier. 397 “So likewise may be procured. They command much the grafting of pears or apples upon a quince. as Diophanes shows” (MN 3. which makes the fruit bigger. but it hath not the power to make a new kind. 395 149 . wherefore it were one of the most noble experiments touching plants to find it out: for so you may have great variety of new fruits and flowers yet unknown. above that which they would be if they were set of kernels or stones. because they taste like Honey. fresh scion: As grafting doth generally advance and meliorate fruits. divers sorts of beasts come from several parts to drink.397 Della Porta’s reason for choosing the 394 SS. SEH II. so (no doubt) even in Grafting. for the same cause. 82. introduction to exp. though more rare. or doubleth the flowers. That mendeth the fruit. Grafting doth it not.396 The other is with an apple. is more at command than that of living creatures. 98). whose Magia naturalis contained two experiments with grafting upon quinces. Bacon does establish some rules in order for this method to work. But even if he reduces so much the effects of grafting. fall to couple. Sweeter Apples by Grafting them into a Quince.394 Grafting therefore has a different purpose in Bacon than it does in Della Porta. What is puzzling is that he uses Della Porta’s examples in order to illustrate these rules. SEH II. For the scion ever over-ruleth the stock.395 When offering experimental evidence of how this “over-ruling” takes place. The compounding or mixture of kinds in plants is not found out. based on similarities of their bodies. as it were. XVII. nutrition can bring about changes in the plant. Bacon criticizes this theory as superficial and considers that the sympathies and antipathies between bodies must be established at the level of subtle entities of matter. of a citron grafted upon a quince-tree. of all other. This difference becomes also evident in the following example. animals on plants. Della Porta believes that the myrtle-tree will bring forth greater fruits in comparison to its body than the pomegranate. as it will otherwise not be over-ruled by the scion. by contrast. 97. who writes: 398 MN 3. and even man himself lives partly on plants” (OFB XII. 399 150 . Of course. the scion grafted onto it will grow more.401 None of this will happen in Bacon. They just change qualities and provoke changes one into another. grafted upon a bitter one. As we have seen. that of sympathies and antipathies between the divers things of the universe. When the tree providing the stock carries bigger fruits. but because of a particularly suitable quality: because the quince-tree. 193). 82). and man on animals.398 For Della Porta. without being engrafted: “But I am persuaded that the myrtle-tree brings forth greater fruit in proportion to her body when it is engrafted upon the pomegranate-tree. then the pomegranate-tree does when it is engrafted upon the myrtle-tree” (MN 3. When two trees possess opposed qualities. There are also carnivorous animals.400 In keeping with his view of grafting as copulation. experience thereof. with bigger fruit resulting from the combination. because the kind of this is greater than the kind of that. Della Porta founds here his examples and his theory on a Renaissance alchemical concept. bears the greatest fruit: and thereby the least pears that are may be so augmented. The theory of grafting from Sylva clearly states that this relation of superiority-inferiority between has to be respected also at a micro level. will produce a fruit with a perfect flavour. any type of tree can be grafted upon any other. one will obtain fruits without a kernel. One of Della Porta’s examples of making fruits bigger is by grafting myrtle-trees on pomegranate-trees. Della Porta had maintained that when one grafts a fruit with a big and hard kernel upon one with a small and soft one. Della Porta believes in a transfer of qualities between two plants. for Bacon. the nourishment should be of a lower nature and a simpler substance. the stock has to be inferior. An overly sweet tree. because the latter is greater in its natural state. the limits of grafting have to do with the sympathies and antipathies acting between the scion and the stock. where grafting only regulates nourishment. 82. 400 This idea is detailed in the Historia vitae et mortis: “As compared with the body nourished.quince as the stock has nothing to do with this tree being “dull” in comparison with the other trees. these will be mixed through grafting.” Bacon’s further examples are just very general: “Plants feed on earth and water. X. but only as a result of the process of assimilation. 401 MN 3. moreover. X. whereby each will be delighted with the other’s company and bring forth bigger fruits.399 When the chemistry works. His example. that they will become a very goodly fruit. is taken over by Bacon. This is another example in which there is no relation of superiority between the two parts of the grafting. we have in many places in our country. receipts for more nourishing food. In other words. the result is due to the fact that the stalk is more watery than the scion and thus makes the fruit of the scion also more watery. Deborah Harkness shows how he maintained relation with physicians. and otherwise either rejects or corrects them. There are also various evidences of his experimental practices. were published in several volumes. 1552-1608). SEH II. goldsmiths.403 Although he had published on agricultural and horticultural matters throughout his life. Platt was a very significant figure of Elizabethan age. especially The Jewell House of Art and Nature and the Flores Paradisae. and more void of the harsh matter of kernels or seeds. 11-40 and Deborah Harkness. he was not: there was at least one figure who preceded him. For Della Porta. His books. 402 SS exp.402 It is striking that here the two authors offer completely different explanations for the same alleged phenomenon. from whom he provided information for his numerous experiments and receipts. and it is very probable that any sour fruit grafted upon a stock that beareth a sweeter fruit. It is to this hitherto unnoticed figure that we must turn here. The Jewel House. that a citron grafted upon a quince will have small or no seeds. But was he the first reader to display scepticism vis-à-vis Della Porta’s claims and to reject the notion of grafting as copulation? No. because it can be explained in Bacon’s own terms.It is reported also. and who moreover influenced Bacon’s own reaction to Della Porta’s reports. he was interested in improving the life of English people and fighting dearth. by a simple transfer of qualities. 505. see Thick. may both make the fruit sweeter. For a short bibliography of Hugh Platt. the improvement of the agricultural techniques in order to have greater crops. What had been a transfer of qualities for one author has become a consequence of the process of nutrition with already concocted substances. Knight: with an offer of an English antidote. clockmakers or gardeners. 515. Della Porta’s experiment is credible. by the industrious labour of H. an English inventor and author on agricultural and horticultural matters who was knighted in 1605 by James I for his inventions. In Bacon’s theoretical framework. The production of seeds is also due to the process of concoction. This figure was Sir Hugh Platt (also spelled as Plat. as their matter is more oily than the other parts of the fruit. apothecaries. 211-41. surgeons. alchemists. Moreover. Hugh Platt’s most important contribution is contained in his Floraes Paradise beautified and adorned with sundry sorts of delicate fruites and flowers. Bacon’s explanation takes recourse to his own matter theory: the sweetness of fruit is due to the higher level of concoctions of its juices. Sir Hugh Plat. 403 151 . Bacon accepts Della Porta’s reports whenever they seem acceptable within his own theoretical framework.P. This is why among his main concerns one can find the preservation of food and drinks for a longer time. of course. see Mukherjee. and intermittent agues) as also of some other rare inventions. As we will see in more detail below. 406 In several experiments. For Platt’s theory of grafting. see Mukherjee. and changes to. Platt’s book is oriented towards a bigger production or obtaining fruits of a better quality. Bacon’s criticism of. Della Porta’s treatment of plants was not exclusively taken over from Platt. the way of selecting the best graft and the best stock. 152 . it will be so hungry that it will consume the sap of the stock immediately (FP II. not copulation.404 Bacon knew and used this book. He is however less explicit than Bacon about the process through which the graft feeds upon the stalk. Elsewhere. he borrowed several experiments from the Floraes Paradise and also concurred with Platt’s understanding of grafting as a matter of nutrition. he identifies grafting with nourishment (as Bacon would) and not with copulation (as Della Porta had done). In Sylva. we may now state that it was his most important source on plants after Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. apothecaries and horsemen. the type of instruments to be used for the different types of bark. Platt does mention that the stalk feeds the scion. see also Mukherjee.405 Platt’s book provides above all detailed information concerning the technique of grafting. “The Secrets. for Platt’s personal network.” 76-78. “Floraes Paradise. In fact. see ibid. fitting the times. While on the topic of grafting. it says little by way of an explanation of the inner workings of the plants. but he clearly does not see grafting as copulation between two plants. and pleasing remedy in violent feavers. By contrast. as we shall demonstrate in more detail below (for a list of corresponding passages see Appendix 6). which contains Platt’s annotations. 131-33). “Floraes Paradise. for his reading of Della Porta. while it tries to uncover the hidden processes underlying the behaviour of grafted plants. However. of 1608. Platt puts the accent on how the scion is fed upon the sap of the stalk. That he had studied Della Porta’s treatise closely can be seen from his personal copy of the Magia naturalis.” 14. Importantly. gardening practices and rhetoric. he explains how grafting can be used to make fruits bigger: if a scion is cut in December and grafted in March or April. he gives advice on how to bring more sap to the stalk so as to feed the scion.(being a present. Importantly. “Floraes Paradise.” 8-10. the Floraes Paradise contained a series of critical remarks with regard to the experimental claims in Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. as Platt prefers the testimony of gardeners.406 In other words. the relation is reversed: it contains little technical information. his own theoretical considerations go much beyond what could be found in Platt’s work. 14. In his introduction. the first dealing with flowers and seeds and the second with trees. nowadays kept at The Cambridge Library. whose reports he considers more reliable. In experiment 79.” 405 See Mukherjee. becoming one of the most influential books on husbandry in England. 80. About Platt’s book and gardening theories. concerning the right time and place of grafting. The book is structured in two parts. easie. which bring about the observed results. that is to say. What we may 404 The Floraes Paradise was published right before Platt’s death in 1608 and went to several editions in the seventeenth century. Platt pointed out that Della Porta was clearly less of an expert in plants than in other domains. however.. the Floraes Paradise does not further mention Della Porta as a source. such as Platt’s. replaces once again the formula “Aristotle reporteth” with “It is reported. the manuscript originally stated. experiment 797. so as to correct or reinterpret Della Porta’s evidence. Bacon’s creative use of sources for his Sylva sylvarum As the previous pages should have made clear. however.4. and (ii) to implement his declared intention of not burdening natural history with the traditional and ostentatious parades of authorities. He selected carefully. see Jalobeanu. 4. OFB XI. which he views as a case of alimentation. “Reading Strategies. Inventarea modernității. and each of the experiments that he selected. rejecting Della Porta’s copulation.407 There are good reasons for affirming that the logic of Sylva is very much in accordance with Bacon’s proposed way of constructing natural histories as sketched in such methodological writings as The Advancement of Learning. Bacon’s selective and critical use of the sources distinguishes Sylva from a commonplace book. Bacon did not blindly excerpt experiments from Della Porta’s Magia naturalis for his own Sylva. 87-122.” 19-28 and my section 2. First of all. to the original “It is reported. There. Bacon’s maxim is as follows: “No author should be cited save in matter of doubt. he changed and transformed often quite dramatically.” which was subsequently replaced by “Aristotle reporteth. Graham Rees has made some very important observations with respect to the differences between the manuscript and Sylva. omitting much. and changed the definitions of such key concepts as grafting. 408 Parasceve 3. In the case of experiment 361. so as to check the claims made by others. as we have seen. 2.provisionally conclude is that Bacon had both the Magia naturalis and the Floraes Paradise lying on his table while reflecting on plant experiments and while compiling the centuries dealing with that matter. “It is reported. Bacon explains how one should deal with texts that one wishes to use as a basis for knowledge claims. or he confronted the accepted borrowings with his own conceptions.” Rees is convinced that Bacon’s intention in deleting the names was not to claim that this material was his own: “The differences noted here (especially the vacillation over Expts. the De augmentis scientiarum or the Parasceve ad historiam naturalem et experimentalem. 457. Bacon clearly wanted (i) to ensure that borrowed material could be identified and distinguished from his own. On the opposed attitude of some philosophers towards commonplacing in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. One way in which he achieved both (i) and (ii) was to use the 153 . It is important to mention that he attempted to integrate the experiments reported by others into his own general matter theory as expounded in his various natural histories as well as in Sylva. voiced criticism of views that can be attributed to Della Porta.” The second example. Della Porta’s 407 On the techniques in the composition of commonplace books. or relied on the experimental horticultural literature. He added cases. It is furthermore evident that Bacon either experimented on plants.” Sylva returns. 361 and 797) almost suggest over-scrupulousness.”408 Indeed. see Blair. the name of the author is not important. 410 Parasceve. natural histories have not been composed to amuse the reader or make him wonder. However. we could see in chapters 2 and 3 that Aristotle’s name is mentioned a few times when Bacon criticized his theories. 457: “For no one collecting and storing materials for ship building or the like bothers (as shops do) about arranging them nicely and displaying them attractively. 467). On the contrary. as well as Paracelsus. with the only existing reference occurring in the manuscript. in his Preface to the edition of Sylva. so that there is no need for any eloquence or stylistic elegance. but it demands on the contrary to state whether an experiment or an idea is ancient or modern. OFB XI.409 However. Where Della Porta had taken an experiment from the ancients. 41 of the manuscript: “leuen to last a yeare. that Ellis criticized. the idea that when Bacon borrowed experiments from Della Porta. it was therefore correct for Bacon to refer to the ancients as the true source of the experiment. according to Bacon. the second with a note. we can state that it is fully in accordance with Bacon’s own norms. As far as the style of presentation is concerned.name does not appear in Sylva. because it is essential to report all those elements important in the design and results of the experiments. He there proposes to distinguish between three discrete levels of reliability: But as for the reliability of the materials taken into the natural history. but represent the prime matter for induction. whether the experiment reported has been performed in the author’s own time or has been taken from the ancients. rather his sole concern is that they are serviceable and good. 409 Fol.” Rees.” 389. which do not demand the compiler of natural histories to consult primary sources. and not to moderns. “Preface. but that such a mention was more accurate. Fol 195” in Rees. “Manuscript. and not with the proper length of the experiment. 2. “everything which is adopted is set down briefly and concisely. And this is just what should be done here. 48r. 154 . such as. the most recent source being less important than the first (the origin of the experiment under discussion). “Unpublished Manuscript. in all other cases where the manuscript contains borrowing from Della Porta. Confronting his methodology of borrowing with the afferent theory. for example. or they report. Now the first sort should be put down plain. he wrote “one of the ancients” (Ellis. the latter’s name is omitted. Porta.”410 Despite this requirement of brevity. p. This does not mean he did not accept Della Porta as his source. or all believed? In the eighth aphorism of Parasceve. of doubtful reliability.411 This brevity has to do only with the style of writing. But how is one to deal with the experimental reports handed down by others? How is one to assess their trustworthiness? Should they all be doubted. or I have it on good stock formula (‘It is reported’) – a formula which occurs dozens of times and in a variety of forms in the Sylva.” 411 It has been already mentioned in 4.” 408.” SEH II. Bacon discusses the way in which he feels a writer of natural histories should present the experiments and observations taken from others. they are of necessity wholly reliable. or downright unreliable. for instance with a phrase like they say. so that they [the accounts] are not exceeded by the words that report them. and take up as little space as possible in the Ware house. not even in those instances where his techniques are criticized. Bacon insists upon the need to report certain elements. 670-71). because (as I said in Aphorism 118 of Book I) the truth of axioms will refute the falsehood of experiments. 2) If the doubtful fact first of all is not impossible and further was verified by some witness. According to Manzo.” is the inclusion of “false facts” in the natural 155 . these “opinions” are often simply Bacon’s own matter theory and sometimes his methodological practices. or has not yet been confirmed by direct experience.” In the second category. and anything else like that which affects one’s estimate of reliability. then certainly the author’s name should be given. but there are many trustworthy testimonies that report it (SS exp. and many other things of the kind). or his own direct knowledge. whenever they might be “useful for practice. which according to Bacon are difficult to verify through “experiments.” There. Another issue that Manzo does not discuss. would it contribute much to the business in hand. No doubt the first criterion is preferred by Bacon. As should have become clear in our second chapter and will in greater detail be shown further down. Certainty. and Facts. There are. either because of its use or because a great deal depends on it.authority. unless the latter swarm everywhere. 467-69. would have been witnessed by many others. SEH II. there are things which are downright unreliable but which are bandied about and celebrated all the same-things of the kind which. Certainty. although she announces it in her section title. for that matter. The first category includes preternatural facts and some of the superstitious and natural magic practices. partly from carelessness. Nevertheless. “Probability. Nor. and whether it deserved to be included in his natural histories. For it would be very hard work to put down the arguments about reliability pro and contra. Lastly. What Manzo does not explain is which of these “presupposed opinions” might be with which the facts are confronted. 998. But if the instance has more nobility. if true. sometimes Bacon decides to include doubtful facts. and the like. that amber attracts everything except basil. the facts can be verified by specific proofs. and they would no doubt hold up the writer no end. and lastly whether that author was a frivolous and idle chatterer or a man of sobriety and rigour. whereby Manzo underlines the fact that the content starts to be more important than the authority. or a source of testimony is not reliable enough or there are scarce testimonies in favor of it (SS exp. SEH II. Pliny gives you). and again whether it was the sort of thing which. That is. 507)” (Manzo. and partly from figurative usage have flourished for ages (such as that diamond binds loadstone and garlic weakens it. but because some of the facts cannot be verified by direct experience. The problem of “doubtful” facts is discussed in Manzo. the second criterion is often relied on in Sylva. and not just the bare name but some note as to whether he had it from hearsay or reading (which is mostly what C. 523. and Facts. and also whether it belonged to the writer’s time or was older. according to Manzo. these should not be quietly set aside but be publicly proscribed lest they do any more damage to the sciences.412 412 Idem. the same criteria are used when a fact is established as false or doubtful.” There are two kinds of circumstances when a doubtful fact should be reported: “1) If a large number of reliable testimonies report the fact but the fact contradicts a presupposed opinion. “Probability. in the context of our analysis of Bacon’s borrowings from Della Porta. prima facie the fact might not be certain because it opposes an accepted opinion. “False and Doubtful Facts.” 131-32). Manzo argues. two ways in which a fact may be considered certain: “when it has been tried and examined by direct experience” and “when the fact is considered certain because it is probable in account of his conformity with presupposed opinion” (130). she addresses the question of the criteria used by Bacon to establish whether a fact reported by others is reliable or not. so that they can no longer impede the advancement of learning. (. at 91). Methodological criticism The first aspect that we wish to subject to scrutiny are Bacon’s methodological considerations with respect to Della Porta’s work. I shall return to that theme in my section on Bacon’s criticism of Della Porta’s methodology. as if to move them out of the way once and for all. 27-28). Oportet discentem credere. 1. the damage is infinite that sciences have received thereby. Authority as such has no weight in the composition of a natural history. and not counsels to give advice. We have also seen that Bacon sometimes also included oft-reported experiments. see also Snider.) And therefore. [when he has learned it he must exercise his judgment and see whether it be worthy of belief. for the truth should be sought not in the inconstant fortune of any particular age. Now this has done great damage to the sciences and philosophy since studies lean rather to antiquity and novelty than to considered judgements. that their words should stand. but few are judicious enough to steer a middle course. According to Bacon. 156 .What has to be noticed is the fact that for Bacon reliability of information is not based on authority.413 This blind and obedient credit given to established authorities was a hindrance to the advancement of sciences. and not an absolute resignation or perpetual captivity” (The Advancement of Learning. neither ruining what the ancients rightly laid down nor despising what the new men rightly put forward.2 and 3.. histories. Oportet edoctum judicare. in making them dictators. some by love and infatuation for novelty. which he then shows to be wrong. as the principal cause that hath kept them low.. although the position be good. but in the everlasting light of nature and experience. 414 “And as for the overmuch credit that hath been given unto authors in sciences. 56. There.] yet it must be coupled with this. This issue of authority is discussed at length in The Advancement of Learning and in the Novum organum. at 89-93. This dangerous phenomenon in fact constituted an idol of the human mind. aph.3. 4. On the issue of authority in Bacon’s works. 21-88. we have explained how Bacon invokes specifically designed experiments with which to reject other experiments and theories. 4. OFB IV.The idols of the cave are consequences of the books one reads and the authorities he admires: “We find that some intellects are captivated by admiration of antiquity. Origin and authority. They are in keeping with what has been said about Bacon’s methodical use of experiments in our last chapter.] for disciples do owe unto masters only a temporary belief and a suspension of their own judgment until they be fully instructed. and for which the criterion of utility cannot possibly be applied. Let us now apply this point to Bacon’s reception of Della Porta and scrutinize closely how he combined his criticism with an appreciation of the presumed utility of the techniques presented in the latter’s natural magic. [a man who is learning must be content o believe what he is told. Thus we should abandon factious studies and beware lest they rush the intellect into agreement with them” (aph.3. 413 Novum organum. 81 and aph. 14 OFB XI. The cure to this disease of learning lay in a critical position towards all authorities. I.414 Bacon’s own critical approach to authorities has been illustrated above (sections 3.3). their admiration for certain authors has made philosophers seek more avidly for their words than for their truth. at a stay without growth or advancement. 53-58. seem to carrie the sent or taste. taste. this technique can never work to slow down the growth of plans or produce compound fruits or flowers. 416 FP II. of changing the colour. 499. taste or medical virtues are all simple natures and are thus induced in an object by means of the same method. in general.3. In the section entitled “Experiments in consort touching the making herbs and fruits medicinable. aromatical. from Hugh Platt. 97. and of supplementing both on the basis of his own theory. but false opinion: The altering of the scent. 141-42.415 Now. in particular. or flower. It should be mentioned that in this experiment. SEH II. of any fruite. by infusing. or medicinal substance. we have moreover shown in section 4.” Bacon starts by citing an established. In this way. or taste of fruit.416 415 SS exp. any coloured. mixing. or at the rootes of any tree. 498-99. Pace Della Porta. 157 . is illustrated however even more exquisitely in the following example. of criticizing the one on the basis of the other. of any colourd or aromaticall substance. by infusing. yet that doth rather arise from their own naturall infused qualitie. such as are not naturally incident to their kind.With respect to Della Porta’s treatments of plants. XV – How the colours of flowers may also be changed. aromatic or medicinal substances. are but fancies. or letting into the bark or root of the tree. it turns out that an exceedingly similar affirmation is found in the Floraes Paradise: All those fantasticall conceits. that Bacon chastised it for its fantastic “conceits. XVI – How fruits and flowers may be made to yield a better flavour than ordinary. because colour. XVII – How to procure fruits to be sweeter and pleasanter for taste. hearbe or flower. mixing or letting into the bark. colour. Maister Hill has by often experience sufficiently controlled: and though some fruites and flowers. XX – How divers kinds of fruits. on making fruits and flowers more aromatic and flavoured (chapter XIV – How to procure fruits to be of divers colours. but that the results it produces are due to alimentation. herb. albeit in a modified form. and likewise wines may be made medicinable). of some aromaticall bodie. and of grafting. We have finally seen that Bacon’s view according to which grafting is not a plant variant of copulation. then from the hand of man. he puts together Della Porta’s examples from other chapters. or flower. Bacon lumps together changes produced by coloured. or sent.” and for misunderstanding the very nature of grafting. Bacon’s method of taking ideas from two sources. was taken. nor will it work unless the relation between inferior stock and superior scion is respected. and grafting in between the bark and the stem.” 418 SS exp. In fact. which are not strong enough to change them. See Prior. After all. 498-99. instead of invoking experimental falsification (or at least lack of results with the given parameters of the experiment). but gives examples for the opposite situation. by adding an experiment with four different methods of making plants 417 It has been enough emphasized in the previous chapters that Bacon’s ideal for the advancement of science was a scientific community. It is clear that in the case of these substances. and nourish not. As we could see in the case of grafting. he gives theoretical reasons concerning the process of nourishment. their spirit is not more active than the one of the tree. 158 .This experiment.419 Bacon goes. further than merely criticizing Della Porta’s experimental procedure. this does not mean that Bacon did not reject Della Porta’s experiments (and the subsequent theory) on the ground of Platt’s reports. as it has been mentioned. These examples are based on received reports. is rejected by Platt on purely empirical grounds: Andrew Hill. in order to make changes.418 Bacon introduces again the phenomenon of nourishment. which lies half-way between changing a tree by transplanting it. On the other hand. thus no force to produce any change. namely that of those substances that are able to produce effects in the body that consumed them. “Bacon’s Man of Science” and Rusu “Virtues. While quoting Platt’s rejection almost verbatim. a gardener whose expertise he often invokes in his treatise and upon whose practice many of his experiments rely. for that those things have passed their period. the nourishment has to be very powerful (this is why grafting can be done only upon “dull” trees). the testing of previous experiments and theories (discussed at length in the previous chapter) can be based on others’ testimony. in which its members can rely on each other’s scientific achievements. thus they have no command over it. without any success. is reported to have tried these experiments several times. He does not stop at saying that these substances do not have the necessary force to produce changes. and this happens in the case of animals. a simple process of nourishment – they only process water or other common juices. And all alteration of vegetables in those qualities must be by somewhat that is apt to go into the nourishment of the plant. milk or eggs.417 What is relevant in comparison with Platt is that Bacon explained why the given experiments did not lead to any results: The cause is. 419 Bacon’s explanation is much longer than this. The big difference between plants and animals is that the latter have. 499. However. SEH II. It is very likely he did so. animals have a more complex digestion and the substances found in their food can be assimilated in their flesh. however. the cause invoked by Bacon for rejecting Della Porta’s time-honoured experimental report was quite different. His idea is that those substances do not any longer have the virtue to make any change in the body in which they are assimilated. we think good briefly to propound the four means which they have devised of making plants medicinable. or such techniques as paraphrasing or abbreviating.422 Rather. reject them if false. giving for each case a theoretical explanation for his rejection of that method. under the same experimental treatment. this example shows clearly how Bacon read Della Porta: it is a model of how he thought that a natural philosopher should deal with different sources. he did not do so blindly. in ascending order. 159 . Often. 2.420 Even the experiments that may be utterly false ought to be mentioned.”421 In sum. These common features are not connected to the external resemblance of plants. Even where Bacon takes over Platt’s criticism of Della Porta. 4. who considers Bacon to be the first to have theorized on the efficiency of paraphrasing sources. the same effect. “Reading Strategies. then. he does not invoke Platt’s reports of Master Hill’s failed replication. moreover. he does not simply leave away Della Porta’s experimental reports. according to Ann Blair. 422 Abbreviations were characteristic for the note-taking in the Renaissance. 500. he clusters a number of Della Porta’s experiments. Generalizations Having looked at Bacon’s methodological criticism of Della Porta. explaining: “But lest our incredulity may prejudice any profitable operations in this kind.” 19-22).” I don’t mean the requirement of “brevity” that Bacon makes in the Parasceve. which are all taken from Della Porta’s twentieth book. although Bacon resystematizes Della Porta’s messy presentation of twelve experiments.” which is based on a letter she identifies as being in Bacon’s writing. 421 SS exp. meant to be discovered 420 Della Porta makes a list of twelve experiments. I mean Bacon’s attempt to discern the common features of a group of individual cases that display. Interestingly. though the sender was the Earl of Essex (Blair. which reduces his texts. where he finds them false. On the contrary. Bacon suggests. but with the inner characteristics. she relies on Snow’s article “Francis Bacon’s Advice. (especially since many of the ancients have set them down). but there are some intermixtures or repetitions that give the chapter a disordered structure. let us turn to another distinctive mark of his treatment of the experiments contained in the Magia naturalis. 4. For this view. namely the way in which he tends to generalize from particular cases to classes of analogous cases. By “generalization.medicinable. in a chaotic order: some of the experiments are grouped according to the quality he wants to inoculate into the plant. SEH II. by grouping them according to four techniques and ordering them according to their probability. but provides his causal reasons for why Della Porta’s experiment cannot work. value their trustworthiness and finally combine them in his own work. he carefully reads and restructures Della Porta’s chapter according to the techniques that are employed. 449. Despite his criticism. Let us give some examples to illustrate this point. Bacon’s section has two parts. is one of those features that demonstrates that Bacon’s Sylva is more than a mere notebook writing down experiments taken from sources. This analysis of the conceptual differences between the two philosophers will be the subject of next chapter. and which other plant he has in mind. If we look at Della Porta’s Magia naturalis.through Bacon’s method of transforming insensible into something that can be studied through experiments (see section 3. use the same experiments and the same examples. we will find that he mostly presents individual cases and techniques.). which he uses as illustrations of more general rules. As a consequence of his conceptual distinction. once more offering theoretical explanations.” we will find that they have partially the same structure. This search for general traits. I say “partially. Both Bacon and Della Porta are intensely interested in the ways in which one kind of plant can be transformed into another – a transformation called “miracles” by Della Porta and magnalia naturae by Bacon. borrowing from Della Porta’s examples. one of them degenerating into the form of the other. one way to do this is by what is commonly called “degeneration” – the transformation of a superior plant into an inferior one. What I emphasize for the moment is the treatment of the experimental procedure of the borrowed group of instances. Now. in accordance with his own matter theory and the shared characteristics of plants. For Della Porta. “How plants are changed. when we compare Bacon’s “Experiments in consort touching the degeneration of plants and of the transmutation of them one into another” with Della Porta’s second chapter. He also always adds causal explanations for the effects obtained. He furthermore seeks to establish limits beyond which a given method cannot be applied. the activity of the spirits of a plant. referring to the quantity of moisture.” because Bacon makes a distinction between “degeneration” and “transmutation. and only this is a magnalia naturae. Taken together. only the first of which is taken from Della Porta: 160 . 3. the picture that emerges is that of Bacon groping towards a general understanding of the inner processes of plant life. after which he sometimes adds: “the same method can be used for another case. the concrete effect of external manipulations. together with the search for common causal patterns (to be discussed in the next section).” While Della Porta often does not tell his reader why “the same method” might work for more than one plant. which for both authors is something contrary to the normal course of nature. Bacon creates groups of plants for which a certain method works.” the latter being a complete transformation into another plant. and so forth. 5. which is transmitted to younger plants through seed. Grapes sown. wholly degenerating. and bigness. if it be planted according to its own nature. It is true that peaches. either if you neglect to dresse or handle them according to their kind. Furthermore. though it givetha finer nourishment. Sometimes also. both in taste. figs.. and fashion: and this I may easily be done. For the stock. (as has been touched before.) If you would change A white vine into a black. that is has nothing of the right garden-vine. others set by some root. never brings forth any other but a wilde or a wood fig-tree. be planted by the root. yet it gives a scanter. and so the seed of a white garden vine will bring forth a white wilde-vine. because a vine is not sowed by seed. or else dresse them more carefully and artificially then their own kind requires. for some must be sowed by seed. or by cunning handling and dressing them. and such as most commonly is of a quite contrary colour. And again. if you deal with it otherwise than the kind requires.Della Porta. and be quite turned into another kind. as Theophrastus writes. By the like means. (. degenerate. or if any that should be thus planted be sowed by seed. and contrariwise a black fig-tree degenerates into a white. every plant has his proper manner. and colour. make the fruits degenerate and become wild. or a black into a white Sow a seed of a white garden vine. 61 Bacon. A white fig-tree will degenerate into a black. if it be sown will degenerate. of a right and noble vine is generated a bastard vine. so that of a white fig-tree it degenerates into a black. In the like manner are changed Whatsoever fruit useth to be set upon a root or a slip.. than the earth at large. that plants may forsake their natural kind. SEH II. 506 [To turn one thing into another] can be done by negligence. or grafted by some branch. pomegranate kernels sown. but the natural planting of it is by sprigs and roots. others grafted by some sprig or branch: so that if that which should be sowed by seed. most of those fruits that use to be grafted. prospereth better upon the stone or kernel. and that which cometh of it will be a black wilde-vine. that which comes up will be of a divers kind from that which grows usually. as Theophrastus teaches. than upon the graft. and that so different in kind oftentimes. but all merely wilde. if they be set of kernels or stones.) do better upon stones set than upon grafting. others planted by the whole stem. and peculiar kind of sowing or planting. and the rule of exception seem to be this: that whatsoever plant requireth much moisture. or set by the whole stock. 519. 161 . II. SS exp. Wherefore. almonds. The reason is. that which comes of it must needs be unkindly. MN 3. For the stone of a fig if it be set. namely that what is ordinarily planted by setting sprigs or roots. will degenerate if planted by seed. as he tries to show. which starts with a rule and then proceeds to the individual examples with detailed descriptions. Bacon limits himself to the case of planting by sprigs. While for Della Porta. and the bay-tree is planted by setting a little sprig thereof that has in some part of the root as we have showed in our discourse of husbandry. for the myrtle is not sowed by seed. degenerates into a hard. and the pomegranate itself. For the stones or kernels of the Pomegranate are changed from their right blue. And cannot choose but lose their colour: for these likewise degenerate. different from the graft or the slip. becomes in Bacon one short paragraph. he simply presents the rule. but which omit the myrtle and the bay-tree. taste.The red myrtle and the red bay-tree into black. not handed down to the seed. Thus they do not affect the spirit of the plant that figures and determines its shape and characteristics. and shift him oft. In it. but planted by grafting. though it be never so good. and commonly sharp fruit. therefore we are counselled to graft him when he is prettily well grown. into a baser colour. so that all further changes are brought about by the way in 162 . and also in feeling. and that did not develop out of a seed. in the cases of grafting and setting a sprig. or else to change him. For him. The changes obtained in a plant by setting a sprig or root or by grafting are. As becomes evident from a comparison between these two passages. the plants have already generated. grafting and setting slips are instances of plants generated without seed. So also are Sweet almonds and sweet pomegranate changes into sowre ones. what in Della Porta takes up one full page. He then goes on to offer a few examples. as the same Theophrastus reports to have seen in Antandrus. The almonds degenerate likewise also in taste. all of which are taken from Della Porta. all these examples illustrate the effects of sowing kernels instead of planting sprigs or grafting. According to his theory. This first example demonstrates that Bacon’s preoccupation is not with individual trees or the consequences of their degeneration – changes in colour. because the result is a new individual. for of a soft one cometh a harder. or shape – but the manner in which generation determines the figuration of plants. and such like. by generalizing from Della Porta’s individual examples. their ground. or forbearing to compost the earth. 423 Bacon had discussed this example before. and wheat into them. with the exception of some flowers. 163 . 487).423 In other words. and Bacon’s generalizations and the rules he connects with this case: Della Porta. MN 3. SS. Bacon establishes rules for the germination of plants. doth the like. both rules and exceptions being justified by the qualities of plants. Bacon again takes all his examples from the Magia naturalis. Although it is true that the majority of fruit trees develop better when grafted. as we see that water-mint turneth into fieldmint. if you shall change their place. The second method mentioned by Della Porta to make plants degenerate is through the absence of culture.. because the nourishment in the earth is more watery. you pervert their kind. for that those plants require a nourishment of great moisture. and though the nourishment of the stock be finer and better prepared. which become white and which he relegates to the section about curiosities. To Della Porta’s and Bacon’s different approaches I shall return later. and you shall find that young growing plant will resemble another kind. but that grafting (for the most part) doth meliorate the fruit.) By labour also and dressing. and the colewort into rape. 61-62 Bacon. 1. (. but yet note well. The cause I suppose to be. yet it is not so moist and plentiful as the nourishment of the earth. Our first example also seems to show that Bacon was not only interested in the degeneration of plants. that there be some trees that are said to come up more happily from the kernel than from the graft. grafting should nevertheless not be practiced blindly. but only after checking the quality of the tree. II.which they are nourished. for that the nourishment is better prepared in the stock than in the crude earth. 506-507 Likewise. by neglect. The standing long. that plants for want of culture degenerate to be baser in the same kind. 3. Experience shows a tree like the peach will grow of a better sort when planted. the corn typha and spelt. And indeed we see those fruits are very cold fruits in their nature” (SEH II. Drought. maketh them degenerate. The cause is manifest. but also in establishing general rules concerning the way in which trees could be helped to multiply themselves. as the peach and melocotone. So doth removing into worse earth. However. SEH II. and sometimes so far as to change into another kind. corn. are changed into wheat. both in colour and fashion. 2. if you take them being 518. and not being removed. The rule is certain. so that as a consequence the fruits will not be as watery as they should when grafted. in experiment 452: “Here is no doubt.. and focus for the time being exclusively on one instance. all which are clear cases in books of husbandry. establishing at the same time exceptions from these rules. while the nourishment offered by the tree upon which it is grafted is finer and more concocted. the power of nourishment is not so forceful as to transmit the change performed on the given plant to its seeds which would transmit them further to the new plants. their air. for this may be done. unless the earth of itself be moist. which is more easily put off. and towards the end. And generally it is a rule. Infelixlolium et steriles dominantur avenae. or arise out of any seeds of the fruits themselves. the best and choicest things that were most made of. but you must expect the proof of it in the third year. did spring out of it self. will sooner change into other species than those that come of themselves. and the cleanest wheat and barley that he could get. and still to have need to be renewed. do oft-times degenerates from the excellency and goodness of their kind and become worse. ut mala culmos esset robigo segnisque horreret in arvis carduus. 525. &c. or the air where they are. or because there is an indisposition either in the earth. saith he. lappaeque tribolique. as corn. It is certain. and then plant them. sowed them in the ground: and when he found much tares going in the wheat. not the original. Virgil has observed it: I have seen.424 The differences between Bacon’s section on degeneration and Della Porta’s are telling. There is an opinion in the country. The entire quotation is “Mox et frumentis labor additus. a few lines below. unlesse mans industry did early supply them with his help: so fatal is for all things to wax worse and worse. interque nitentia culta infelix lolium et steriles dominantur avenae. but this will not so prove the first nor the second year. especially in his old age. but it is interesting to notice the fact that he uses the same author as Della Porta and the same work. by a kind of degeneration of the pulse into Axesceed. It is worth noting that the second line is a paraphrase of Virgil. and knead them. subit aspera silva. which did degenerate into other kinds. Pliny writes that corn sigilio is changed into wheat the second year. In the first experiment (518). So all the seeds. and having picked out all other seed whatsoever. 164 . and at least found in Pulse a hard and round fetch. he returns to develop further the rules that he had given at the beginning. then turns to other causes or methods for degeneration. and moreover. but a different fragment. that plants that are brought forth by culture. whether the annoyance of fruits. Georgics. 524. Grandia saepe quibus mandavimus hordea sulcis.” The quotation in Della Porta is from the same book. Both experiments in Sylva (524 and 525) talk about the importance of a good soil for a plant that 424 The quotation is from Vergil. I 154. either by reason that they are neglected. he put the same experiment in other grain in practice. bestowed great pain and diligence to find out. for that culture giveth but an adventitious nature. Wherefore he took the purest. intereunt segetes. Bacon starts with the general rules for the plants requiring culture in order not to degenerate. that which mars their pure goodnesse. at length yet to degenerate. that if the same ground be oft sown with the grain that grew upon it. that in very sterile years corn sown will grow to another kind. it will in the end grow to be of a baser kind. but very little in the barley. as Theophrastus sheweth. Galen’s father. that the herb Axesceed did grow among Pulse. Bacon was probably quoting from memory.of a thorough ripenesse. a man very studious of husbandry. and Galen’s father. unless moved to a new patch of soil. At the beginning of this section. Bacon announces that the techniques he will present make roses and other flowers blossom late. will degenerate in poor soil. as the form of the superior plant is sustained by abundant nourishment. corn does not constitute the purpose of the experiment. because in time the earth is “depraved” of the substances that nourish that plant and sustain its new nature. neglect or the poor quality of the earth will lead to degeneration. which claims that culture requires the adding of composts to the earth to help the plants. only three are about roses. Virgil. The last example of a generalization that we wish to discuss is an experiment mentioned towards the end of the section on retardation of germination (420). In this way. The following experiment (525) is an exemplification of both the second and the third rule. see also Platt’s book. being a very good example of plants changed by culture. The New and Admirable Art of Setting Corne. several authorities for the same technique. he provides a rule for “plants that are brought forth by culture” generally. The focus of his text lies. Conversely. he tells us at the 425 The sense in which Bacon uses the term corn refers to the entire class of grains. The majority of the examples in that section are once more borrowed from Della Porta. This instance illustrates both rules because earth when getting dry is equivalent to moving the plant into worse earth or to the absence of fertilizers.425 The case with Della Porta’s text is quite different. Note that although Bacon presents the example of corn. but merely serves to illustrate his rule. Without having offered individual illustrations of these rules. to wit. corn will turn into wheat. But of the eight rules he offers. spelt turns also into wheat. this author also provides a general rule. the plant cannot keep its new form. To be sure. here too. As he always does when he wishes to strengthen his affirmations. They all display the characteristics I have been at pains to emphasize. this experiment goes further that the realm of grains and can be applied to any plant that is modified into a superior one by culture. Pliny. Della Porta presents. 165 . However. in this case Theophrastus. not to an individual plant. while three others are about trees in general and the remaining two are about any kind of plant. however. as he goes on to offer detailed accounts of particular species of plants and of their transformations. in the sense that the consequence is the same – there is not enough nourishment to maintain the culture. that the change of place. air and ground will change the plant. On technique for the cultivation of corn.otherwise. The cultivation of soil will bring some cereals to transform themselves into other species of plants within a few years. Put differently. and add theory to mere experimental reports. clearly on the ensuing examples. while wheat can turn into either. Experiment 524 is the exemplification of the first rule of experiment 518: when remaining in the same earth. while. Della Porta is interested in the transformation of individual plants. We recall. flowers or fruits. 420.”426 This statement can be explained by the fact that for Bacon. As has been already observed in the previous sections. Once the cause for such a delay has been identified in one given plant. However. 426 427 SS exp. and prefers supplying additional examples to providing explanations. After all. 4. 3.” 269. which by ever similar means can be made to grow later than under natural conditions. it both underestimates the degree of Bacon’s reworking of the experiments reported in the Magia naturalis and does not call the attention to the implications this has for Bacon’s understanding of natural history and magic. 166 . Rees “Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum. above. both trees and flowers. the same means can be applied to any kind (provided the presence of structural similarities). the cause of retardation lies always in the control of the sap in the plant and its redirection to new branches. individuals are illustrations and exemplifications of actions that can be performed on larger groups. Della Porta’s book of plants from the Magia naturalis contains very few causal explanations. This also explains why. It is of course true that each of his chapters begins with a theoretical part containing a general explanatory framework. Put differently. the rules that determine the growth of plants are thought to be the same everywhere. 4. mutatis mutandis. Della Porta is far more interested in the production of astonishing effects than in obtaining theoretical knowledge. 2.427 While this observation is precious. the Neapolitan magus limits himself to the reporting of recipes and techniques. SEH II. Bacon does not define the limits of this particular technique. See also section 4. these introductions contain sometimes no more than simple descriptions or lists of the techniques or methods that will be presented in the ensuing pages. for Bacon. Bacon used Della Porta’s experiments to illustrate his own matter theory. These implications will be analyzed in the following pages and in chapter 5. that Graham Rees took this addition of explanations to constitute the only change of significance between the two texts.end of the section: “these means may be practiced upon other. Addition of causal explanations A particularly important difference between Bacon’s Sylva and Della Porta’ Magia naturalis is the way in which the former supplements the experiments with causal explanations. 480. According to Rees. Most of the time. in this case. from above. It thus becomes clear that Della Porta and Bacon have different aims for their experiments. and as soon as you have pruned the vine. but he does not explain the inner phenomenon for which these features are essential.428 Here is a first example.3. that if you take nitre. are explained in Sylva in connection to the inner processes of plants and the activity of their spirit. such as perception. We recall that Della Porta’s experiment did not contain any explanation of the phenomenon. so that it be made of the thickness of honey.) the opening of the bud 428 In my previous chapter (section 3. the perception between cucumbers and the water. heat or cold.” whereas for Bacon the phenomenon is related to the most subtle activities of matter. but limited itself to mentioning that cucumbers have “delight in moisture. Likewise if you would have A vine to bring forth before her time. and why Bacon’s own section on acceleration does not borrow instances from the Magia naturalis. It is reported.1. activity taking place at a very deep level in matter. We will see that these explanations range from simple indications about the effects of the quantity of moisture upon the growth of plants over the activity of the animate spirit of plant to the basic appetites and processes of matter. you must take nitre. It borrows examples from different chapters of the Magia naturalis. Bacon. 76-77. Let us examine in detail how Bacon proceeds. taken from Bacon’s section on the melioration of fruits. it will sprout forth within eight days. in the two centuries on plants which contain the borrowings from Della Porta. the effects of moisture. 485-486. and therewith anoint the bud after the vine is cut. (if the experiment be true. But Bacon does not only offer more explanations than Della Porta. MN 3. Furthermore. these causes go much deeper in the knowledge of nature than Della Porta’s. This understanding of melioration and acceleration as related phenomena explains clearly why a number of experiments in this section are taken from Della Porta’s chapter on how to make fruits and flowers ripen before their due time. so as to see how Bacon adds causes which do not appear in the source he used: Della Porta. When we turn to Sylva. when he furnishes explanations. Let us compare the two texts. I discussed the experiment on cucumbers as a demonstration of Bacon’s theory of perception in plants. that almost every instance is followed by a causal explanation. namely an increase in the quantity of sap in a plant – an increase that can be brought about by different means. at the general importance of the quantity of moisture or of the effect of heat and cold. he is also much more detailed and specific. and mingle it with water to the thickness of honey. 167 .). For example. for example. and pown it. which sometimes also appear in the Magia naturalis. VIII.Whenever he does attempt to invoke some physical principles. we will find. acceleration and melioration have the same cause. SEH II. The cause is like to be. by contrast. SS. lay good store of your nitre upon the 444. and mix it with water. these remain vague: he might gesture. which must be explained by the fact that for Bacon. pp. whereby it manifestly ripeneth the sooner. Take seed or kernels of apples. which Bacon omits. in a separate theoretical section at the end of century VI. 447. (which is like a great onion. It may be tried also with putting onion-seed into an onion-head. This I conceive to be as a kind of grafting in the root. 168 . 430 The first four examples are consecutive. And I suppose the same would be done by putting kernels into a turnip or the like. (. by the spirit of the nitre. which is a great help to fertility. immediately after their bearing. Della Porta presents more devices (for the vine. whereby in few days the fruit is ripened. It is reported. if a man cut off a cucumber close by the ground. when the figs begin to wax ripe. Therefore. we take a wooden needle. the same substance should be applied to the roots. We see the example of the biting of wasps or worms upon fruit. so the squill doth the like to the seed. will further their growth. to cut off the stalks of cucumbers. Latin edition from 1589. The cause may be. or a plum-stone.429 vegetables. &c. if you want to have anything to bud forth very timely. even before others that were most seasonably sown. ashes. if they be carefully looked into will leave long. close by the earth. Our practice is this. and so thrust in through both ends of the figs. oranges.430 448. Where note. The virtue (no doubt) hath relation to salt.) 445. put under the roots of coleworts. Between those and the last example. it will cause the speedly ripening of figs. that alga marina (seaweed). and is not spent in the stalk or leaf. Theophrastus setteth down another practice. when it is almost at his bigness. which remaineth after the fruit. and (perhaps) of other plants. but will more easily and speedily shoot forth. Pliny shews How to make coleworts branch before their time. and they will bear the next year fruit long before the ordinary time. and then to cast a pretty quantity of earth upon the plant that remaineth. pears. while the figs’ growth is accelerated also with pepper. only that for the vine and the figs. hath been practised with success.) and they will come up much earlier than in the earth itself. by reason of the strong inward heat which that herb is endued withal. and different types of dung. or a peach. lentils and melons: hot water. and put them into a squill. 112. 446. to ripen the fruit more suddenly. vinegar. save that the squill is more vigorous and hot. and anoint it with oyle. Moreover. Theophrastus says you may procure it by setting the same Into the sea-onion: for if a fig-tree be set but near it.. after it hath brought forth fruits. the very same roots the year following will bring forth very timely fruits. And to be brief.. Cucumber-roots.vine buds. It hath been practised. 429 I have changed the English text. which translated the original “eight days” of the Latin text into “nine days. and so shall your buds shoot forth and of the parts contiguous. and this is by laying good store of sea-grasse about it. and before it ripeneth. which thereby (perhaps) will bring forth a larger and earlier onion. oil or pigeons dung). for as the stock of a graft yieldethbetter prepared nourishment to the graft than the crude earth. for nitre is (as it were) the life of within eight days after (…). for that the sap goeth down the sooner. there is nothing set in the sea-onion. held up with little props (…). and then cover the roots over with earth. which Bacon mentions.” See Magia naturalis.. among other composts that assist melioration and acceleration. The pricking of a fruit in several places. others are interposed concerning substances which help the germination of parsley. more than either of them have severally. which being prevented. This happens because the nitre is “(as it were) the life of vegetables. we will see that nitre is here said to act in the way it does because it possesses this substance similar to the spirit of plants. seemeth to be partly caused by the over-expence of the sap into stalk and leaves. which need both juices” (SS exp. accelerating an otherwise natural process. for example. as we see in that they put forth plants. doth excel. Let us look at each of these five experiments separately and examine not only Bacon’s addition of causal explanation and their relation to his matter theory.432 In the other two experiments.”431 Why nitre possesses such a special property is not said here. He further explains how to improve this effect by preventing the nitre from consuming itself in the formation of vegetables: “But it is true. 30. see Debus. 433 “The instances we have wherein crude and watery substance turneth into fat and oily. by contrast. as can be seen in the work of Joseph Du Chesne. 355. SEH II. If we now return to experiment 444. it supplements the 431 Nitre was very well known as a fertilizer at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Put on the buds. omitting others. that such earth as hath salt-petre bred in it. 355 and 596 are. if you can procure it without too much charge. if they stand warm.that the dying in the winter of the roots of plants that are annual. 432 See SS exp. 351-52. In the first example (experiment 444). and Du Chesne. for whom nitre was defined as a life-giving substance reaching the Earth as the consequence of a macrocosmic distillation. gather a nitrous fatness. We will see that such an analysis not only renders his explanations themselves clearer. 169 . spontaneous germination is described through the process in which the sun gathers the nitre from the earth. are of four kinds. which mingled by the help of the sun. but also their relation to other experiments in Sylva. as I conceive. all connected to this issue. they will superannuate. SEH II. The same idea is found in experiment 596. together with the vital spirit of plants and animals. In experiment 30. Della Porta gives no explanation of the phenomenon whatsoever. The way to hasten the breeding of salt-petre. where Bacon discusses the diverse types of grounds and considers that simple earth is fertile in itself because it contains nitre. 525). where the virtues of nitre are presented and explained. Experiments 30. nitre is defined as one of the few substances that contain both airy and flamy substances. The Practise of Chemicall. but only makes sense when related to several other experiments reported in Sylva and the Novum organum. “The Paracelsian. Bacon was by no means the only author for whom nitre represented an important substance in the process of germination and growth of plants.433 This nitrous fattiness acts like the vital spirit contained in the seed and has the power of transforming watery substances from the earth into oily ones and to keep them together. and was held to be responsible for both vivification and growth of vegetables and animals. but also helps us understand the non-arbitrary reasons for which Bacon selected the experiments from Della Porta that he did. The entire Paracelsian tradition was interested in nitre. and why it happens the way it does: the spirit of nitre facilitates the opening of the buds. First in the mixture of earth and water. which Bacon borrows from Della Porta. explains what happens. is to forbid the sun. and the growth of vegetables” (SEH II. Bacon.” 51-54. 459-60). Now. no longer a process of uniting two trees. as has been mentioned above (section 3. 437 Although the experiment was borrowed from Della Porta. In both examples the scion will take the virtues of the roots into which they have been planted. which discusses the acceleration of maturation as a consequence of piercing the skin of fruits. in this and similar instances(as it became clear from the detailed analysis of these techniques in section 4. The following experiment. 3. Bacon changes Della Porta’s original set-up and also the explanation. 446).436 This analogy. see experiments 316-26 (SEH II. 1. 446-48) and 858 (SEH II.434 As a comparison between the texts shows. Bacon calls this action “grafting in the root. thereby accelerating the natural process through which the flowers develop and the bud opens. too. On the theme of the maturation of fruits. which represents one of the modes of experientia literata (translation from nature to art). justifies the use of a technique borrowed from Della Porta.). when the grosser parts are digested and when putrefaction sets in (SEH II. In experiment 316. pricking fruit leads both to an escape of the spirits and to an inception of putrefaction. as in the sea-onion the juices are already concocted. 436 Maturation of fruits as well as the opposite action. the seeds will not need so much time to produce the plant as it takes when planted simply into earth.quantity of spirit and increases its motion. 3. conservation. 107). The reason why these examples are not included in Sylva is precisely the fact that Bacon does not believe that plants can take the virtues from the roots into which they are set. In the second experiment. 94).1).” because the only difference from common grafting is the part of the plant where the grafting is done. who refers to the heat of the seaonion(although Bacon. Both of them occur as a consequence of the qualities of the onions. 446.). 4. was of great interest for Bacon. XV. man should learn from this observation and also prick the fruits so as to quicken the process of ripening. 445. Bacon states that causes for the maturation of fruit are when the spirits are made to leave a given body. his explanation for the effect is unlike Della Porta’s. is ready to admit that it is a hot plant). According to Bacon.3. XX.435 Grafting is. the spirits left inside moreover provoke putrefaction. this being one of the experiments in which Della Porta offers a cause. 624-25). 435 He reports that a gillyflower engrafted into a carrot changes its colour and becomes red (MN. This became clear from Bacon’s criticism of Della Porta’s “fantastical conceptions” of making plants in general change their qualities or make them medicinable with the help of different substances (see above 4. they will become purgatives (MN 3. within the discussion on Bacon’s transformation of the concept of grafting. it was of course generally known that a fruit pricked by an insect (or by man) ripens more quickly and also starts to putrefy at the place where stung or 170 . Another example is found in his chapter on how to make fruits more tender and beautiful to the eye (chapter XIX). seen in this light.. as it creates channels for the spirits to escape.437 434 This experiment was briefly discussed in the section 4. or that if you engraft figs into the roots of hellebore or sea-lettuce. 3. Della Porta includes two experiments on monstrous generation. he invites the reader to put seeds or kernels of diverse fruit trees inside the sea-onion and predicts that these will sprout earlier than normal. Also. offers an explanation that rests on an analogy between art and nature: given that in nature fruit that is pricked by wasps ripens earlier. but any process through which a plant is fed upon the already concocted juice of another plant. while substituting the reasons the latter had given. 440 SS exp. The technique of pricking fruits was known in the tradition of husbandry that goes back to Varro and Columella. invoking Pliny’s authority.” salt is defined as “the rudiment of life. Bacon considers the terebration of fruit and the pricking of trees to be the same process (see experiment 464). As the textual comparison documents. without giving any explanation for the effects this plant could have upon colewort.440 And once again. when “the finer parts are severed from the grosser. respectively.” is also used in another experiment. 596. it might be objected that Bacon’s analogy does not add up to an explanation. 525. For example. in century I. The sweetness of taste follows. A careful reader of Sylva will however find the explanation given in century I. In fact. 457 and 460. SEH II.”442 Sea-sand. 645. 443 SS exp. 595-600. Percolation is a kind of separation of simple natures.438 Indeed.”439 When pricked.443 The sense in which salt pricked. and so forth. Bacon suggests. 339-40 and 371. whereas the grosser matter. together with nitre. Della Porta just reports the example. is mentioned as another fertilizer. SEH II. because they produce the same effect: the fruit will be sweeter or ripen earlier.441 Taken all together. 488. 439 Ibid. which is responsible for the sweetness. The same expression. Bacon adds a causal explanation: seaweed grows in sea water and therefore must contain a great quantity of salt. and thus the root will have to draw more substances from the earth. “rudiment of life. 442 SS exp. his reasoning goes as follows: if the root possesses a quick spirit or if its spirits are agitated. will remain inside. SEH II. 438 SS exp. experiment 447. which will eventually be transformed into the body of the plant. salt is featured as a fertilizer all over Sylva. between the gross and the fine. 441 See experiments 2 and 73. The fourth example in this sequence. we are told that salt increases the lust or the spirits of the root. In the section on composts and “helps of the ground. it will require additional tangible matter to feed upon. SEH II. part of the spiritual matter will leave the fruit. as is shown in the example of colewort watered with salt water. for example. as it remains unclear why fruit should ripen more quickly when pricked by a wasp. we can look elsewhere in Sylva for fuller explanations. while percolation is indicated as a cause for the sweetness of fruit. Bacon speaks of the quick spirit of salt. 8. 539-40.Now. concerns the use of algae for the acceleration of germination. obviously because of the large quantity of salt it contains. SEH II. For the entire section on the composts and helps for the ground. see exp. Once again. In another experiment. so that plants will become bigger. between the thick and the thin. 341. having found a channel by which to escape. where the algae are presented as participating in the nature of saltiness. 171 . SEH II 524-27. where pricking is given as an instance of percolation. SEH II. but a mixture of those two held together by an energetic spirit. and so it will do to the heads of onions. SEH II. Bacon gives us a long explanation for this phenomenon. and other parts which not only do not conceive flame. before they wither. they can produce larger fruit and earlier in the year. will preserve the root all winter. so that the plant’s sap will not be spent in them.”444 Bacon’s explanation for why salt is helping plants to grow faster or improves their quality therefore much resembles his treatment of nitre: being a substance composed of the watery and the oily. by strengthening the root. As a consequence. and covering again the root something high with earth. 444 HSMS. too. the roots being greater. and is in addition of great utility – given that salt combines the sulphurous and mercurial natures. Nevertheless since the inquiry into salt has a certain kinship with the other two things. 413-15. it will make the fruit also the greater” (exp. they will not spend the usual amount of time having to transform water into sap.” 445 For example. And where the fruit is the esculent. 491).445 In this specific case. 172 . where the definition of salt is very close to that of nitre in Sylva: it is a mixture of sulphur and mercury “held together by an energetic spirit. 448. This experiment and its explanation offer Bacon the occasion to provide the reader with a general rule: some plants are annual because the sap is consumed by the stalks and leaves. for that the sap hath the less to feed” (SEH II. as hath been partly touched before. The explanation Bacon offers for this effect is the same he gives in a number of other experiments: when the sap is equally consumed in all the parts of the plant. OFB XIII. 137-139: “But if we want to take salt in its literal and not in its figurative sense. The experiment is simple enough in both Magia naturalis and Sylva: the stalks of cucumbers should be cut off immediately after harvesting and covered with earth. The last experiment of our textual comparison. and is a rudiment of life in itself – this too I have decided to bring into this history and inquiry. it accelerates the process of nourishment in the plant. they will bear fruit in the following year ahead of time. In experiment 455. as radish and parsnips. 446 The same experiment appears again towards the end of the section.446 Moreover. and make it bigger in the spring following. or other roots. When new stalks will appear the following year. mercurij et salis. all others should be cut off. they will be able to feed on plenty of sap that has already been concocted in the roots. so that the sap moves to other parts (exp. but will retreat to the roots for the winter. salt is not a third principle distinct from sulphur and mercury. If this is done. in the beginning of winter. This time it is used for the greatness either of the root (in case it is edible) or of the fruit (in case it is not edible): “The cutting off the leaves of radish. some of the instances on retardation use the technique of cutting off some parts of the plant. is one that treats of the acceleration in the growth of cucumbers. the leaves of a fig are cut off in order to obtain greater fruits: “The cause is plain.must be considered a rudiment of life is even more clearly expressed in the “Preface” to the Historia sulphuris. 479-80). the appropriate technique is to cut the stalks. So that there is a double use of this cutting of he leaves. 488). in order to help one part. but shrink and fly from it with all speed. so that the roots die in the winter of overconsumption. which explains why the plant will grow earlier and more quickly. it will make the root the greater. The second reason for their death and for the fall of tree leaves generally. for in plants where the root is the esculent. which is very much connected to this first one. For all salt has inflammable parts. 474. making then bigger. but that either they want juice to spend. because the causes given in Sylva are not true. see Historia vitae et mortis. some trees. Condensation being the enemy of concoction. where Bacon explains why in hot countries. 173 . vegetable saps are the result of concoction.”448 The techniques proposed in order to compensate for such local deficiencies in nature are hothouses. and therefore this circle of ripening cannot be but in succulent plants. have fruit all year long. exposed elsewhere in Sylva. ultimate causes. cold should therefore be avoided for any process of plant growth. According to Bacon. and hot countries. and the two processes of concoction and condensation are opposed to each other. making sure that much sap remains in the roots means that they will have sufficient heat to counterbalance the cold. These two requirements for the survival of plants during winter are more clearly stated in experiment 581.is only alluded to here: it is the factor of cold. 448 SS exp 581. For this reason. OFB XIII. But then. These just-mentioned techniques are all causally connected. as well as the idea that a great quantity of cold can provoke death. SEH II. and the application of substances that stop condensation or the keeping of the sap within the roots. The provisional explanations are thus susceptible to change in case additional experimentation proves them wrong. condensation will not take place. even though the nature of all trees is to have leaves all year long: “And no doubt the natural motion of plants is to have so. 447 The effects of cold and the following condensation upon animate and inanimate spirits. but represent the initial stages in the process of induction. when the temperatures are low. we need to understand the effect of cold upon plants in the context of his general ideas. again. such as the orange. Bacon mentions at the end of the abovementioned passage that plants can survive the winter and grow the following year from the same roots when the latter stay warm during the winter. This feature elevates Sylva above a mere natural history and takes it towards the level of natural philosophy. a process of condensation occurs in the roots. they regularly feature such causal explanations. Nor should the insertion of causes into a book of natural history be seen as the type of “anticipation of nature” that Bacon condemns so strongly in the Novum organum. or they meet with the cold of the winter.447 The plant’s death is a consequence of this inability. which does not permit the spirits of the plant to draw the juices from the earth and to nourish themselves. 520. warm water. Irrespective of whether the experiments are taken from Della Porta or appear to be Bacon’s own. After all. 253-59. and why in other places they do not. When the roots contain a great quantity of sap. will 449 450 OFB XII. This feature might make Sylva appear as superficial at the level of theoretical considerations. they must be read together with other causes or experiments. which has to address the whole spectrum of natural phenomena. the process or scientific advancement. I do this sparingly. proposes a similar explanation: Further. But the reader who is not interested in a blind production of effects. 4.450 This addition of causal explanation is connected. but stay upon these causes (such as they are) a little. to another essential feature of Sylva. the advancement of knowledge is not only due to the methodology used for making new discoveries. certain imperfect attempts at the interpretation of causes. more to hint at what might be the case than to present it cut and dry. 336-37. 15. not for any excellency of his own wit (as his lordship is wont to say). that by this addition of causes. SEH II. but in respect of his continual conversation with nature and experience. they are far more certain than those that are rendered by others. all things may be in more readiness. Conclusion In a scientific community as imagined by Bacon. and seeks for the knowledge of nature and its inner processes.”449 Rawley. will understand how the various causes are related within a system of speculative philosophy. but also the way in which old knowledge is used. his lordship persuadeth himself.5. He did consider likewise. men's minds (which make so much haste to find out the causes of things) would not think themselves utterly lost in a vast wood of experience. 174 . If one ignores the knowledge assembled in past ages. his lordship thought good also to add unto many of the experiments themselves some gloss of the causes: that in the succeeding work of interpreting nature and framing axioms. in his “Preface to the Reader” prefixed to Sylva. till true axioms maybe more fully discovered. as we have seen. And for the causes herein by him assigned. In many cases. as it were.The provisory character of the causes offered in the natural histories is clearly stated by Bacon in the “Preface” to his Historia naturalis et experimentalis: “I put forward speculations and. these causes are not understood by themselves. In the previous chapter (sections 3. in many of his methodological writings. The example by which to document this process was Giambattista della Porta’s Magia naturalis. His natural histories. 3. all very much quoted in Sylva. Characteristic for both Giambattista Della Porta and Hugh Platt is the highly operative character of their writings. as we have seen. This element of efficiency is the reason why the transmission and the careful reception of received knowledge play such an important role for Bacon. 3. What he is really after in his study of plants is an understanding of the inner processes of both matter and of life. The visible processes in both plant and animal realms are 175 . 2. 3. the different treatment has to do with the type of writing he used. This is why authors such as Aristotle. The conclusions of this chapter are not to be applied to the treatment of all the sources Bacon used in his Sylva. This translation of natural effects from a lower realm to a higher one is possible in the general context of Bacon’s philosophy because of the similarities between plants and animals. The main characteristic of Bacon’s procedure. Bacon enunciates on the way one ought to assess or test the credibility of natural historical reports. In fact. The aim of this chapter has been to document how Bacon read and used his sources for his Sylva Sylvarum. document Bacon’s translation of his own rules into practice. inanimate spirits and a vital spirit.be very slow. although he repeatedly points out that some techniques might be of a great profit. including Sylva. and one on which I have put emphasis through my chapter. is that unlike Della Porta. This feature of Baconian experimentalism emerges very clearly indeed when we place Sylva next to Della Porta’s Magia naturalis and compare what the two men do with the same experimental evidence. do not add much to the reports themselves and can in fact often be omitted. 3. how should natural historical reports be treated? Bacon insists on a critical attitude towards sources. both of which contain tangible matter. the Novum organum. he is not interested in the phenomenology and behaviour of individual plants. Furthermore. since their works consist more in simple descriptions of facts. the source most heavily exploited besides (pseudo-)Aristotle and the most important source for Bacon’s two centuries dealing with plants. Pliny or George Sandys. but this must be the subject of further research. including The Advancement of Learning. This – as I have argued – explains why Bacon could consider experiments on plants as providing models of more developed and complex beings. irrespective of the standing of their authors whose names. nor in the art of husbandry. are used in different ways. and 3. the De augmentis scientiarum or the Parasceve.) we could see how Bacon dealt with other types of sources. the ultimate aim being our ability to perform changes upon animals and notably upon man. However. 000 experiments. Bacon will offer a different explanation. Bacon insists on them – in fact. as Ellis had claimed with respect to Sylva and as most modern Bacon scholars have explicitly or implicitly confirmed when neglecting or ignoring that work. always tries to be as concise as possible in his exposition of the methods he discusses. To begin with. Nor did Bacon pillage Della Porta only in order to arrive at the magical number of 1. Their importance becomes even more visible once we compare Sylva with the Magia naturalis. Ample evidence to the contrary has been presented in his chapter. what Sylva would have looked like had Bacon had the chance of finishing it himself. of course. Finally. we have seen how Bacon used Hugh Platt’s Floraes Paradise as an antidote to Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. What we do know. he often does so only with the intention of showing that several authorities have confirmed the same phenomenon. We do not know.caused by the same appetites of matter and the same interactions between spirits. he reports on experiments so that he can find causal patterns. Bacon offers an explanation. by contrast. Admittedly. whenever the effect is due to a general characteristic of all plants. is that many of the explanations that have looked hasty and ad hoc to scholars. We have seen that the addition of explanations at the end of the experiments constitutes one of the hallmarks of Sylva. Where Della Porta remains silent. and where Della Porta hints at a cause. or in the other natural histories. but they did so with a very different mindset. Whereas Della Porta was interested in the “miraculous” transformation of plants. When Della Porta does apply the same technique to several plants. proof was announced that Bacon was not a mere transcriber of Della Porta and other authors. in their struggle for satisfying their appetites. We have seen that different features distinguish Bacon from Della Porta. Bacon. and ideally to all plants. While Della Porta routinely offers individual examples to illustrate the use of a given technique. in a number of instances. as Graham Rees suggested. In the introduction to this chapter. how brief and apparently incomplete explanatory remarks are related to explanations offered in greater completeness elsewhere in the treatise. Bacon is interested in techniques that can be applied to groups of plants sharing the same features. there is the element of generalization. Both authors dealt with plants. We have shown. Although 176 . are related to theoretical utterances made elsewhere in Sylva or in other late Baconian works. A more important difference concerns however the explanatory needs of the two authors: while Della Porta neglects causal explanations. however. the fragmentary character of Sylva renders the discovery of the underlying explanatory framework a very arduous task. Platt sought methods to further the quality of plants and increase of crops. series of them. But what are the implications for Bacon’s understanding of natural magic? After all. but restructured the experiments that this book reported (mostly from older sources) according to his own method. in the hope of putting these experiments to a better theoretical use.Bacon accepted much of Platt’s criticism of Della Porta’s fantastical experiments. or individual chapters. but he changed the logic of Della Porta’s entire book on plants. adjusting them to his own understanding of the operations of nature and the processes of matter. shifting the attention away from individual plants towards inner processes and the hidden activities of pneumatic matter. he did not for that reason reject the Magia naturalis. to pillage a work entitled Magia naturalis while restructuring its contents cannot possibly take place without profound implications for the notion of what it means to manipulate nature and to be engaged in natural magic. 177 . It is to this important issue that we must turn in our final chapter. Bacon did not restructure only single experiments. Through these transformations and rearrangements as well as through deliberate omissions and specific criticism. The implications of these transformations for Bacon’s natural historical enterprise should have become clearer in the process. Bacon changed the meaning and implications of many of the experiments. 93. 378. they tended to focus exclusively on his theoretical and methodological works. This divide is partly the result of the classification of Sylva as one of 451 The sense in which I use the term science (in “science of magic”) is not the modern one. was to build a science of natural magic.” because of its theoretical consideration. scholars have almost exclusively studied it in the context of Bacon’s theory of matter and his practice of experimentation. Sylva has been seen as an imperfect natural or experimental history.” 452 SS exp. “Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum. As has been mentioned earlier.”452 Graham Rees has taken this affirmation to contain a reference to Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. indeed of “a high kind of natural magic. 178 .Chapter 5: Sylva sylvarum and the Baconian Science of Magic 5. in turn. By contrast. Due to its notoriously fragmentary structure.451 Bacon declares that Sylva sylvarum is a book of natural magic. OFB XI. aph. SEH II. all four discipline build up in natural history are called by Bacon “scientia. 1. This chapter will go beyond Rees’ reluctant appraisal of Bacon’s interest in natural magic. he calls magic “true and active science” (“scientiam veram et activam” (NO II.” 270. but Bacon’s own. As I already mentioned n chapter 2. 200-2). but only in the sense that Sylva is superior to “this kind of thing attempted by Della Porta. according to the De augmentis scientiarum and the Novum organum. In the Novum organum. experiments of fruit. and theoretical considerations. has as its purpose the creation of all possible kinds of things that were useful for humankind. and uncommon mixture of experiments of light. This demonstration will rely on a careful analysis of Sylva’s experiments of fruit and on their comparison with the overall aims of Bacon’s science of magic and also with Della Porta’s “magical” experiments. Introduction The aim of Bacon’s natural philosophy. 2. Its purpose is to show in detail why and in which respect Sylva sylvarum instantiates the practice of natural magic as Bacon defines it in his theoretical writings. 453 Rees. This. even its superior kind is inferior to Bacon’s Latin natural histories. but has never been read in connection with natural magic. when dealing with his natural magic.453 However. Rees takes Della Porta’s book to be the kind of magic Bacon criticizes for being “fantastical” and thus. lack of order. as a book of physics and mechanics. It will be documented how. it will be once more useful to compare it to Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. This analysis will prove that Bacon used Della Porta’s book. then it follows that its place in the Great Instauration is introductive and cannot deal with either induction or the production of works. that are common in all bodies.” I shall subsequently engage in a comparison between Sylva and Della Porta’s Magia naturalis at the level of the concepts of relevance for magic. whereas his own Sylva would be concerned with manipulating the forms. We have seen in the previous chapter that Della Porta was chiefly interested in the transformation of individuals. We will see in the following why this view cannot be correct. These two features – generalization and causal explanation – happen to coincide with the transition from physics and mechanics to metaphysics and magic. despite its title. In order to make legitimate why we may speak of Sylva as dealing with magic and forms. upon which a genuine natural magic could be created. It will be essential to grasp the way in which Bacon’s forms can be manipulated through appetites and “simple natures. while using Della Porta’s experimental reports. stressing the differences between mechanics and magic in the way they manipulate nature.Bacon’s natural histories. but this time not at the level of individual instances. I do not claim 179 . which is a superior science that can only be performed after all the axioms of natural speculative philosophy have been discovered. due to their common features – the forms. I will begin this chapter with a definition of magic in terms of matter theory. and magic makes changes by manipulating these entities. in Bacon’s perspective. and new species. being thus able to transfer this knowledge to other bodies. We will have to look first at the distinction drawn in Bacon’s De augmentis scientiarum between metaphysics and magic. We have also studied how Bacon attempted to generalize Della Porta’s experiments and to add causal explanation in terms of his matter theory. Bacon defines some central concepts for his operative philosophy. be concerned with the transformation of individual bodies. on the one hand. vivification. and physics and mechanics on the other: physics studies visible processes in certain bodies and mechanics is able to transform individuals by imitating nature. We may therefore affirm that Della Porta’s Magia naturalis would. but at a more general. such as transmutation. conceptual level. just like Bacon’s mechanic. Nor could it be concerned with magic. and if we read a clear distinction between natural history and natural philosophy in Bacon’s division of the sciences. But if Sylva sylvarum is a natural history. while metaphysics studies the hidden entities of matter. In order to illustrate the way in which Bacon wished to reform the science of magic and document that Sylva is an instantiation of that reform. 51). Rossi’s interpretation of Bacon’s magic has been thoroughly criticized in Sophie Weeks’ doctoral dissertation.” Weeks. 219-20. given that the method displayed in it is equally modelled on rhetoric. when Rossi comes to discuss Sylva. Rossi’s general claim is that Bacon’s science must be understood as a reaction to the Hermetic tradition of Renaissance magic. and also includes Sylva. According to Weeks. “Bacon and Knowledge Broken. From Magic to Science.” 451-54. he admits that it does not differ from Della Porta’s. All these secondary sources are discussed at length in my first chapter. History of Magic. 63-88. that Bacon’s alchemical preoccupation led him to change his matter theory from an initial atomism to an ontology of simple natures. but instead the “absence of legitimate inquisitional procedures and the ignorance of true cause” (21-22). as I already mentioned. Farrington discusses this theme at length (See notably The Philosophy of Francis Bacon. Thorndike. Cardano’s. which could eventually lead to an operative science. pace Rossi. However. however. 2.. Interestingly. We could see in the previous chapter that Bacon had a large number of sources. in a book titled Francis Bacon.455 This feature renders Sylva inferior to Bacon’s natural histories. all these arguments are the continuation of our previous chapter on the comparison of the two texts at the level of singular instances or groups of experiments.454 In fact. 5. but rather as an integral part of. Farrington concludes. 180 . Della Porta occupies a specific place because it can be proved that his experiments are transformed in what Bacon considers to be natural magic. Rossi agrees that there are some ideas that Bacon borrows from this tradition. to be found in the collecting and ordering of instances in natural histories. his reformation of magic marks the transition from Renaissance magic to modern science. idem. 216). the tradition of Renaissance magic. Dee’s or Fludd’s magical texts. According to 454 The secondary literature has repeatedly claimed that Bacon nurtured ambivalent feelings about traditional magic. according to Rossi. 455 Rossi. Horton. State of the scholarly debate As it had been discussed in the first chapter. Baconian histories are defined by Rossi as “collections of places arranged in order” (Francis Bacon. the first to have connected Bacon’s natural philosophy with magic was Paolo Rossi. including that of “man as the servant of nature” or “knowledge as power. in “Francis Bacon’s Science. On the influence of magic and alchemy and Bacon’s ambivalent attitude.” states that Bacon’s attitude was not ambivalent. see also West. theoretical influence of magic and alchemy to be discerned in Bacon’s work. as he did not criticize the material claims of natural magicians. “Attitude of Francis Bacon. This Renaissance rhetorical tradition is. “Notes on the Importance”.” but he claims that there is no deeper.that the Magia naturalis is the only source for Bacon’s concept of magic. Moreover. Francis Bacon. not for those instances that are at the level of metaphysics and magic. Bacon’s magic should not be viewed as a reaction to. increasing. out of which a proper natural history might eventually be built. It is true that in a few footnotes she connects Sylva with Bacon’s natural magic and the superinduction of forms.” 303-4. ‘perfect concoction’. but he undoubtedly saw it as a major contribution to the task of assembling natural-historical material” (Rees. in imitation of the process of cosmogony once that process has been understood by the magician.” 29. but she does not offer arguments for this vision and Sylva is always secondary in the discussion about magic. Nevertheless. 98: “I suggest that Sylva sylvarum in presenting itself as ‘a high kind of natural magic’ fulfils the required system (SS.” 123. for that matter. imperfect history. it is evident that all.456 On the basis of her detailed analysis of Bacon’s matter theory and her definition of a thing as a “bond of simple natures. 70: “Sylva sylvarum clearly reveals Bacon's deep absorption in magical lore. 613614). 458 For the accusation of the previous neglect of Sylva. 378). multiplying. ‘conversion’. The operational goal of Baconian science (defined at the opening aphorism of Book 2 of Novum organum as the superinduction of forms). Bacon himself describes Sylva sylvarum as ‘a high kind of natural magic" (SS. which I have argued in this chapter is quintessentially a magical procedure. her book is also more oriented towards Bacon’s early works and his theoretical writings.” 121. Rees has understood that Sylva is a kind of exercise in magic. SEH. the topics in this long list are covered. 378). see “Francis Bacon’s Science. 457 181 . the way in which Rees defines Sylva as a book of “magic” is the pejorative sense in which Bacon uses the term to criticize the 456 “Francis Bacon. “Unpublished Manuscript. II. on Bacon’s own terms. is handled in the Sylva under the terms ‘version’. and transforming bodies. If one considers the list of Magnalia Naturae appended to the New Atlantis.459 Thus.” 459 Rees states that Bacon “freely acknowledged that it was an untypical and. even though for the negative reason that it is not even a plain natural history. According to Bacon’s statement from the Cogitationes de natura rerum the very business of philosophy is: by proper methods and a course of application suitable to nature to acquire the power of exciting. II. SEH. 22. see p. CDNR. SEH. the power to create new objects (nova). often at length. in the Sylva.” 386). 426. remitting. “Francis Bacon.” Weeks defines of magic as the control of the simple motions with the aim of preserving. change. or virtually all. 457 Unfortunately. but at best an imperfect one. SEH V. and thereby to preserve. in Bacon’s conception. mean that it is unrelated to natural philosophy. changing. restraining. n. even though Weeks accuses Baconian scholarship of not taking Sylva sufficiently into consideration. n. which would. and transform bodies. II. For her association of Sylva with the concept of natural magic. quoted in Weeks.458 We have already mentioned that one of the main reasons why Sylva has not been read in connection with natural magic is because its title presents it as a natural history. Thus the Sylva could certainly be considered as a kind of manual of Baconian magic. the science of magic yields.Weeks. and calming and stopping any motion whatever in a matter susceptible of it. and ‘maturation’ (a degree of concoction). and absolute conversions are distinguished into assimilation and transmutation (SS. natural history provides more than just the material for induction in the sense that induction would be the form. There is no change in what concerns mechanics in Bacon’s thought. showing how the science of magic takes shape at the level of this specific 460 Giglioni. there is no clear distinction between natural history and natural philosophy. the same as in The Advancement of Learning and the De augmentis scientiarum. 27. “Francis Bacon. Rees has also described the Latin natural histories as “hybrid” constructions. to the obvious disadvantage of Sylva. 462 Ibid. Peter Anstey. when such explanations and rules are found in Sylva as well.” 72. see Weeks. Confusing various types of mechanics. 195-96 and The Emergence. Francis Bacon..” Weeks identifies experientia literata with another (third) kind of mechanics. since Bacon makes clear distinctions between the diverse types of mechanics. even though without a heavy argumentation (See Francis Bacon’s Philosophy. “Francis Bacon.” 241). At the same time. Mechanics remains in the Novum organum. located halfway between natural history and natural philosophy. Giglioni explains. Anstey is mistaken. Anstey argues here against Findlen’s idea that Baconian natural history “provided the via media between the academically exalted field of natural philosophy and both the occult sciences and the crafts traditions. It is quite evident.” the discipline that applies the knowledge of physics in order to create changes in nature. I think. 361. “Francis Bacon.” 20). that there are conceptual tensions in the way in which Rees classifies the Baconian writings. Anstey also concludes that “I shall largely ignore Bacon’s extended discussion of the operative part of natural philosophy in the Advancement of Learning because it does not concern natural history” (Anstey. which because of a proper method did not succeed in properly performing its operations. In fact.” 25. Method and history go hand in hand.” (Findlen. 22. contrary to what has traditionally been assumed. who agrees with Giglioni that there exists indeed a big overlap between natural histories and speculative natural philosophy in Bacon’s last writings. 461 Anstey. as Guido Giglioni has recently shown.“fantastical books” of the Renaissance.. and the second being “Bacon’s mechanics. as only function is to illustrate Bacon’s system of speculative philosophy. I shall attempt to move beyond Giglioni’s interpretation and argue against Anstey’s. according to Rees. underlines that the latter “nowhere claims that magic is given over to natural history or that natural history in any way parallels magic. And yet. Anstey also affirms that the mechanics that should be the operative side of physics is moved into the history of arts. because they contain both causal explanations and general rules. “Historia and Materia. Sylva is. one being the Renaissance mechanics as it was performed in Bacon’s time. as “there is no natural history without method. its ‘material’.”461 Referring to a number of experiments from Sylva. For Bacon.” (74).. For this reason.”460 as well as method being already included in the process of compiling natural histories. Discussing the Advancement of Learning. The idea had been already outlined by Peter Urbach. “there is no method that ‘objectively’ separated from the matter under investigation. nor can anyone conceive of a thinking activity that is abstracted from the objects of thought. 155).”462 In this chapter. “Mechanics in Bacon’s Great Instauration. and natural history the matter. For a detailed analysis of Bacon’s types of mechanics. According to Giglioni. 182 . n. a view that is influenced by Gaukroger. inferior to the other types. Anstey argues that “natural history and natural magic are consistently distinguished in the posthumous Sylva Sylvarum even though that work draws heavily on Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. qua genre of writing. 40). or the part OPERATIVE of NATVRALL PHILOSOPHY. but starts by distinguishing his use of these concepts from the old ones. however. 93-95). Physics represents the study of material and efficient causes. In several other cases. constituted by experiments: “For NATVRALL PRVDENCE.” An explanation for this change might be that in his early writings. PHILOSOPHICAL and MAGICAL. it moreover became necessary to include both types in the same collections of experiments. OFB XI. not to speculative science. in the production of the magnaliae naturae. 5. that Bacon constructs his science of natural magic on the reports he borrows from Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. OFB IV. This experimental verification takes place by means of the manipulation of what Bacon calls “forms. to serve as a basis for natural philosophy. Once the boundaries between experiments of fruit and experiments of light had become more flexible.” where it represents the superior operative side of natural philosophy (see Appendix 1). Bacon realized that she could not be understood without performing experiments constraining her to unveil the hidden causes.set of experimental natural histories. the need for terminological innovation is a recurrent theme in Bacon’s works.463 Philosophy. In the first book of the Novum organum. I shall argue that it is precisely the characteristic interplay between theory and experimentation that raises Sylva to the level of natural magic. 1.” The final axioms can be established once the provisional ones are proven to be true in practice. as a higher level of knowledge. and METAPHISICKE” (AL II. by further work. is defined as the study of formal and final causes. Bacon thought that he could base the discovery of causes only on an observational natural history. physics and metaphysics “have to be scrubbed clean of their classical meanings and encoded with their new. that is. while operative philosophy includes mechanics and magic. 3. As Kennington correctly suggests. he uses old terms. aph. 59 and 60. we will deuide it into three parts. 3. 88). which three parts ACTIVE haue a correspondence and Analogie with the three parts SPECVLATIVE: NATVRAL HISTORY. But while studying nature. Magic. It is important. In the later De augmentis. Bacon discusses the problem of misleading terminology under the Idols of the Market (NO I. has two parts. PHISICKE. in turn. In fact. In other words. that is. but it has an operative counterpart. while experiments belonged to the operative science alone.464 463 It is interesting to note how Bacon’s classification of sciences changed from The Advancement of Learning to the De augmentis. be perfected. Problems of boundaries: Bacon’s science of magic 5. The classification of sciences Magic occupies a key position in Francis Bacon’s “tree of knowledge. the experimental testing of provisional causal explanations in terms of matter theory produces results that belong to magic. there is only one “natural and experimental history. but the text provides provisional concepts and examples of experiments that can. natural history is indicated as the basis of physics. 183 . EXPERIMENTAL. and metaphysics. Baconian ones” (On the Modern Origins. Speculative philosophy includes physics and metaphysics. speculative and operative. before he performed experiments and compiled natural histories. In the first text. History is the basis of natural philosophy within the realm of natural knowledge. as it results from Sylva is not the complete science. 464 The way in which Bacon uses old terms is peculiar. each having two additional branches. SEH IV. 468 DAS III. Quite to the contrary. And therefore to speak plain and go no further about. Sachiko Kusukawa decides to ignore Bacon’s requirement to keep these fields of knowledge apart. Metaphysics studies the same entities as abstract physics. while magic applies forms to given bodies. chap.468 465 DAS III. because physics is situated in between natural history and metaphysics. she explains that “theoretical” and “operative” are the two sides of the same coin.” 56.466 To render things even more complex. It follows that the true difference between them must be drawn from the nature of the causes that they inquire into. the counterpart of physics.The Inquiry of Causes I referred to the Theoretical part of Philosophy. V. This I subdivide into Physic and Metaphysic. and does not address the place of magic in Bacon’s tree of knowledge.” Unfortunately. with the similar aim of transforming them: The operative doctrine concerning nature I will likewise Divide into two parts. since these are only in God’s mind. Physic inquires and handles the Material and Efficient Causes. Bacon decided to exclude the study of final causes from metaphysics. Metaphysic the Formal and Final. IV. and that by a kind of necessity. 346.” and that importantly.467 On the operative side. in an effort to manipulate nature. IV. For this division is subject to the former division of the speculative doctrine. “rather than independent types of scientia. chap. 466 184 . but from the point of view of the formal cause. which is defined by Bacon as the source of simple natures.” and more specifically the schematisms of matter and its motions and appetites. it has two parts: the first studies “nature diffused” (and represents an abstraction of the subjects of natural histories). applies the material and efficient causes discovered in physics. chap. and as Physic and the Inquisition of Efficient and Material causes produces Mechanic. “the degree of abstraction of a proposition about a given nature in the theoretical part is the degree of freedom from material one possesses in reproducing that nature in the operative part. 467 See DAS III. so Metaphysic and the inquisition of Forms Produces Magic. which cannot be confronted with experience and bring prejudices to natural knowledge. SEH IV. 365. 363-65. SEH IV. Kusukawa does not go beyond this very interesting general observation. while the second investigates “abstract physics. they become pure speculations. but only in so far as their material and efficient causes are concerned. mechanics.465 Bacon stresses that all these sciences should be kept separated one from other in order to ascertain a solid progress of knowledge. In her article “Bacon’s Classification of Sciences. OFB IV. shows that it was customary in the Renaissance to include the Persian magi among the first practitioners of natural magic. 3. Different types of magic If not studied in detail. 139.5. But the deriuations and prosecutions to these ends. Della Porta also aimed to return to the magic as performed by the Persians (MN I. 247. Pico della Mirandola and Giordano Bruno. James agrees and supports witch-hunting. In this book. which is betweene the superiour Globe and the inferiour. It should not be surprising thus that Bacon stresses once and again the difference between his natural magic and this kind of demonic magic. both in the theories. for its superstitions. 183. Giordano Bruno. as she shows with reference to Marsilio Ficino. what his contemporaries consider to be witchcraft is merely an art of tricking the imagination. which in fact exercises no real power over nature. magic is presented as one of the sciences that deal with imagination and belief. Naturall Magicke. and in the practises are full of Errour and vanitie. James I published his book Daemonologie: in forme of a dialogue. magic constitutes for him the very aim of all sciences. are three in number. than with clarifying how true magic should be performed. diuided into three bookes. And may pretendeth to make separation of all the vnlike parts of bodies. On the other hand. Because of this ambivalence. according to what he believes is the Persian model. The same idea appears earlier. to saue the credite of Impostures” (AL I. 263. On the one hand. false theories. which he feels should be separated from true natural magic. In Bacon’s view. 470 AL II. 3-5. a belief of “strange and impossible shapes. 2. As we will see below. magic as hitherto practiced deserves harsh criticism. Astrologie. and a true natural magic yet to be developed. Naturall Magicke pretendeth to cal & reduce natural Philosophie from variety of speculations to the magnitude of works. For Astrologie pretendeth to discouer that correspondence or concatenation. 80. which wavers between condemnation and idealisation. OFB IV. the term “magic” in his work appears to carry several meanings: superstitious activities of witchcraft.”470 Once again. 2). because of its explanatory causes added at the end of the experiments and the exclusion of some of the fantastical conceits.” namely superior to these practices. which in mixtures of natureare incorporate. 185 . and such other deuises.469 Both in The Advancement of Learning and in the De augmentis scientiarum. Frances Yates. Bacon thereby directs his scorn at superstition and credulity. demonic magic. which the great Professors themselues haue sought to vaile ouer and conceale by enigmaticall writings. as presented in the section above.471 469 Bacon’s model of proper science are the Persian Magi. In the De augmentis. Bacon’s attitude towards magic can seem both ambivalent and puzzling. 89. and referring themselues to auricular traditions. Is exactly this sense the one in which Rees considers Sylva to be “a high kind of natural magic. in the first book of The Advancement. and Alcumy: of which Sciences neuerthelesse the ends or pretences are noble. when presenting the branches of natural philosophy. natural magic and alchemy are mentioned together as sciences that possess noble aims but practice the wrong methods in attempting to attain their goals: “The Sciences themselues which haue had better intelligence and confederacie with the imagination of man. 27). Bacon seems to be more concerned with purifying the term “magic” from its association with “superstition” and with its re-establishment as a respectable science. than with his reason. 15. and impostures. and in translation in De augmentis: astrology. 471 It is important to mention here that in 1597. However. OFB XI. 367.473 As a consequence. rituals and amulets. 475 Following Rossi and Walker. who work everything out in terms of the sympathies and antipathies of things. whereas magic isolated the individual in selfish quests that ‘aim rather at admiration… than at utility’. 186 .). Then there is the imposture of ceremonial magic. Bacon thought that magicians or alchemists deserved less admiration than other branches of applied learning. “fascination. in the reformed sciences (following his own reformation). To this kind of “light magic. in the De augmentis.475 Moreover. “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread. this kind of approach is fruitless in what concerns the further development of natural philosophy. and when they show off their Wares. that imagination has power. 473 DAS III. considers that Bacon never took these occult sciences seriously. it is of paramount importance to assign the correct causes to the phenomena.). SEH IV. the operative part of metaphysics.” as he calls it. In keeping with this view. as we have had occasion to mention earlier. but this time upon the mind of natural philosophers. where nature only follows her normal course. 474 DAS IV. Bacon writes that magic “applies the knowledge of hidden forms to the production 472 “As for the labourers in the vineyard of natural magic. but untrue. and that they be used sincerely and intentionally for that purpose. chap. these latter are of a kind suited to admiration and novelty and not to fruitfulness and utility” (NO I. as representatives of a solitary manner of performing science. aph. rather than on tricks and short-cuts. V. 85. who.” For magic of this kind proposes to attain those noble fruits which God ordained to be bought at the price of labour by a few easy and slothful observances. Indeed. collaborative and institutional. magic should be as collective.” occupies a great part of the last century of Sylva. which represents. they falsely ascribe by idle and inert speculations wondrous virtues and operations to things. SEH IV. which even while relying on natural causes. where it appears as an integral part of a genuine natural magic. and as a physical remedy. Still.” 297). III. Brian Copenhaver concludes that “Bacon prefers the mechanical arts to the magical because they were collective. This affirmation is discussed by Brian Vickers. chap. which do not have any power in themselves. they are nevertheless to be held unlawful. The changes produced are thus due to the actions of the imagination upon bodies. is often merely the work of imagination and runs against the course of nature and against the divine commandment. man attempts to explain phenomena through miraculous causes. However.”474 The latter charge is due to Bacon’s conviction that the domination of natural forces needs to be based on a painful investigation of nature. whose understanding becomes drowsy and whose minds are subsequently filled with dreamlike ideas that are pleasant. even though he admitted several times that the aims of their work was noble. Too often.In order to re-establish magic as a genuine and respectable science. without any the least thought of inviting thereby the aid of spirits. as opposing and disputing that divine sentence passed upon man for sin. the search for the true causes of phenomena is abandoned.” which is the name he gives to this science and which is defined as “the act of imagination intensive upon another body. “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread. Bacon laments. collaborative and institutional as mechanics. 137).472 The kind of degenerate natural magic that results from such misattributions of causality has the same effect as the soporific drugs used by witches. but strengthen the imagination of the persons involved. and further that ceremonies fortify and strengthen that power.” (“Astrology and Magic. 3. Bacon opposed the true natural magic.” Bacon’s examples are ceremonies. This means that it is a science that applies the forms that have been discovered in metaphysics for the sake of the creation of effects. Copenhaver agrees that Bacon’s forms and occult qualities are a “reformulation on physical grounds of magical theory” (Ibid. 401: “My own judgment however is this: though it be admitted. as has been emphasised in the first chapter (1. constitute whiteness” (DAS III. which is nothing else than the vehicle of the form. for any object having whiteness among its simple natures. But nevertheless this is far from being the form of whiteness. either by accidents or essays of experiments. 3.”476 Bacon does not give examples of the work he thinks the magician will perform. Abstract physics explores these natures in individual objects in which they are found. and by uniting (as they say) actives with passives. 477 187 . SEH IV. 3. Bacon exemplifies what he means with this distinction through the example of the simple nature of whiteness. that two transparent bodies intermixed. IV. However. chap. whiteness is defined as the intermixture of two transparent bodies. V. 364. if the cause of whiteness in snow or froth be inquired. they go about their investigations differently. 476 DAS. form and formal cause being the same for Bacon. while metaphysics defines the simple natures irrespective of the bodies in which they appear. chap. according to Bacon.478 This latter definition is correct. 478 “For example. in other words. Physics and metaphysics: the discovery of causes Physics and metaphysics have the same objective. whiteness is explained by the intermixture of air with water or of crystal with air. with their minute parts arranged in a simple and regular order. 361). displays the wonderful works of nature. DAS III. namely. that it is the subtle intermixture of air and water. or from the light and direction of physical causes. 5. but only by the discovery of forms. SEH IV. when applied to such individual objects as ice or powdered glass. with their optical portions arranged in a simple and regular order. would create a similar whiteness. it is only the efficient cause. no less than when mixed with water. simple natures being defined in terms of material and efficient causes. let us now examine the distinction between physics and metaphysics and the definition of forms within the Baconian corpus. it defines their forms. while in metaphysics. IV. III. but limits himself to the following remark: For it seems to me there can hardly be discovered any radical or fundamental alterations and innovations of nature. it is well rendered.477 Given that this “discovery of forms” is the task of metaphysics. SEH IV. chap.of wonderful operations. In physics. seeing that air intermixed with powdered glass or crystal. But if the inquiry be made in Metaphysic you will find something of this sort. the investigation of simple natures (schematisms and motions) and compound natures. In the De augmentis scientiarum. 367. of the simple nature of heat. 117-19 and 129-30. Air is then also excluded from those first instances where it had been established as the efficient cause of whiteness. that is in a simple proportion. unpublished Valerius Terminus and the Novum organum. It is true. when discussing the form of a simple nature. With respect to the afore-mentioned example of whiteness. nor are the material and efficient causes mentioned as such. but even when Bacon ascends the ladder of abstraction. The fifth direction studies the way in which a transparent body becomes white. which establishes the definition not only of whiteness. the phrase of the Valerius Terminus appears in a very similar form in the De 188 .”479 479 VT. he concentrates on the other changes in those bodies. physics and metaphysics are not separated. 237. Bacon then moves to his last direction. In the second example. that the tables of presence and absence effectively deal with individual instances (which would thus designate the realm of physics). if necessary. moving into the realm that one would take to be metaphysics.” as Bacon calls it) of the form of whiteness.” of which the first four include air. Francis Bacon. of course. Without bothering to investigate all other colours.There are two places where Bacon actually describes the process of discovering forms. but also of transparency. namely when it is mingled and beaten (until air disappears). in this case – in a given body. The definition of whiteness in the Valerius terminus reads: “all bodies or parts of bodies which are unequal equally. colour in general as well as blackness. For a discussion on the form of white. Given that there are two substances that together cause the colour when intermixed. SEH III. rejecting) the “natures” he postulates. Then he searches for common characteristics of the substances and studies the processes through which a coloured body becomes white. Importantly. which might be the cause of the apparition of whiteness in the given body and on the discovery of the thing that restrains the existence of whiteness in the body. while the fifth abstracts to other bodies that do not include air and the sixth offers what in the De augmentis would be the very definition (or “axiom. In the Valerius terminus. we read that physics only deals with material and efficient causality (with respect to the individual substances that possess the capacity when transformed into mechanics) to produce a given nature – whiteness. he continues by eliminating one of the two substances and finding other individual instances in which the other substance is present. as Spedding points out. namely the early. which was the purpose of the entire process of induction. He presents six “directions. he continues to rely on individual substances in testing (and. There. The process sketched in the Valerius terminus goes as follows. Bacon establishes the material causes of a simple nature in one individual instance. see Lisa Jardine. do represent whiteness. Bacon illustrates the process of induction applied in the discovery of the form of whiteness. This time. put briefly. but restrained and struggling by way of the lesser parts. just one more of the terminological problems in Bacon’s matter theory. with those bodies where this nature – heat – is present and with those where it is not. physics is transformed into metaphysics. After four “differences” or “limitations. But the expansion is modified. As I have mentioned earlier. 237. in the Novum organum. AL II. augmentis. whiteness and colours in general have to do with the grosser parts of the bodies.” heat being one of them. so that it is not altogether sluggish but driven on and with some vigour to it” (NO II. this process of exclusion is identified by Bacon with “the removal of restraints from the operator” and represents the transition form natura naturata to natura naturans (Francis Bacon’s Science. and by the rejection of those natures that do not constitute the form of heat. of heat relative to the universe and not just relative to the sense) is. 481 As Sophie Weeks has explained. not with the subtlest ones. 482 “And let this be the First Vintage or Provisional Interpretation concerning the form of heat. But first. SEH III. 271). 1. He starts. This issue constitutes. This is followed by a comparison of the two categories. 20.” One can assume that this change is the result of Bacon’s attempt to offer an axiom of whiteness. latent processes and forms. We shall also have to scrutinize several aspects of these two processes of induction. 189 . OFB IV. since all the directions from the Valerius terminus are based on interventions in nature and not on mere experiences. in order to illustrate once more the process of induction. The corresponding passage from De augmentis has thus very much been changed after the writing of the Valerius terminus (Spedding. as in the example of whiteness. which makes it difficult to separate “heat” from what Bacon considers compound motions.As Bacon himself points out.” the form of heat is given. 216). which will play an essential role in his argumentation. The natures he excluded from the form of heat are “elementary nature” or “celestial nature.480 Once this negative process is finished.” which have nothing to do with the strong sense in which he uses the term. 480 The sense in which Bacon uses the term “nature” here is not the same as in the “simple natures. for “heat” is explained in terms of multiple motions and limitations. where Bacon confines himself to saying that it is impossible to discover the form of whiteness in the actual state of natural philosophy. made by the Intellect going its own Way. Bacon gives the example of the simple nature of heat. this misunderstanding has led many commentators to the mistaken view of Baconian form as a relation between simple natures. another change between The Advancement and the De augmentis is the translation of “experimental history” from “operative” to “speculative philosophy.”481 With this begins the affirmative process. In this way. OFB XI. n. but not in The Advancement of Learning. so that in expanding all round it nevertheless tends to rise upwards. Thus. aph. 84). Bacon formulates his first “vintage. the process of discovery is described in much more detail. while Bacon clearly rejects this idea in the Abecedarium. we must discuss the definition of physics and metaphysics in terms of latent schematisms. with an axiom that looks much more complex than that of whiteness. which culminates in the Interpretation of Nature. Now from this First Vintage. though he even uses “simple nature” in the following aphorism after finishing the process of exclusion. as we will see further in this chapter. the form or true definition of heat (i. However. this: that Heat is an expansive motion.482 I shall later have to return to the definition of heat so as to show how the elements of Bacon’s theory of matter are connected. acquiring the virtue of liberty – the liberty to super-induce the given nature of any material. The struggle by way of the parts is also modified.e. Francis Bacon. In the first 483 As it had been mentioned in the first chapter (section 1. I believe this. but from different points of view – different causes.5. On the different meanings of the term in Bacon’s philosophy. which are.” 239-40. while in other writings appetites are described as the source of simple motions and as being completely different from these. however. and an alchemical spiritual vision of matter to have caused the many terminological gaps in Bacon’s philosophy and especially in his theory of matter. the term “simple natures” seems to include only the simple schematisms and not the simple motions. however. but also to what Bacon’s calls “latent schematisms.” “latent processes. simple schematisms. efficient and formal causes.). is the relation between the different simple schematisms of which some are called “the most profound schematisms” (sulphur and mercury). For the different positions on this topic. Manzo identifies many of Bacon’s sources and postulates that it is his very mixture of traditions as different as classical atomism. physics and metaphysics are distinguished according to the entities that they study. it is obvious that compound motions are the result of simple motions. Bacon ultimately manages to combine these traditions in a coherent and original way.486 In the second book of the Novum organum. 485 Silvia Manzo. I will not discuss here the issue of atomism. 3. 8. Entre el atomismo. for it seems difficult to accept the idea that Bacon identified the four appetites with the sixteen motions (or more. 4. the two great families of things – Sulphur and Mercury – and pneumatic matter as the source of activity in nature?483 And what. since they are perfectly aligned to the goods proposed by Bacon in ethics. depending on the writing) that are subordinated to these appetites.” and “forms.485 Furthermore. simple motions. as motions and appetites are described as equivalent entities in the De augmentis. appetites. how is the definition of physics and metaphysics through the efficient and material causes related to their definition through latent schematisms and processes? Do they involve the same process of discovering causes? One of the reasons why Bacon’s matter theory has remained a puzzle in the face of all scholarly attempts to solve it is in fact due to Bacon’s failure to establish the connection between the diverse entities that his matter theory invokes. while in the De augmentis. 112-13). scholastic Aristotelianism. in the Novum organum. latent processes. 486 In her Entre el atomismo y la alquimia. 190 . Italian vitalism. 69.” But how are the two approaches connected? In other words. others “forms of the first class” (the five pairs of schematisms related to the quantity of matter)?484 These terminological issues must remain unclear. “Bacon’s Philosophy. see Rees. identifies motion with the tendency to motion. in contrast. According to Manzo. Manzo prefers to call the appetites “goods” (“bienes”). included in the De augmentis. and that compound schematisms result from a combination of simple schematisms. because Bacon did not refer to the atoms after the publication of the Novum organum. Physics and metaphysics: discovery of latent schematisms. or appetite (Manzo. moreover. to constitute a case of terminological confusion. following Lisa Jardine. Jardine. Sure enough. But what is the relation between forms. 484 I refer here only to schematisms as simple forms and to the problem of their classification. they are said to investigate the same entities. see my previous section. and forms Physics and metaphysics are described not only in relation to material. OFB XI. Metaphysics.489 But it would seem that this implies that the schematisms of matter are examined by both physics and metaphysics. in every case of generation and motion. Anthony Quinton. 255). studies gold under the aspect of a combination of simple natures: it studies it inasmuch as it is yellow and heavy. can become liquefied. in every kind of matter and susceptible subject” (OFB XI. their generation and their growth (a process in which nourishment plays a crucial role). 487 NO II. aph. the scientist needs to know the form of the simple nature.aphorism of the second book of the Novum organum. from the seeds up to the fully-grown individual.488 Bacon’s favourite example is gold: physics studies the process through which gold was generated from the first menstruum in the earth and its growth into the well-known metal. 489 The same idea seems to appear in aphorism 17 of the second book: “When I speak of forms. can be separated and dissolved by certain means. 201. lumen. Bacon distinguishes between the two principal objectives of human knowledge: the first is to superinduce a new nature or new natures on a given body – and this is called “magic” – and the second is to transform concrete bodies into one another. by contrast. metaphysics is concerned with the schematisms of matter (with the discovery of their formal causes) and physics with the motions that lead to the visible processes in nature and with the configuration of material objects. 45). then. or the source from which the natures arise. or the true difference. 488 191 . which differ only in their method of discovery and in their objectives. does not become volatile. 1. one needs to know the latent processes and the latent schematisms: the discovery. weight. physics is also concerned with latent processes. As for the work of superinducing these characteristics on another material.487 The latent processes. aph. this is precisely the task of magic. can to a certain extent be stretched. 5. of the latent process carried on from manifest efficient cause and manifest material cause all the way to the form implanted. NO II. It also studies the generation of plants and animals. For the former. or the natura naturans. by contrast. However. Bacon explains to his reader. OFB XI. According to this scheme. he did not see the difference between the object under study –schematism – and the view point from which it is studied: forms are “the hidden states of the fine structures of things by reference to which their straightforwardly observable properties can be explained” (Francis Bacon. and likewise the discovery of the latent schematism of bodies at rest and not in motion. For mechanics. etc. does not lose any mass by fire. 207. like heat. I mean nothing other than those laws and determinations of a pure act which regulate and constitute any simple nature. as we could see in the case of whiteness. possesses a certain weight. are about concrete bodies. completely identified form and schematism. 226. As it is concerned only with these two types of causality. In fact. the limitation of matter’s potency which we experience as a given simple nature” (232). and in fact investigates them in motion with the aim of superinducing them on another body. the simple motions.”490 Moreover. An analysis of the form of heat as described in the Novum organum will clarify the way in which simple motions are connected both to the latent processes.that is. 192 . with the development of individuals. Bacon’s definition of form Sophie Weeks concludes her analysis of Bacon’s description of the form of heat in the Novum organum by stating that the concept of form refers to the “constraints or limitation whereby matter’s absolute power is unfolded and organized into simple natures. But how can the investigator of nature study the changes in a body other than through the changes in the schematisms of matter? In other words. which has as its aim the re-configuration of simple motions. it is bound to individual bodies. And yet he also says that metaphysics studies the changes of these schematisms in any body in which they are encountered among the simple natures. physics investigates the efficient and material causes of the transformation of one schematism into another. 3. however. Week does not notice that Bacon’s definition of heat is given in terms of several simple motions. namely when he reaches a universal cause. she does not recognize the ones Bacon invokes from his list of simple motions. the motions of which are studied in metaphysics. the form can be defined. 490 Weeks. A further point to take into consideration is that Bacon explicitly states that physics investigates schematisms at rest. she argues that the overall aim of Bacon’s method is the discovery of these limitations. For once it has been established what is common to all individuals that carry the same simple nature. it is evident that there is no clear separation between physics and metaphysics. In sum. This is why a study of the efficient cause. There is. namely. Weeks furthermore defines form as the law “governing the act. will lead to the discovery of form. There is at best one indication that signals to the investigator that he has now entered the realm of metaphysics. which are studies in physics. then. and with the schematisms of matter. an element of Bacon’s theory of matter that does not appear in these definitions. Francis Bacon’s Science. 5. not in motion. While her interpretation seems generally convincing. 5. inasmuch as it is the “vehicle” of form. 221. in this particular case – is another simple nature. The kind of reader Bacon had in mind would have found the correspondence between the definition of form in aphorism 20 and the correspondent simple motions in aphorism 48. However. OFB XIII. 195. which can be found by determining the relation between the latent configuration and the latent process that constitutes a given nature. However. 492 193 . Worse. but not all alone and by themselves. It seems that the work of compiling natural histories and experimenting made Bacon change his list. But if simple natures cannot be the unique causes of one another. still not at all controlled by them alone but by other causes too.493 There. Sometimes.492 But Rossi does not provide a single example to buttress his view. Rossi. what then is the other part of the cause that together with the afore-mentioned simple nature constitutes the form? The answer to this question can be found in the second book of the Novum organum. in the Abecedarium there remain only sixteen (see Apendix 3). the latter pair is the result of the former. Paolo Rossi had preceded Weeks with a similar interpretation: according to him. it is said that the dense and the rare stand in a special relation to the hot and the cold. but there will also be other causes. Francis Bacon. But this cause is not to be identified with its form. as we will see further in this chapter. and they are. Weeks bases her affirmation on Bacon’s fourth aphorism from the second book of the Novum organum. the aim is to find another simple nature which cannot (under any circumstances) be divorced from heat” (Francis Bacon’s Science. 491 Ibid. as when heat makes the body expand and cold makes it contract. even if properly the works of heat and cold. but always making a reference to the Novum organum. If in the Novum organum Bacon mentions nineteen motions. The motions mentioned in the definition of form are to be found under the same name in both texts. A similar definition of form as a relation between two simple natures is given by Sophie Weeks: “When investigating the simple nature heat. This can be seen when we use Bacon’s own example from the Novum organum and from the Abecedarium. 494 ANN. where Bacon establishes the form of heat as sequences of simple motions that are limited by the existing schematisms of matter.491 This interpretation does not follow Bacon’s text.”494 There are two ways in which one can interpret this affirmation: either by saying that heat and cold are always the causes of condensation and rarefaction. this is the theme that should be investigated. 221). or else that they are not always the causes. From the way in which Bacon discusses the issue. nor does he develop it further. In this case. 202. as becomes obvious when we read on and Bacon explains that “since that condensation and rarefaction are constant and unfailing. 493 The lists of simple motions differ from one writing to another. Bacon does not define heat in terms of another simple nature. one would tend to view the first interpretation as the correct one. I will give the definition from the Abecedarium since it seems to be more concise.. the form is a relation between simple natures. the cause of a simple nature is indeed another simple nature implanted in the body.She furthermore concludes that the form of a simple nature – heat. his definition of “form” does not solve the problems surrounding Bacon’s matter theory. then. enjoying its new form. 20. as heat itself is motion. we anticipated the investigation of this topic in the inquiry about hot and cold. OFB XIII. 265. 195: “it is certain that bodies change their sphere if they be altered by due means. of such a type that it subsequently does not want to return to its previous state. that is. as we have seen. Bacon adds four differences which “limit motion and establish the form of heat.” 91-93.”496 Bacon does not explain this concept of expansive motion. Now since this is relevant to dense and rare. they contract into a smaller sphere or expand into a larger (and that readily and eagerly.497 This specific motion is caused by the appetite of bodies to better their condition. 48. 498 NO II. This first motion. “Motion” is.”495 But motion is not the cause of heat. 497 For the definition of the motion of hyle. as we have said. they do not trouble to return to their former state but enjoy their new bulk. but yet with this rider: that the body is borne upwards at the same time. 229). 496 NO II. 389. OFB XI. we have therefore marked out this motion with a name derived from matter itself and called it motion of hyle. “Heat is an expansive motion. motion is the genus because it is more original than heat: it is freer and less restricted and so close to the extraordinary power of natura naturans” (Francis Bacon’s Science. namely to the abundance and scarcity of matter (natures which are.In aphorism 20. see Manzo. But the definition is not yet complete. 267. that he has anticipated the investigation of this topic in his inquiry about heat and cold. even if properly the works of heat and cold. He now adds to his original definition that heat is an expansive motion towards the circumference. Yet. it becomes evident that what Bacon refers to is the “motion of hyle. it is not clear what the relation is between motion as the form of heat and motion as a simple nature. In the same way heat’s motion is at once expansive and a local motion upwards. The second type of motion Bacon names is a modification of the first. and takes up a greater sphere or dimension than it filled before. 20. aph. in the Abedecarium. still not at all controlled by them alone but by other causes too. especially primordial). and flies in rotating. 263. Bacon defines the form of heat as follows: “the nature of which heat is a limitation is motion. see ANN. it is certainly proper that an inquiry concerning this motion be prepared separately. aph.498 495 OFB XI. On the difference between the Aristotelian motion downwards and upwards and Bacon’s motion.” First. a seminal concept for Bacon. nor heat of motion. and not unwillingly and with difficulty). is the expansion in the bulk of a body. OFB XI. and touched on this very thing in passing in the inquiry concerning dense and rare. by which a body strives towards self-dilatation. to the extent that a little afterwards. delighted by the new form. aph.” See the definition of this motion also in the NO II. For there is no doubt but that there exist many mixed motions – for example that an arrow or dart at once rotates in flight. “Francis Bacon y la concepción. From this simple definition.” The truth of interpretation is confirmed by Bacon’s remark. However. and thus in the Novum organum. and they are. OFB XI. but when we correlate this aphorism from the Novum organum with the aphorism 48 and with the Abecedarium novum naturae. 194 . since that condensation and rarefaction are constant and unfailing. Sophie Weeks proposes that “in the case of heat. and does not seem to be journeying to a resting place. are not the most subtle. OFB XIII.”499 This motion is caused by the appetite of bodies to enjoy their own nature and should not be confused with the local motion. Bacon draws a difference between the motions that are all local in a certain sense. 502 ANN. and unsettled by constant rebounding – whence originates the rage of fire and heat. which is placed by Bacon among the sums of motions. does not use the exact same terms as in the Abecedarium. and at the same time is impeded. OFB XI. See also NO II. in such a way that the body takes on a juddering motion. 20. For this motion is endless. 211). This is local motion. 269. aph.”503 This last 499 “But bodies which are so favourably compounded and placed that they cause annoyance and trouble neither to themselves nor to others but are perfectly satisfied in themselves and therefore are free of all desire for change. 271. and these motions cannot take place or be produced in any other way.502 Once again. 503 NO II. In my opinion. 195 . 411-13. and they struggle and act restlessly. evidently have nothing to do except enjoy their own nature. 203: “Between those two motions of perpetual rotation and repose. Bacon agrees that they have great diversity (SS.501 More evidently than in the first two cases. but to exercise itself willingly and forever” (ANN. 48. aph. 409-11). For no one doubts that most of the simple motions no less than the sums are just local motions per minima or through particles. OFB XI. OFB XI. OFB XIII. forever shaking. but rather larger. aph. 38082). it may be concluded that this local motion is a “spontaneous rotation. and beaten back. and not of the motion hidden within the confines of the body itself” (ANN. Bacon is here talking about the motion “of trepidation. For this reason they are constantly agitated. 98. exp. SEH II. namely a motion of bodies which are so placed between convenient and inconvenient circumstances that they are not satisfied with their situation and yet. In fact these bodies are of two sorts: there are those that rejoice in motion. 201). OFB XIII. given that in Sylva. the particles Bacon refers to are the pneumatic ones. But this expression local motion must be taken in its proper sense. But we are speaking here of the manifest local motion of whole bodies over a distinct distance. such as this one. as in the previous case. there occurs what might be called an intermediate motion. this motion has as its source the appetite of enjoyment of its own nature. straining. not the grosser tangible parts. 500 When he defines this local motion. and proceed by way of particles which. such as found in the motion of the heavens. if they try to retreat from it. repelled. Hence follows an inquiry concerning spontaneous rotation. aph 48.500 The third distinction is once more given in terms of motions: heat is a motion which is not uniformly expansive through the body as a whole but through its smaller particles. they fall into a state which again they shun. and the proper local motion: “There remains a sum which is wholly extrinsic and external. and nothing to do with a body’s schematisms. 501 NO II. OFB XI. 20.Even though Bacon.” in which bodies are constantly agitated and remain in a state of restlessness. and struggling. The last difference has to do with the particles of matter on which this nature is induced: “that the motion of provocation or penetration must be rather rapid and not at all dull. We call this motion of trepidation or palpitation. though minute. when bodies change position and `nothing' else.” See the definition of motion of rotation in NO II. and others that love the quiet and shrink from motion. one finds that it is not defined in terms of motions. which manifest themselves in simple natures as the only visible effects of the invisible motions of matter. the definition of the form of whiteness. and the intervals in which the beginnings. these motions in different quantity seem to be also responsible for the changes taking place in the schematisms. 3. I have mentioned the importance of studying the latent processes. However. as well as the process leading to its discovery.504 Having discussed Bacon’s definition of heat from the Novum organum. and whether the differences are to be found in the limitations. how great a stretch of time motions take to run their courses. even though they are presented as such when he discusses them. This represents another argument in support of the idea that mathematics plays a more important role in Bacon’s natural philosophy than has normally been supposed. 196 . OFB XIII. ends. If one takes a look at the form of whiteness. and of the intensity of motion. and which things they may vanquish. are not expounded in the same degree of detail as the case of heat. Since all schematisms have divers degrees from one body to another. 213). This study of latent processes can establish which simple natures change concomitantly as a consequence of the same motion and the way they limit or even destroy 504 The measurement of time is defined in the Abecedarium as follows: “Next comes an inquiry about measure of time. this degree is established according to the quantity of motion producing it. I understand the concept of latent process to refer to the visible changes in nature. smell. which slower and come along after. and to which effects they may. visible in the changes of the schematisms of the object. colours (and other qualities of bodies such as taste. very much dependent on other simple natures present in a given body. Moreover. the measurement of time. namely. colours are. The exact results can be achieved having exactness in the definition of form. namely how far motions carry power and weight. be unequal. on the contrary. and the like” (ANN. There can be no doubt that ultimately the arrangement of parts in the case of whiteness also represents the result of motions within the body. which leads us to the idea that Bacon conceived of them as “secondary schematisms. which represent either a change in the intensity of a simple motion or its disappearance for the benefit of a new motion.). get the upper hand and control and curb the rest.” In the previous section. in colliding and clashing. At any rate. and which of them may. and which are quicker and act first.characteristic of heat does not lead to another simple motion. etc. and also in what sorts of subjects individual motions flourish especially. and in which. This is why a form of a simple nature not including the measurement the motions would not be complete and it would be useless in practice. 4.) do not appear in any of Bacon’s lists of simple natures. among the questions that remain open are whether the form of every simple nature is motion. 1. but in terms of the geometrical arrangement of parts. as I have already mentioned. and which again succumb and lie low. Nevertheless. as we shall see when we look at their analysis in Sylva (5.” The measurement of the “strength” of motion is mentioned somewhat later: “There follows an inquiry concerning measure of strength. returns or periods and so on of motions happen. Their introduction in the definition of heat explains why Bacon included them in the Abecedarium: he considered them as letters of the alphabet. but to a measurement of motion. on the contrary. they are enfeebled. 96). they try to satisfy their desires as best as they can. is not the material cause of the simple nature.” Giglioni does however not make the connection between the appetites of matter and the concept of form. In the context of her discussion of the Aristotelian concept of motion and Bacon’s criticism thereof. 6. because each of them wants to gain the upper hand. 197 . in turn. the simple natures studied by metaphysics are the schematisms of matter. The result of manipulating an appetite can be the change in a simple nature or a more complex phenomenon. as part of a form. they would all be satisfied. After all. however. Rather.each other. However. Silvia Manzo defines the appetites as “principles. causes and forms of motion” (“Francis Bacon y la concepción. is the only cause of a change and a necessary one.506 The concept of appetite is as essential for an understanding of the concept of form as it is for a comprehension of what Bacon means by magic. more exactly the already existing schematisms with their respective motions. Without their imprisonment within tangible matter. However. to understand it as a relation of motion as a genus with an existing schematism of matter. 506 See on this issue Giglioni. which limits that motion and transforms it into one of the simple motions that appear on Bacon’s lists. “Mastering the Appetites. To accept the definition of form as a relation between simple natures does not. transforming its qualities and causing the natural processes that we observe. in order to understand how exactly a schematism can transform generic motion (appetite) into a simple motion becomes only clear when we introduce the concept of appetite. As for the schematism. Their definitions are given in terms of simple motions and sequences of simple motions. but rather. Appetites. In conclusion. 3. In the process. together with the simple motion(s). sources. natural magic is. in which they depend on the conditions defined by the tangible matter.” 81). This schematism. it is an essential part of the form. as we 505 Perez Zagorin proposes a similar interpretation of a latent process as “the manner in which simple natures interact to produce the innumerable compound bodies and effects found in the ordinary course of nature” (Francis Bacon. the material cause is the body on which the superinduction of the simple nature is being carried out. but she does not explain. he does not seem to be able to define the relation between latent processes and latent schematisms. that appetites are the forms of simple motions.505 It is here that physics becomes metaphysics: when the same motion. here or elsewhere. motions and forms The basic appetites of matter are in a permanent conflict with each other. they work upon the matter and change it. 5. and this is the sense in which metaphysics deals also with simple motions. in the actual fabric of universe. mean to understand form as the relation of a given simple nature under investigation with another one that is always co-present with this first one. However. there are four distinctive motions to each appetite. When Bacon affirms that motion as a genus is the form of heat. This obviously results in a change in a simple nature: the body becomes dry. This motion is activated because spirits are not happy with the tangible environment in which they are kept hostage.507 This motion. All the changes are merely the results of the activity of appetitive matter. depending on the precise circumstances.” by which Bacon means a liquefaction of the body. which will obviously lead to a longer life. It is up to the magician’s sagacity and knowledge to discern which schematism existing in a given body will force the appetite to manifest itself through the simple motion he wants to have in the body. 198 . It is worth recalling here again that that this type of investigation and of explanation belongs to the domain of metaphysics. and Bacon uses it to illustrate the main activities of the spirits. the science of applying forms in order to change the schematisms of a given body. the specific motion depends on the schematisms of the given body. Where possible. Though this example might look similar to Bacon’s discussion of efficient causality in the De augmentis. the spirits will start to move violently (their appetite becoming even stronger) and provoke “colliquation. be asked which of its four motions is being activated when a given appetite is activated. The example is taken from Sylva. If they cannot leave the body. no motion of major congregation is triggered. The Historia vitae et mortis contains much advice on how to keep spirits content within the body. but not on all of them at once. of course. In such a case. and not to that of physics. What the magician can manipulate in bodies are exclusively the appetites of matter and no other part of matter. will produce different changes in different bodies. The appetites and the simple motions stay in a relation of genus and species. In their desire to unite with air and enjoy the sunrays (which is an appetite towards the betterment of their condition). where fire appears as the cause of both the melting of wax and the 507 There are ways in which spirits can be kept in a happy state within the body. provoking the latter’s desiccation. the spirits start to move inside the bodies (according to the type of motion of major congregation). he refers to the appetites of matter. As we can see in the scheme of appetites and motions given in the Abecedarium (see Appendix 3). as in Bacon’s example of the form of heat. The difference between these two actions depends on the qualities of the respective bodies previous to the motion of major congregation: porous bodies will lose the spirits and dry up. the spirits simply leave the body. Again.recall. in turn. This idea will become clearer if we provide an example. while compact bodies will keep the spirits but liquefy. It may. We may observe this effect in drinkable liquids and fruits. (. the body becomes more oily. 510 On sulphur and mercury. OFB XIII. fire is the cause of colliquation. The idea is rather that once one has discovered why heat produces the simple nature of hardness in a body. with a given structure.hardening of clay. Even if the natural philosopher seeks for universality. but respective to clay. In the case of drinkable fluids. On the influence on Paracelsus on Bacon’s theory of matter. Bacon dedicates a section to the maturation. he is always bound to transform individual bodies. and respective. One possible solution might be that the example invoked in Sylva can and does take us to the causal form precisely because it is not about individual bodies but about the structures of bodies. which indicates a change in the sulphurous-mercurial schematism. Once the larger parts are digested. Rather than creations. where they move about without violence. 97-100. lead to further changes in the simple natures of the body. “Francis Bacon’s Semi-Paracelsian Cosmology. chap.” 509 Bacon does not treat here the type of digestion that takes place within the bodies of living creatures. but does not aspire to the constant. the spirits work only upon the body in which they reside. This is why in his definition of magic.510 This change will. IV. see ANN.) Fire is the cause of induration. simple natures are transformations of already existing simple natures. this specific nature can be induced with the help of heat in all bodies possessing a similar structure. Entre el atomismo y la alquimia. see Rees. they digest the grosser parts. variable. in the case of the transformation of 508 See DAS III. Once united.508 they are very different and it is important to mention their divergence in order to emphasize once again the difference between physics and metaphysics. 189-91. in turn. For example.. Bacon insists on the superinduction of simple natures on a given body. seeing that it is the cause of two different processes. For drinkable fluids and fruit. In the case of animal digestion. 346: “Physic then comprehends causes vague. the magician therefore has to know the structure of the body. but respective to wax. sometimes so much so that they turn into their opposites. which is once again due to their wish to unite with their connaturals.” and Manzo. maturation is brought about by the congregation of spirits. some matter is transformed into the body of the animal during digestion. producing changes in the simple schematisms of the body. 199 .. A third effect of the appetite of the spirits to leave the bodies in which they are captured and unite with their connaturals is maturation and digestion. Bacon concludes that fire is not the formal cause of either of these effects. SEH IV. where the spirits remain within the bodies. Such specific knowledge does not contradict the understanding of metaphysics and magic being about universals.509 At the beginning of century four of Sylva. In his example from the De augmentis. Before superinducing a nature on a given body. We have seen that the reason Bacon gives for why fire (or rather the simple nature of heat) leads in one case to desiccation and in the other to liquefaction is because the structural porosity of compactness of bodies. Importantly. even when in maturation the appetite and the motion provoked by it are identical in various bodies. denser. which will become sweeter and change its colour and sometimes its scent. taste. introduction to exp. the spirit must first congregate and can only subsequently transform the body. 205. and more transparent. which takes place when the smaller part of the spirits finds a channel by which to leave the body. this compound motion is described as “a rudiment of generation. spirits digest the parts by moving towards the outer limits of the body. In the Abecedarium novum naturae. in the dense. the taste changes. and this will also lead to other transformations in the body.”511 This confused motion leads to changes of the schematisms that are often observable to the naked eye. while the larger part remains imprisoned.must into wine. compact body of fruits. becoming sweeter. it remains common that in their motion. fluidity. colour. for the fruits it surrender the body and the spirits can find channels to get out all over it. 200 . ANN. such as changes in the consistence of the body. and sum of various simple motions that belong in part to the dissolution of an old nature. or the superinduction of a new form. or scent. 511 512 SS. the spirits digest the body and changes its schematisms. the way in which the spirits act upon the tangible matter imprisoning them is different. in the second they move in separate directions). 451. its density. SEH II. their maturation comes about when the spirits are called forth outside and in their passage they digest the grosser parts. and they all move towards it. because the motion is not ordered and it leads eventually to the dissolution of the entire body. there is a common feature of this and it should be seen in the form of the body and the place of the channels spirits can find to get out – for drinks this surface is little. In the case of drinks.” which “dissolveth the consistence of the bodies into much inequality. In the case of fruit. where they attempt to get out. However. 329. The motion of spirits inside the body is in such cases “confused and inordinate. which is however not successful. By contrast. The mature fruit will also become more oily. OFB XIII. and in part to certain tentative efforts of a new. but simply explains the idea that putrefaction is due to the dissolution of an old form and the attempted creation of a new one. The fourth effect of the motion of minor congregation is putrefaction.”512 Bacon does not mention the specific simple motions involved. separating the fine from the gross and eventually leaving the body altogether (as happens when wine transforms into vinegar). Even if the motion seems completely different (in the first they come together. which are liquid. but a change in the schematism of the body (or in this case of the spirit). Bacon only says that when the motion of the spirits takes place in a certain order. Bacon’s imperfect axiom of vivification provides us with yet another indication of the importance of the schematisms of matter: Now the great axiom of vivification is. Incidentally. things from which a specific body is gradually formed by a series of simple motions” (ANN.The precise process involved is better understood when it is compared to the last type of motion that Bacon discusses. which is in turn provoked by heat. 559. In the given passage from Sylva. it is difficult to “unfold” the two motions of the spirits into the simple ones. The second motion is that which is able to order the matter in which it is kept – a type of matter that must be viscous or tenacious. and that matter to be put forth and figured. which explains why not all matter can be subject to vivification. discussed above. but “generation” does. the axiom of vivification from the Sylva’s century VII makes it clear that the implied ordering of the motion is due to the existing schematisms in bodies. while “vivification” does not require a seed. in order to define this process. 205). matter viscous or tenacious to hold in the spirit. it is possible to discern what task Bacon wanted to attribute to the science of metaphysics. OFB XIII. an active spirit to be dilated. there seems to be a difference between the two processes. But despite the rudimentary form of this axiom. 696. From the information that Bacon provides in the above axiom. or from a menstruum or gathering of matter which may be equivalent to seed. 514 201 . SEH II. After physics establishes for each of the motions the latent processes. there follows vivification and figuration. namely vivification. “generation” being always the formation of a new individual out of a seed. From the axiom it becomes clear that vivification starts with a dilatation of the spirit. as the spirit will otherwise leave the body. In fact. However. 513 SS exp. Dilatation is not a simple motion.513 “Vivification” as such does not appear in Bacon’s list of composite motions. metaphysics can discover the form for every change of schematisms in the complex process of generation. it is necessary to cut it into its simple elements. However. but the elements mentioned in the axiom just cited.514 As we will see further down. “Generation is propagation from seed. it should be obvious that vivification is the effect of the motion of minor congregation. that there must be heat to dilate the spirit of the body. the degree of generalization from physics to mechanics must remain very low and cannot be based on a comprehensive matter theory. 5. as it studies the activity of the last particles and of the motions of matter. We recall from above how Bacon thought about the relation between metaphysics and magic. We have seen that the differences between the five main activities of the spirits are easily explained.Looking back at what has just been explained in quite some detail. More specifically. respectively – differs. however. 3. We have already seen that in his “tree of knowledge. as not every natural body can carry every existing simple nature. 202 . which is insufficiently described). Sometimes.515 As explained earlier. mechanics can produce changes in the bodies that 515 This is also the way in which I read the expression “within the bounds of the possible” from the first aphorism of the second book of the Novum organum (OFB XI. Given that forms are the result of an interaction between schematisms of matter and the motions of spirits activated trough their appetites. The limitation established in physics is the current state of things and the impossibility of this science to see the similarities beyond the visible characteristics and visible phenomena. mechanics will transform bodies following the example of the natural bodies studied in physics. In the case of magic there are also bounds. I can now turn to its magical aspect.” Bacon defined mechanics as the application of physics and magic as the application of metaphysics. 201). they and their operative means must also differ. 7. Having shown the metaphysical aspect of Sylva. Both mechanics and magic have as their aim the transformation of bodies. a very important conclusion may be drawn about the disciplinary status of Sylva. we must first turn our attention to the definitions of operative philosophy given in the De augmentis and the Novum organum. These patterns in turn allow us to understand the task of metaphysics more clearly. But because the knowledge of their speculative counterparts – physics and metaphysics. we may define the overall scope of Sylva as metaphysics. Only then will we be able to reinterpret certain experiments in Sylva as instructions to the magician who produces new works. How a magician should manipulate nature In order to understand precisely the office of magic. from the simplest to the most complex. precisely because of this specificity. and to the way in which this book is related to the work of the Baconian magician. All of them display some easily recognizable patterns (with the possible exception of the last type. within the narrow limits of strict similarities existing between the body investigated and the body to be transformed. which in turn are also activated and influenced by the constrains of tangible matter. are not an imitation of nature. But in this case, the mechanic is not able to explain the process and his manipulation of nature is what Bacon called “chance.”516 Magic, by contrast, is able to bring about much more substantial transformations. We have mentioned the reason for this ability already above: it has to do with the fact that the descriptions of bodies used in magic are given in terms of forms of schematisms and forms of simple and compound motions, this being the level of “generalization” at which metaphysics aims. As a consequence, the classes of objects are not grouped according to visible, superficial, and common features, but according to the schematisms of their matter. With this metaphysical understanding in hand, the investigator of nature will know what motion will be produced once a certain appetite is activated within a certain conglomeration of simple natures and also what the effects of that motion will be on the given body. It should be mentioned, however, that imitations are not only ascribed to mechanics, but also to magic. As in the case of novelty, the superiority of magic resides in the fact that it has the precise knowledge of the manipulated instances, and it is not a mere reproduction of a natural model. A further characteristic of magic is that it is able to recognize, thanks to its knowledge of a given body, when a simple nature, even when it has never been induced upon in the ordinary course of nature, can nevertheless be so induced by art. This ability, which is both predictive and operative, is obviously impossible in the realm of physics, as it goes way beyond the generalizations of which this discipline is capable. This is why Bacon names “freedom” among the characteristics of magic. Able to move beyond a mere imitation of nature, magic is free to apply its operations to materials that are very different from the point of view of physics, but which are similar from the metaphysical point of view, by featuring similar schematisms. It is once again the provisional rule of heat in the Novum organum that can help us to understand the nature and task of magic better, and to defend my interpretation of magic and the theory of forms. After presenting this axiom, Bacon transforms it into a rule of operation: If in any natural body you are able to spark off a motion of self dilatation or expansion, and to repress the motion and turn it back on itself in such a way that the dilatation does not go forward smoothly but is now given its head and 516 In the De augmentis, Bacon describes the work of mechanic as imitation: “Physic carries men in narrow and restrained ways, imitating the ordinary flexuous courses of nature” (DAS III, chap. IV, SEH IV, 362). However, he agrees that inventions can be the operative side of physics, but only in “similar matter” (Ibidem). The same idea appears in the Novum organum, where Bacon says about mechanics: “extends and enlarges operation beyond the ones usually found in nature to certain operations which are closer to hand or not very far off” (NO II, aph. 5, OFB XI, 209). 203 now forced to retreat, then without doubt you will generate heat regardless of whether that body be elementary (as they have it) or impressed by the heavenly bodies, luminous or opaque, tenuous or dense, expanding locally or keeping to its original dimensions, tending to dissolution or staying in its original state, animal, vegetable or mineral, water, oil or air, or any other substance whatever that is susceptible to the motion just mentioned.517 Bacon’s transformation of his axiom into an operational rule is intriguing, and it sheds much light upon the way in which the magician can manipulate nature: he must induce a motion of dilatation (the first of the four limitations of heat) and restrain it with the help of the other two simple motions. Even if Bacon does not mention the appetites of matter in this passage, this does not eliminate their importance, as it has already been shown that the motions are subordinate to their specific appetite. The second part of the rule enumerates those schematisms that permit the motions producing it to take place. Bacon does not mention here that some of these schematisms will not change as the effect of heat, but just that they will allow it in a first instance in those bodies in which they are simple schematisms. A last observation to be made concerns the matter to which Bacon considers that this simple schematism can be applied. His specification on this point has been misinterpreted in the literature. Bacon does not claim that heat can be induced in any singular body, but that irrespective of its mineral, vegetal, or animal provenance, the rule will be the same. But in any of these three realms, there are objects on which this simple nature cannot be superinduced, because their schematisms do not permit the creation of the specific motions that constitute the form of heat. The same is true for any simple motion. Operational freedom in magic does not therefore mean that every schematism can be superinduced upon every possible object, but that for those objects upon which it truly can be superinduced, the operation will be the same, as it will work on the same appetites of matter. 5. 3. 8. Conclusion: Is Sylva about natural magic? I think we may conclude that Sylva sylvarum possesses all the characteristics of magic that we have presented in the previous chapters. After all, in Sylva the basic appetites of matter are manipulated in order to produce the desired effects. This does not mean that every single 517 NO II, aph. 20, OFB XI, 271-72. 204 instance that Bacon gives in that book describes the work of magic. We have seen in chapter 2 that some of the instances are theoretical, while others are mere observations of phenomena. Furthermore, we have seen in chapter 3 that several experiments are concerned with the discovery of causes, so that we should attribute them to the domain of speculative philosophy, that is, either physics or metaphysics. In chapter 4, however, we have been able to see just how many of Bacon’s experiments are experiments of fruit, intended to produce changes in the given bodies. We could certainly not fail to notice that many of Bacon’s experiments of light, by testing hypotheses, produce effects. In other words, even while confirming imperfect rules, these experiments do produce the works of magic, if the causes have to do with imperfect and provisional descriptions of forms. In chapter 3, we have seen in what way it is that experiments can bring light into nature. There, we classified the experiments according to their function, complexity, and the type of result they yield. This classification, I think, can now be reinterpreted in the light of the double distinction between physics and metaphysics, on the one hand, and mechanics and magic, on the other. (I am here omitting those experiments that are intended to illustrate or else to refute theories and experiments; though very important for the advancement of science, they play no role in the distinctions just mentioned.) We recall that the fourth class of experiments was one that studied the changes of a body during a process. This type of experiment is essential in establishing the relations between simple schematisms, on the one hand, and between them and simple motions, on the other. The relevant parameters I mentioned in the analysis of these experiments are also exactly those that define the limitation of the motions. The investigation delves more deeply into nature as the parameters are diversified and the tables in which the results are reported become more complex. Indeed, the work of metaphysics starts when the individuals from the tables are grouped according to their schematisms. This grouping is achieved by means of the experiments in the fifth class, which were about transformations of invisible into visible effects. Oftentimes, the activity of spirits and the internal motions of bodies are not visible to the eye. Although their effects may be seen later, without a proper knowledge of the hidden processes underlying them, their causes will not be identified correctly. These experiments, then, serve to look more deeply into the connections between the motions provoked by external factors and the schematisms. They do not stop at the level of the previous class, which studies only visible changes. With the last class of experiments, those transferring knowledge from one realm to another, one is clearly in the domain of metaphysics. In these experiments, the magician 205 induces simple natures on completely different matter from that originally investigated, based on his knowledge of universal forms. In our chapter 4, section 3, we have seen how Bacon explains certain experiments through others, which belong to a completely different field. This, I should like to claim, is one of the foremost characteristics of Sylva as natural magic.518 The point is that the success of an experiment of fruit can be explained and understood through another such experiment provided the reader is able to recognize the similarities of the processes involved thanks to his deep understanding of nature and matter theory. Such a transferral of knowledge is found in Bacon’s discussion of grafting – a phenomenon, or so I have claimed, that he studied in order to apply the knowledge gained to the process of assimilation in men. We have also seen how in grafting the causes behind experimental results start making sense in connection with results obtained in other domains. I have discussed this characteristic of Sylva at length in section 4. 4. 3. We may now add, more generally, that Bacon is able to define the cause of a process in the vegetative realm by describing the processes involved in percolation or in the explosion of gunpowder, precisely because he is convinced that the appetites of matter and the relevant schematisms are the same in all these bodies. In my second chapter, I discussed the highly operational character of Sylva. It is difficult to establish whether the experiments of light or those of fruit are more important to Bacon, partly because many experiments possess characteristics of both, as he himself admits. In the Novum organum, Bacon agrees that provisional axioms can be transformed into practical rules to be used in magic, as we could see for the first vintage of heat. This is one of the most important aspects of Baconian science and has very frequently been misunderstood by scholars who believed that it could only operate once all axioms are in place. But thanks to the provisional character of axioms and the corresponding rules, the magician does not have to wait for the axioms to be fully established. After all, he will verify them precisely by means of experimentation. I have mentioned in the previous section of this chapter the experiments on the maturation of drinkable fluids and fruit. They constitute the operative part of some of the axioms of maturations, with the rules being given in terms of the activity of spirits. Furthermore, as should have become evident from chapter 4, the majority of the borrowings 518 In discussing the phenomenon of grafting, I have shown how Bacon used the knowledge obtained in the experiments on plants in order to prolong human life. In this sense, the Historia vitae et mortis may also be defined as a book of natural magic. There are also other arguments in support of this claim, most prominently the operative character (the sections are called “Operations”), that is, the manipulation of spirits and their appetites in almost all these operations. Methodologically speaking, the Historia vitae et mortis is very similar to Sylva. 206 from Della Porta’s Natural Magic are practical instances, as they are about the transformation of plants. Although I have only dealt with a limited number of practical instances in Sylva, they are, I think, enough to show that the experiments of fruit are very much present, and that many of them are the application of an imperfect rule or provisional axiom. Let us add to this that in operating upon natural bodies, Bacon speaks of the way in which the appetites of spirits can be manipulated and motions in bodies can be activated (as illustrated in chapter 3, section 3. 3. 1.). It must therefore be evident that Sylva is not solely a natural history, in the basic sense of a collection of mere experiences and experiments. Nor is it a book on physics and mechanics, even though some of the experiments stop at the explanatory level of material and efficient causes. Rather, a great part of the experiments treat of subjects of metaphysics and magic. However, a discussion of this topic would be incomplete without examining the relation of Bacon’s notion of magic to that of contemporaries, notably Della Porta’s, whose Magia naturalis he pillaged. Let us therefore see how their notion of magic differs, why Bacon used the Magia naturalis as a book of physics and mechanics, and why he thought of his own Sylva as exemplifying a “high king of natural magic.” 5. 4. Bacon’s transformation of the Science of Magic As mentioned in the introduction, it is not clear whether Bacon intended to refer to Della Porta’s Magia naturalis when he said that his own Sylva was a “true kind of natural magic.” It is also not clear whether he had the book of the Neapolitan in mind when he compared physics and mechanics, on the one hand, and metaphysics and magic, on the other at the beginning of the Novum organum: The man who knows the cause of some nature (such as whiteness or heat) only in certain subjects has incomplete knowledge of it; and the man who can induce an effect only on certain materials (among those which are susceptible of it) has, in the same way, incomplete power. He who only knows the efficient and material causes (fluctuating causes and nothing but vehicles which in certain cases carry the form) can come upon new discoveries in materials to some 207 degree alike and made ready, but he cannot shift the underlying limits of things. But he who knows forms grasps the unity of nature beneath the surface of materials which are very unlike.519 Whether or not this is in fact a reference to Della Porta, the transformation of the experiments taken from the Magia naturalis (analyzed in our previous chapter) would have marked, in Bacon’s own eyes, the transition from inferior sciences to the superior sciences, that is, from physics to metaphysics, and from mechanics to magic. As we know, for Bacon, generalizations are used to render the discovery of common forms possible, and Bacon’s addition of causes explains these common features in terms of matter theory. In fact, generalizations and causal explanations must go hand in hand, as generalizations must rely on matter theory, for otherwise, individuals would be grouped merely (and falsely) according to their superficial visible characteristics. But if the classes of objects with common features are established according to some invisible characteristics brought out and rendered observable through experimentation, then what they have in common is the form of a simple nature the understanding of which is essential for the transformations one wants to perform.520 There are, thus, two ways in which Della Porta’s and Bacon’s approaches to magic differ. The first is that Della Porta has little interest in providing a theory that could back up or explain the experiments he reports. His orientation is towards a display of the effects of his craft. Bacon, by contrast, even if his final aim is operative philosophy, explicitly holds that magic cannot be performed without a sound theory. Such a theory does not have to base itself on the final axioms of science; it is enough to have imperfect rules and provisional axioms that can be experimentally tested. This first difference between the two authors is the result of another difference, which has to do with the entities on which magic operates. Della Porta is interested in individual bodies that are susceptible to what he calls “magic manipulation,” while Bacon wants to operate at a deeper material level, so that he can manipulate the basic appetites, the simple motions and simple schematisms, also called “natural magic,” but different from Della Porta’s understanding of the term. In what follows, I will discuss Della Porta’s conception of magic, stressing its similarities with and differences from Bacon’s conception. I will emphasize the way in which Bacon applied all the characteristics I presented in the previous section with respect to the 519 NO II, aph. 3, OFB XI, 203. Also in the De augmentis, Bacon explains how metaphysics should gather its axioms: “and this is best performed by collecting and uniting the axioms of sciences into more general ones, and such as many comprehend all individual cases” (book III, chap. IV, SEH IV, 361). 520 208 we will find the secrets of living creatures. Thorndike thinks that this reluctance to go beyond traditional recipes might have been the consequence of censorship from the Catholic Church. For Della Porta. Vedrine. is full of much Virtue. This art.” 523 The approach is very similar to Bacon’s. For the relation between Della Porta and the Catholic Church. and such as men can neither well conceive. I say. III. 92-104.522 Briefly. this definition shares some common ground with Bacon’s claims. Vol. and it reacheth us by the agreement and the disagreement of things.theory of forms and the manipulations of the occult appetites of matter. 4. This is in keeping with his definition of “true magic” in the first book of the Magia naturalis. vol. “I poteri delle streghe. is to create new plants never before found in nature. magic is the science of producing works. 3). eds. either to sunder them. and metals as well as of their generation and corruption. Thanks to our knowledge of the heavens. thereby performing “strange works”. as thereby we do strange works. It opens up the properties and qualities of hidden things for us. Giambattista Della Porta. using Della Porta’s experimental reports. However. formulated in the methodological writings. 5. At the same time. 1. there are notable differences between the view of magic of the two men. or else to lay them so together by the mutual and fit applying of one thing to another. 2: “This art. Catholic Church and Modern Science. “Della Porta et Bruno” and Muraro. the effects of which were even more evident in the second edition. Della Porta also calls magic “the practical part of natural philosophy” (MN 1. 522 MN 1. as well as the knowledge of the whole course of nature. within the limits imposed by nature. plants. as well as their respective motions and changes. concerning the general aim of magic. from which some magical experiments from the first edition were omitted. possesses much virtue and contains many secret mysteries. thanks to our knowledge of her operation. In fact.” his book is a “mere repetition and compilation of the medieval book of secrets and experiments” (A History of Magic. see Baldini and Spruit. such as the vulgar sort call them miracles. and the knowledge of the whole course of nature. 209 . 1507-69. tome 2. “Cardano e Della Porta”. it openeth unto us the properties and qualities of hidden things.” On Della Porta’s distinctions between natural causes and witchcraft.. The science of magic in Della Porta’s Magia naturalis We saw in chapter 4 that Della Porta’s aim. magic is the survey of the whole course of nature. nor sufficiently admire. see Ingegno. VI. 1. he seems to take them as partners in the same enterprise. seen when we separate them or put them together. and these differences work themselves out in the operative side of this science. Della Porta does not separate magic and natural philosophy as clearly as Bacon does.521 As we shall see in more detail below. in the third book of his Magia naturalis. II. of many secret mysteries. 21-58. For a different vision of Della Porta’s science of magic. 418). We find these properties and qualities by the agreement and the disagreement of things. see Ernst. magic even helps nature to improve herself.523 521 Lynn Thorndike has claimed that even if Della Porta makes much use of the words “magic” and “magician. which the general public will believe to be miracles. according to Della Porta. while at the same time nature also helps magic to perform its operations. the stars and the elements. After his brief characterisation of magic and short excursus about the instruction of a magician,524 Della Porta turns, still in his introduction, to providing information about nature and our knowledge of universe. What we are given is an Aristotelian world in which everything is composed of matter and form and in which the four elements appear as the first seeds of nature: they are the “material principles of a natural body, and they are moved and altered by a continual succession of change.”525 All effects we perceive in a thing are produced by the form, while matter and the temperament are merely instruments of the form.526 In each hylomorphic composite, there are, furthermore, causes at work, of which the form is the most active.527 Even though Della Porta’s and Bacon’s views on form display certain overlaps, in the sense that they both consider it the source of all natural effects, the differences between them prevail. To begin with, Bacon does not believe in a heavenly origin of the forms, while such an origin is highly significant for Della Porta. Nor does Bacon share the idea that forms need the help of an efficient cause, instead taking efficient causes to be merely vehicles of forms. On the important issue of forms, Della Porta is quite brief and cursory. He does not, for example, explain how one can arrive at knowledge of forms, or how one must apply them in experimental or magical practice. Indeed, in the remainder of his book, forms all but disappear from his explanatory toolbox, as he prefers to invoke sympathies and antipathies, the influences of heavenly bodies, the external similarities between objects and the virtues resulting from them. He believes that the virtues of heavenly bodies can be attracted by 524 In his opinion, the magician must possess knowledge of all disciplines: he must be a physician and an herbalist, he must know everything about metals, mineral gems and stones, about the art of distillation, mathematics, astrology and optics. 525 MN 1, IV, 4. For an introduction into Della Porta’s matter theory, see Shumaker, “’La magia naturale’,” 11315. 526 MN 1, V, 6. The English version translates “temperament” with “temperature,” presumably because earlier in the same paragraph, Della Porta talks about temperature and secondary qualities, and the translator supposes he refers to the same thing. 527 “But the form has such singular Virtue, that what ever effects we see, all of them first proceed from there; and it has a divine beginning, and being the chief and most excellent part, absolute of herself, the use the rest as her instruments, for the more speedy and convenient dispatch of her actions. And he which is not addicted nor accustomed to such contemplations, supposes that the temperature and the matter works all things, where indeed they are but as it were instruments where the form works. For a workman that uses a graving Iron in the carving of an image, does not use it as though that could work, but for his own furtherance in the quicker and better performance thereof. Therefore where there are three efficient and working causes in every Compound, we must not suppose any of them to be idle, but all at work, some more and some less. But above all other, the form is most active and busy, strengthening the rest; which surely would be to no purpose if the form should fail them, in as much as they are not capable of heavenly influences. And though the form of itself be not able to produce such effects, the rest also must do their parts, yet are they neither confounded together, nor yet become diverse things; but they are to knit among themselves, that one stands in need of anothers help. He that scans these things well by the search of reason, shall find no obscurity herein, nor confound the knowledge of the truth. Wherefore that force which is called the property of a thing, proceeds not from the temperature, but from the very form itself” (MN 1, V, 6-7). 210 activating sympathies and antipathies. Bodies, says Della Porta, are like the members of one living creature, and they lend and borrow natures to and from each other. This is how they manage to attract other bodies, and how celestial forces are brought down to the inferior things.528 However, even this type of explanation is not used universally in his work. In his third book, on plants, he no longer relies on the influences of heavenly bodies, let alone on form, but instead uses what he calls “efficient causes” in order to produce his effects. All of this apparent carelessness about the explanatory framework is related to a point that we have tried to make in chapter 4. There, we have shown in quite some detail that Della Porta tends to provide us with many individual examples, which he cites or describes without much explanation. The few times he does add a causal explanation, he limits himself to a passing reference to heat or the quantity of moisture, without ever attempting to dig deeper into the occult processes of matter. By way of a first conclusion, we are entitled to say that Bacon was undoubtedly influenced by Della Porta’s aim to reform natural magic and to restore it to the splendour it possessed when it was the superior science of the Persian Magi. The two authors also coincide in the idea that the magician should possess knowledge about all fields. They furthermore both see magic in connection with the concept of form, although they differ over its definition. While for Della Porta, the form is given by the influence of heavenly bodies, for Bacon it is the result of the interaction between the appetites and the schematisms of matter. They also differ over the nature of the efficient cause: for Della Porta, it is active in every object along with the form, with the form being the more active. For Bacon the efficient cause is just the vehicle of the form. Importantly, however, Della Porta in the end speaks little about either efficient or formal causes in the book, being mostly interested in operations necessary for the transformation of individual bodies. The similarities and, above all, the differences, between the two men’s understanding of magic become clearer when we compare their respective books on plants. 528 “The parts and members of this huge creature the World, I mean all the bodies that are in it, do in good neighbour-hood as it were, lend and borrow each others Nature; for this reason that they are linked in one common bond, therefore they have love in common; and by force of this common love, there I amongst them a common attraction, or tilling of one of them to the other. And this indeed is Magick” (MN 1, IX, 13). On Della Porta’s conception of the universe as a living being, see Vasoli, “L’‘analogia universale’.” 211 5. 4. 2. Different interests in the study of plants: Magia naturalis and Sylva sylvarum Chapter 4 sufficiently demonstrated that Bacon’s attention is not directed so much towards individual plants and their transformations, however useful that might be for agriculture, but more towards the mastery and manipulation of the appetites of pneumatic matter. We recall that Bacon tried to achieve this mastery by applying certain substances that possessed virtues capable of affecting the spirits of plants or by producing changes in the environment that could have the same effect upon the spirits. We have also seen his interest in transforming plants during their germination or growth and in creating new forms of animate life. The way these interests diverge from Della Porta’s are reflected both in the way in which Bacon re-orders his centuries on plants with respect to the Magia naturalis and in the way in which he modifies the individual instances themselves. The structures of the two sections on plants in the Magia naturalis and in Sylva respectively are indeed quite different. The fact that the majority of the experimental examples are not even presented under the same title is a clear indication that Della Porta and Bacon, even while studying the very same experiment, were interested in different processes and different aspects of the experiment. A telling example to illustrate this difference is an experiment in which garlic planted closed to a rose augments the latter’s scent. While Della Porta includes this example in the section on “How fruits and flowers may be made to yield a better savour then ordinary,” for Bacon this furnishes an example of the sympathy and antipathy between plants.529 Such differences in the structure of Sylva compared to the Magia naturalis, together with Bacon’s sometimes complete transformation of individual instances, say something important about his specific interest in vegetative life and about his understanding of natural magic. The way in which Bacon restructured Della Porta’s sections on plants (after taking them on) is documented in Appendix 7, and need not to be discussed in much additional detail. From this table, it becomes evident, however, how Bacon’s regrouping of different experiments under the same title testifies to his more theoretical interests. It also documents that Bacon skipped some of Della Porta’s chapters, while at the same time inserting experiments in consort which have no counterpart in Della Porta. In fact, as has already been pointed out in chapter 4, Della Porta, while being Bacon’s most important source on plants, is not his only one.530 Sure enough, there are some other sections where the correspondence 529 See MN 3, VI, 97 and SS exp. 481, SEH II, 494. These are “Experiments in consort touching the acceleration of plants” and “Experiments in consort touching the procerity and lowness and artificial dwarfing of trees” in century V, and the last five sections in century VI, which address the seasons when plants spread, the period of life of trees and herbs, the figures of plants and their differences, and composts and improvements to earth. Some of these are either very theoretical (such as the 530 212 between the two texts is very close.531 In yet other cases, experiments taken from the same chapter of the Magia naturalis are distributed by Bacon among different sections.532 There are two sections that attract our particular attention for the reason that they include instances from several of Della Porta’s chapters, namely those concerning the melioration of fruit and those dealing with curiosities. To the problem of what constitutes curiosities, we shall return later in this chapter, where we will show how the experiments on changing the colour of flowers borrowed from Della Porta lead Bacon to discuss forms and relations between simple natures.533 What Bacon calls melioration, in turn, is composed of experiments found in Della Porta’s chapter on acceleration,534 on rendering fruits more tender and beautiful, sweeter, bigger, or with a better flavour (in chapters 8, 19, 17 and 11, respectively). As can be seen from the subjects Bacon takes from Della Porta and inserts into his own section, “melioration” implies a large range of effects, all of which have to do with the increase either of quantity (the number of fruit produced by a tree or making the fruit grow bigger) or of quality (taste, smell). In terms of matter theory, these effects are achieved by very similar means, namely by means of an increased quantity of nourishment or by manipulating the activity of the spirits in such a way that the tangible matter will behave in the desired way. The effects obtained by these techniques may be different either because the experiment with composts) or based on personal observations (such as the experiment on the seasons of the year when plants grow), or more oriented towards further experimentation (such as the section about dwarfing of trees). It could seem odd that to this list should be added the experiments about the acceleration of germination, given that Della Porta has a section with the same title. Bacon’s treatment of this topic is however very theoretical, more than other sections of the same century: here, he explains his techniques only in very general terms, especially regarding composts that help the earth. And even though similar substances are found in Della Porta (warm water, dung, ashes, wine, earthen vessels, digging), it is difficult to find a clear correspondence between the two chapters. Instead, some of Della Porta’s examples from this chapter have been placed in Bacon’s section about melioration. 531 This is the case, for example, for the sections on retardation, on compound fruits and flowers, on making plants medicinable, and on the degeneration of plants. 532 Those experiments taken from Della Porta in the three sections on rudiments and excrescences, on perfect plants without seeds and on foreign plant are all from the same first chapter on “Plants generated of putrefaction.” 533 Except for the changing of colours, this section offers experiments that Della Porta had mentioned in his chapters on producing fruits that are more tender and beautiful, fruits with figures, or having fruits without kernels (chapters 19, 18, 15, 2 and 12). 534 It is not obvious whether Bacon drew inspiration from Della Porta when he affirmed that acceleration and melioration frequently rely on the same methods. However, Della Porta mentions the same experiments in his chapters on acceleration and on rendering fruit more tender and beautiful: for example, watering plants with warm water is a means to make cucumbers, parsley or any kind of fruit ripen very early (75-78). In chapter XIX, it is said that if the myrtle-tree is watered with warm water, it will have no kernel (101), and the same technique is presented in the chapter dedicated to producing fruits without kernels in almonds and chestnuts (chapter XIII, 90). Some other experiments in the section on melioration, 460 and 461, are identified by Ellis as being taken from chapter XIX, on how to make fruits tender. Della Porta presents the very same experiments also in chapter XVII, which deals with techniques for getting sweeter fruit. See MN 3, XIX, 104-5 and XVII, 99-100. The last experiment is presented in almost the same form in the chapter VIII, on acceleration (76). 213 motion produced in the individual plant differs from that of another, or else because they are differently influenced by the existing schematism. In chapter 4, we saw how Bacon modified individual instances taken from Della Porta and also how he reshaped a key concept, namely grafting. Here, I must turn my attention to a discussion of some other concepts of importance for metaphysics and magic and show how Bacon distinguished his own method from Della Porta’s, basing the formation and illustrations of the relevant concepts on borrowings from the Magia naturalis. 5. 4. 3. From mechanics to magic 5. 4. 3. 1. Relations between simple natures Bacon’s transformations of the experiments reported in Della Porta’s Magia naturalis are best illustrated by examples. As mentioned above, the different approaches to the issue of colour change in flowers provides suitable material in this respect. Bacon’s century VI starts with curiosities concerning fruit and plants. Interestingly enough, curiosities, according to Bacon, should not be a theme of natural histories. Conscious of this tension between his theoretical works, such as the De augmentis, where he condemns natural histories that are nothing but collections of “curiosities,”535 Bacon justifies the presence of this category in Sylva in the introduction to this section by conceding that “we must apply ourselves somewhat to others.”536 He does not mention Della Porta’s name here, nor anyone else’s, but given that 535 On Bacon’s critical attitude towards curiosities and wonder as instances of natural histories, see book IV, chapter 2: “For you will find no sufficient and competent collection of those works of nature which have a digression and deflexion from the ordinary course of generations, productions, and motions; whether they be singularities of place and region, or the strange events of time, or casuum ingenia (as they have been called) devices of chance, or the effects of hidden properties, or productions of nature singular in their kind. It is true, I find books more than enough filled with fabulous experiments, idle secrets, and frivolous impostures, for pleasure and novelty; but a substantial and methodical collection of the Heteroclites or Irregulars of nature well examined and described I find not; especially not with due rejection and as it were public proscription of fables and popular errors. (…) The end of this work, honoured with a precedent in Aristotle, is nothing less than to gratify the appetite of curious and vain wits, as the manner of mirabilaries is to do; but for two reasons, both of great weight; the one to correct the partiality of axioms and opinions, which are framed for the most part upon common and familiar examples; the other, because from the wonders of nature is the most clear and open passage to the wonders of art. For you have but to follow and as it were hound nature in her wanderings, and you will be able, when you like, to lead and drive her afterwards to the, same place again. Neither am I of opinion in this history of marvels, that superstitious narratives of sorceries, witchcrafts, charms, dreams divinations, and the like, where there is an Assurance and clear evidence of the fact, should be altogether excluded” (SEH IV, 295-96 and I, 497-98). On Bacon’s use and reform of wonders, see Daston and Park, Wonders, 220-31. 536 “Our experiments we take care to be (as we have often said) either experimenta fructifera or lucifera; either of use or of discovery: for we hate impostures, and despise curiosities. Yet because we must apply ourselves somewhat to others, we will set down some curiosities touching plants” (SS, introduction to experiment 501, SEH II, 501). This affirmation seems to indicate that Bacon wanted his Sylva to differ substantially from 214 almost all the experiments in that section are borrowed from the Magia naturalis, it is obvious that the Neapolitan must have topped the list of “others” Bacon had in mind. And even so, Bacon does not present them as simple “curiosities,” but as phenomena that can be created with the help of art and which are only considered “curiosities” because of a lack of understanding of natural and artificial phenomena. The impression Bacon wishes to convey is that he uses the label “curiosities” only to attract readers, by making them “curious,” while in reality he engages them in a discussion on simple natures and their reciprocal relations. At any rate, under the heading of “curiosities,” Bacon describes a number of experiments on changing the colour of flowers, fruits and berries.537 His starting point is the experiments borrowed from Della Porta, but he puts them to use in order to develop his own matter theory further. I believe in fact that his inquiry into matter theory in this part of Sylva exceeds in detail even his discussion of heat as a simple nature in the Novum organum, because Bacon here connects his analysis of simple natures with the theme of the quantity of moisture in bodies and the degree of concoction, which is the result of the motion of spirits. As I have been at pains to show in my earlier chapters, Bacon’s primary intention in various experiments of Sylva is to induce one simple nature upon a given body in order to change other simple natures, which are interdependent with it. Remembering all of this, let us now turn to the passage in question; because there, we see Bacon interested in inducing, upon flowers, the simple nature of a different colour: It is good therefore to see what natures do accompany what colours; for by that you shall have light how to induce colours, by producing those natures. Whites are more inodorate (for the most part) than flowers of the same kind coloured; as is found in single white violets, white roses, white frilly-flowers, white stock-gilly-flowers, &c. We find also that blossoms of trees, that are white, are commonly inodorate; as cherries, pears, plums; whereas those of apples, crabs, almonds, and peaches, are blushy, and smell sweet. The cause is, for that the substance that maketh the flower is of the thinnest and finest of the plant; which also maketh flowers to be of so dainty colours. And if it be too sparing and thin, it attaineth no strength of odour; except it be in such plants as are very traditional natural histories. Curiosities may please the reader, but they cannot be of any use, and thus they should not be included in a natural history meant to serve as a basis for building up a natural philosophy. 537 What Bacon understands by “curiosities” are, for example, trees bearing several kinds of fruit at the same time, fruits with strange forms, carrying inscriptions, trees with fruit or flowers in their bark, trees and shrubs cut in various forms, colouration, double flowers, and fruits without stones. 215 succulent; whereby they need rather to be scanted in their nourishment than replenished, to have them sweet. As we see in white satyrion, which is of a dainty smell; and in bean-flowers, &c. And again, if the plant be of nature to put forth white flowers only, and those not thin or dry, they are commonly of rank and fulsome smell; as may-flowers, and white lilies.538 The discussion continues in the same manner for several experiments. What Bacon is seeking here are the relations between colour and fragrance in flowers, and between colour and taste in fruits and berries. His explanations refer of course to the motion of matter responsible for these simple natures and to the degree of concoction of the tangible matter, since they are according to Bacon’s theory responsible for taste and smell, advanced concoction rendering fruit and flowers sweeter. When I claim that this discussion goes further than anything he says about simple nature in the Novum organum, this is, first, because he here attributes to tangible matter the paramount causal role, and second, because he specifies the relation between the motions of pneumatics and the degree of concoction, liking them to the two quaternia of things, that is, Sulphur and Mercury. We have heard earlier that one of the chief conceptual problems afflicting Bacon’s matter theory is that he never explains the relation between the simple natures and the two quaternia, which constitute the two basic families of things he recognizes.539 We do not need to recapitulate Bacon’s entire account of the relation between colour, smell and taste here. Suffice it to say that his entire presentation of colours is given in terms of tangible matter worked upon by pneumatic matter. In their motion, which is brought about by the desire to unite with their connaturals, the spirits make the body in which they are imprisoned swell up and grow, as they cannot escape from them. Growth is a composed motion, based on alimentation and accretion.540 In these simple motions, we learn, watery substances are concocted and become more oily and thus identical to the substance of the bodies themselves, and, in this process, they also fix the colour, taste, and scent of these 538 SS exp. 507, SEH II, 503. In the Abecedarium they appear among the pairs of simple natures and are presented as peculiar, because they are the primordial natures, contained in all objects and a source of all other pairs (ANN, OFB XIII, 189-91). 540 About growth as a compound motion, see Abecedarium, OFB XIII, 209. Alimentation is also a compound motion, of which the simple elements are preparation, digestion, attraction, separation and assimilation (ibid., 207). 539 216 bodies.541 Naturally, there exist essential differences within the parts of plants: flowers, as we have earlier seen in experiment 507, are created by the finest parts of the plant, while fruit and leaves are created by the grosser. The way in which tangible matter is concocted by pneumatic matter therefore leads to different effects, in the sense that the same degree of concoction will produce different levels of sweetness in fruits and flowers. Equally, the relations between colours and taste or scent will differ according to the part of the flower; in other words, they differ according to the existing schematisms. Let us summarize this important point. In the examples just examined, we find Bacon using some of Della Porta’s experiments on changing the colour of flowers as his starting point. But his interest is not in these changes themselves. His purpose is to establish the effects of the motion of the spirits in the process of growth upon colour, scent and taste of flowers, berries and fruit. Given that all of these vegetable parts come about as a result of the same motion, Bacon considers that they can be manipulated in the same manner once the form of any of them has been discovered. The difference in their forms consists not in the motions of their spirits (which are identical), but in the schematisms of the bodies and in the influence of the outside, also limiting the motions. 5. 4. 3. 2. Germination and vivification Let us further illustrate our thesis according to which Bacon uses Della Porta’s experiments to construct his science of magic with the second, quite different example of vivification. For Della Porta, vivification is ruled over by the heavens.542 For Bacon, by contrast, it is the result of the activity of the spirits imprisoned in the tangible matter, as we could see from his discussion of the five main activities of the spirits (section 5. 3. 6.). Bacon does not have a separate section dedicated to the germination of plants, but the experiments that address this process are present all over the centuries dealing with plants. As we saw earlier, Bacon draws a distinction between plants generated from seed and those without seeds. We recall that, for him, generation is the result of a composite motion, which starts with putrefaction, or, put differently, with the dissolution of the previous (composed) 541 This idea is more clearly stated in century IX, in a solitary experiment about sweet smells: “To sweet smells heat is requisite, to concoct the matter; and some moisture, to spread the breath of them” (SEH II, 610). 542 This idea does not appear in the book on plants, but in the first book, about magic: “I suppose that no man doubts that these inferior things serve their superiours, and that the generation and corruption of mutable things, every one in his due course and order, is over-ruled by the power of those heavenly Natures” (MN 1, VIII, 10). Further down in the same book, Della Porta makes the connection between the time when plants spread and the phases of moon. 217 form. The difference from putrefaction consists in this: the attempt to create a new form succeeds. The definition of generation in the Abecedarium, as a “propagation from seed, or from a menstruum or gathering of matter which may be equivalent to seed, things from which a specific body is gradually formed by a series of simple motions,”543 is essential for our understanding of the subtle distinction Bacon wishes to draw. The seed already contains some matter of the plant, and the transformation of nourishment into a plant is done by simple assimilation. When there is no seed, a full transmutation takes place, because there is nothing to bind matter and create a specific form of life.544 The plant can therefore change its form until it is bound by a definite form. The “axiom” of vivification returns repeatedly in Bacon’s natural historical writings. We find it not only in Sylva,545 but also in Historia et inquisitio de animato et inanimato546 as well as in the Historia vitae et mortis547 and in the Abecedarium novum naturae,548 in the latter not as an axiom, but as a sum of motions. An important aspect of vivification is the inner process of matter, whereby watery substance is transformed into oily substance; or, in other words, the juices of the earth are transformed into the body of the plant.549 In the previous section, I discussed the example of vivification as one of the main activities of the spirits as they follow their desire to get out of the bodies in which they are imprisoned. We recall that the resulting compound motion has as its starting point the spirits’ appetite to better their condition, which results in a tenacious, sticky, pliant and soft matter. What follows from 543 ANN, OFB XIII, 205. This is explained by Bacon in century IX, in his discussion of the transformations and alterations of bodies. Concoction has two periods: assimilation and maturation. I have discussed the maturation of fruits above, in 5. 3. 4. The first period has two different actions: “But note that there be two kinds of absolute conversions; the one is, when a body is converted into another body, which was before; as when nourishment is turned into flesh: that is it which we call assimilation. The other is, when the conversion is into a body merely new, and which was not before; as if silver should be turned to gold, or iron to copper: and this conversion is better called, for distinction's sake, transmutation” (SS exp. 838, SEH II, 614). 545 Exp 696, SEH II, 559.See above, 5. 3. 5. 546 “We should note that four things are needed for vivifying: an enclosed spirit, heat attenuating and dilating the spirit, soft and matter, and a matrix closed up for the right length of time. For the pre-existent spirit of the thing is inflamed a little by heat; then dilates itself and strives for an outlet and, meeting sticky and clinging matter, it is kept in to stop it exhaling, and drives the compliant and sticky matter before it, and shapes it according to its own motion. But as this cannot come about suddenly, enclosure in a suitable matrix is necessary to keep harmful influences at bay and supply nourishment” (HIAI, OFB XIII, 235). 547 “But generation or vivification is also the combined work of the spirit and grosser parts, but in a quite different way. For the spirit is completely kept in, and swells up and moves about locally, while the grosser parts are not dissolved but follow the motion of the spirit, and that drives them as if by the breeze, and forces them out into various shapes, and that causes this generation and organization. Thus vivification always happens in matter tenacious and sticky, and at the same time pliant and soft, so that there is at once a keeping back of the spirit, and a gentle yielding of the parts according as the spirit fashions them. And this we see in the matter of all things, vegetable as well as animal, be they generated from putrefaction or from seed; for in all these things we most plainly see matter which is hard to break through but easy to yield” (HVM, OFB XII, 349-51). 548 See ANN, OFB XIII, 205 and above, section 5. 3. 6. 549 See SS exp. 355, SEH II, 459-60. 544 218 this for the natural magician? In order to modify aspects of vivification, he has to manipulate both the motions of spirits and, through these, the simple schematisms of matter. Bacon is interested in several aspects of the process of germination from seed: its acceleration and retardation as well as degeneration and transmutation. Both Della Porta and Bacon have sections on acceleration and retardation, but they look quite different. While Della Porta, as almost always, is predominantly interested in presenting individual examples, Bacon is interested in finding the underlying processes of matter and in explaining natural processes in terms of activity of spirits.550 Both acceleration and retardation are therefore activities to be controlled and changed by the magician. After all, the acceleration of time stands, according to Bacon, next to the creation of matter,551 while retardation is a compound motion,552 and both are to be manipulated by means of working on the appetites of matter. In the ordinary course of nature, living creatures go through composed motions. By accelerating or retarding them, the magician changes this natural course. Viewed in this way, acceleration appears as the superinduction of a new nature, while retardation appears as the prevention of a new nature, when this nature exists in potency in the form of the plant. But we must move on to a further significant set of differences between Della Porta and Bacon: the way they deal with degeneration and transmutation. I will compare specifically their view on old seeds. When presenting the example of colewort and rape, the cause Della Porta offers for their degeneration is the seeds themselves: “old seed is of so great force in some things, that it quite changeth the nature.”553 Bacon, on the other hand, talks about old seed not in relation to these plants, but as a separate instance of degeneration, while these plants are an illustration of moving into less fertile earth: 550 “Besides the two means of accelerating germination formerly described; that is to say, the mending of the nourishment, and comforting of the spirit of the plant; there is a third; which is the making way for the easy coming to the nourishment and drawing it” (SS exp. 406, SEH II, 477). 551 Century IV starts with this remark about acceleration: “ACCELERATION of time, in works of nature, may well be esteemed inter magnalia naturae. And even in divine miracles, accelerating of the time is next to the creating of the matter” (SEH II, 442). Creation of matter is one of the actions that are not in the power of humans – and this is one of the first assumptions of Bacon’s philosophy. What this quotation seems to suggest is that the acceleration of time is the highest activity of art. 552 Conservation is one of the compound motions appearing in the Abecedarium: “Bounded by generation and corruption is the duration of a thing. Therefore an inquiry ought to follow concerning the conservation of bodies, which prolongs a thing’s duration and holds off its destruction, or at any rate the steps and processes leading to destruction. And it is no use arguing that, as conservations of bodies are privations rather than sums of changes, it is quite wrong to place them amongst the sums; for We did something similar in placing the appetite for rest among the [simple] motions. For nowhere do we come across conservation that can keep things unaltered in a straightforward way, but we do find one that can retard, blunt, and balance motions and changes for the worse with other motions and changes of a wholesome kind” (ANN, OFB XIII, 207). 553 MN, 3, II, 62. 219 while others are excrescences or super-plants (such as mushrooms. or superplants.” 556 See MN 2. that if you will have one plant change into another. Unsurprisingly. 506. SEH II. and yet have strength enough to bring forth a plant. SEH II. among the imperfect plants. Jew’s ear. which constitute the second type of vivification. and therefore you are to practise it by nourishments as contrary as may be to the nature of the herb. make the plant degenerate. 26. or whether other changes in the schematisms of the seed have taken place.” and “Experiments in consort touching foreign plants. and likewise with seeds that are of the weakest sort. Della Porta dedicates the first chapter of his book on plants to them. mistletoe. on “Experiments in consort touching the rudiments of plants. and if they be good. a seed becomes more powerful as it gets old. Bacon draws many more distinctions among the plants bred out of putrefaction. and thus possesses a greater force to create a new plant. given the length of the sections in Sylva dedicated to this theme.” “Experiments in consort touching the producing of perfect plants without seeds. then. you must make account.554 For Della Porta. And therefore skilful gardeners make trial of the seeds before they buy them. Bacon is convinced of the contrary: the seed becomes weaker in time.”557 Bacon borrows some of Della Porta’s examples for this first chapter on plants. you must have the nourishment over-rule the seed. they will sprout within half an hour.555 As for plants growing out of putrefied material. some are rudiments (like moss). Moreover. because in their weakness they are more easily over-ruled by the nourishment. I-4. such that the schematisms of the regular (superior) plant can no longer be induced. 520. SS exp. the same old seeds can be used also to transmute plants.” and uses them in three different sections. just as he had done in his previous chapter on animals. 526. so nevertheless as the herb may grow. and of the excrescences of plants. and this weakness explains why a plant emerging from it will degenerate into a baser kind. not only from the variety of Simple. toadstools.if they be very old. to which he then adds further instances. 557 MN 2. “How new kinds of Plants may be generated of putrefaction. 555 220 . it is nevertheless fair to say that Della Porta’s experiments provide the starting point for Bacon’s investigation. which are either borrowed from different sources or are his own observations.556 Why should he begin his investigation of plants and animals from the case of putrefaction? Because “that is the principle to produce new creatures. by putting them in water gently boiled.558 Also. but of mixed bodies.” Although Bacon’s three sections are much expanded with respect to their source. in contrast to Della 554 SS exp. 508: “First therefore. Introduction. 558 The first distinction is between imperfect and perfect plants. whether they be good or no. and have least vigour. Bacon does not explain whether this is due to the spirit lacking the force to create the regular (superior) plant. 26-33. without any help of seed or such like” (MN 3. the unordered motion of the spirits first dissolves the ambient matter.). I analyzed Bacon’s experiments on the fertilizers of earth. that new kinds of living creatures may be generated of Putrefaction.). is once more found to use individual examples to investigate the hidden processes of matter. 3. plants and animals bred out of putrefaction constitute an example of the possibility of the transmutation of species. A comparison between the two texts shows that Della Porta uses the experiments he reports as a proof for the possibility of generating new plants. all plants and animals came out of putrefaction. water.559 Bacon. 221 . Finally. etc.” a characteristic having to do with the spirit of the plant. but in the context of several other experiments. rines. For Bacon. which has an ordered motion.560 At any rate. I. he suggests that vapours emerging from the bowels of the Earth are involved – an idea that may have been influenced by the alchemical theory of the circulation of nitre.Porta. and prickles. to proceed in the same order as we have begun. is mistletoe. spontaneous generation takes place as the result of a spirit leaving the inside of the Earth and encountering matter that fulfils the various conditions of vivification. But Bacon does not just cite these examples: he tries to account for them in causal terms. as a result of the existing schematisms. For him. 4. section 4. Perfect plants are also “formed. “by their own accord” (sponte). such as heat to dilate the spirit. Della Porta seems to believe that that at the beginning of the world. 3. The resulting organisms are what Bacon calls “creatures bred of putrefaction. In this process. 4. watery substances from the Earth are transmuted into oily substances. for Bacon. the virtues of which he held to accelerate the motion of the spirits and speed up the etc. 59). Bacon does not tell us how the process takes place and where the spirits come from in the relevant centuries. it is enough to know that some substances (like earth. and that some of them are still generated in this way. but then the motion becomes increasingly ordered. who only reports the facts (his own experiments or the recordings of other authors). because one is in the presence of a spirit that had not been prepared to generate a certain plant or animal and is yet enabled to create it. In what might constitute a Lucretian topos. exudations. The only imperfect plant which is “formed. 560 I have discussed this theory at length in chapter 4. it does not seem to have generated in him a deeper interest in the process itself. tenacious matter to be moulded by it. 559 “As we have shown before. While this notion provides him with a justification for his curiosity. the bark of trees. nor is there any proper theory of spontaneous generation to be found in his work. we will now shew that new kinds of Plants may grow up of their own accord. and matter becomes figured. Admittedly. etc. Bacon once again digs much more deeply into the causal framework underlying the phenomena reported. by contrast.” In the third chapter (section 3.” according to Bacon. or parts of animal bodies) can generate plants without a seed. so.. formation of plants. These experiments were. 61. in the vulgar philosophy. 3. SS. and how he managed to connect his experiments on plants with other experiments reported in Sylva. 507. introduction to exp. II. I discussed in detail how Bacon added causal explanations.”561 Alas. as he conceived it. by reporting on a powerful example of how Bacon used Della Porta’s experiments as a starting point for his investigations into what was for him a crucial objective for the science of magic. 3. and certainly it is a thing of difficulty. 3. according to the extant manuscript source. he does not develop this idea further. as he explains in the section on transmutation and degeneration: this work of the transmutation of one plant into another is inter magnalia naturae: for the transmutation of species is. the present section has brought this theme to a close. SEH II. In chapter 4. drawn from the examples he gives. “To work miracles is nothing else (as I suppose) but to turn one thing into another. or to effect those things which are contrary to the ordinary course of nature. but seeing there appear some manifest instances of it. At the beginning of his section on plants. Della Porta writes. changing bodies from one thing into another is one of the magnalia naturae. and requires deep search into nature. For Della Porta. 5. 526. performed by Bacon himself.” As for Bacon. 222 . Degeneration and transmutation Degeneration and transmutation occupy a special place for both authors. Bacon identifies two types of transmutation: “versions of bodies into another bodies” and “transplanting of one 561 562 MN. couched in the terms of his matter theory. pronounced impossible. the opinion of impossibility is to be rejected. With our discussion of Bacon’s theory of spontaneous generation. and the means thereof to be found out. in analyzing the individual instances taken from the Magia naturalis. of what he might have meant by “changing plants” and by “degeneration. to change one thing into another represents a “miracle” because it violates the normal course of nature.562 In the list of the magnalia naturae given at the end of The New Atlantis. so one is left with a mere intuition. 4. SEH II. 506. The same also holds for watering the plants with warm water. SEH II.565 But in the printed version. Bacon puts degeneration and melioration together.”564 It thus seems that in preparing Sylva or in taking notes from Della Porta’s book. not changing the earth. Degeneration. for that the nourishment is better prepared in the stock than in the crude earth. Digging about the roots is a great method for acceleration and melioration (exp. the transitory modifications produced by culture. Bacon put degeneration and melioration together.” by which. Nevertheless. but cannot be used for other trees which have to be planted by slip: “There is no doubt. as I shall presently show. 439. It is worth mentioning here that in the unpublished manuscript of Sylva. SEH II. as the peach and melocotone” (exp. which is temporary. 484). and then sets up the way in which plants should be planted as the principal technique for both melioration and degeneration: “Degenerating and Meliorating of Plants. 451. 564 223 . As for Della Porta. he has none of these distinctions. 452. 566 SS exp. “Transmutation. the two being opposite effects. SEH II. which will degenerate back into the baser kind as soon as the “adventitious nature” is no longer maintained artificially. 487). in this case. 434-36. which makes them grow sooner and better (exp.”563 A look at the relevant section in Sylva helps us understand why Bacon draws this distinction. The first refers to a mere modification of a body. The term “melioration” and its opposite. at folio 47v. 167. SEH II. Grafting does meliorate some fruits.” 408. SEH III. the second chapter of Della Porta’s book and the first part of Bacon’s section on degeneration (the 563 MA. can at times imply a veritable and irreversible change of species: “and sometimes so far as to change into another kind. does not alter the plant itself. he means a change that only lasts as long as the specific individual plant is taken care of. that there be some trees that are said to come up more happily from the kernel than from the graft. a distinction that is much more subtle and has to do with the principle of life. and his two conceptions about these two fundamental processes (transmutation and degeneration) are very different indeed. the distinction that is drawn is between degeneration and transmutation. the spirit contained in the seed and the way in which the seed can be changed in order to generate another species. is a process by which a plant is changed in such a way that it will be able to reproduce further in its new form. transplanting into worse earth and the wrong way of planting) are the exact opposites of those mentioned for the melioration of fruits. while the second implies a permanent change in species.” pertain to what he calls an “adventitious nature. The relevant parts of Della Porta’s Magia naturalis and Bacon’s Sylva (that is. and plants of Slip.”566 This means that at a certain point. “but with this caution. “degeneration. Rees. 565 The techniques presented in the section on degeneration (not dressing.” by contrast. or Roote. 483-84). but yet note well. by contrast. 518. 486). drought. “Unpublished Manuscript. The cause is manifest. shifting of ground is good both for trees and fruits. or the melioration of plants obtained by several means.species into another. degeneration becomes transmutation. but that grafting (for the most part) doth meliorate the fruit. that all things do prosper best when they are advanced to the better” (exp. Plants of seed. As we heard earlier. II. However. suppresses all references to the change of colours. Let us take a closer look at the examples they give so as to understand the implications of these conceptual differences. and corn degenerates when neglected. colewort becomes rape if neglected. while for Bacon. By contrast. 4.567 and corn typha and spelt changing into wheat or. for Bacon. However. degeneration for Della Porta simply means that a given plant species changes into another. For him. 224 . we must now add that the account given by the two authors of the two processes of degeneration and transmutation are completely different. 4. it is a change of a superior plant into a lower one. the first important difference between their approaches consists in this: Della Porta sees any kind of transformation of one plant into another as a degeneration and does not establish a ranking of higher and baser forms of plants. grapes degenerate into lower forms if they are sowed instead of being set by the root or sprig. his addition of causal explanations. a change of colour is merely a consequence of other changes in the latent 567 MN 3. these distinctions are important. again. See above 4. conversely. Thus. and his occasional criticism. this does not imply that they change their colour.). As a consequence. Bacon also takes transmutation to be something different from what Della Porta takes it to be. while for Bacon they do not. when using Della Porta’s accounts of degeneration. coleworts changing into rape and back again. 62. without any criterion of superiority or inferiority. when cultivated grapes degenerate into wild forms. We have just heard Della Porta speak of white grapes degenerate into black ones. I focused specifically on Bacon’s way of generalizing Della Porta’s experimental reports. as we have shown in chapter 4 (section 4. namely a way of affecting the plant’s principle of life by working upon its seed during the process of germination. The examples he gives are a black vine degenerating into a white one and vice versa. 1. Bacon. Bacon uses the very same examples. There. 1. or ground. both authors view the two types of transformations in question as significant changes brought about in the nature of a plant. air. and vice verse. Thus. degeneration means literally the degeneration of a superior plant into an inferior plant.second being on transmutation)) are quite similar to each other. for Bacon. To be sure. and a change of place. certain changes in plants represent for Della Porta instances of degeneration. but not the other way around. wheat into corn and spelt. For Della Porta. planting in the wrong way. one can make plants degenerate in three different ways: negligence or dressing. but changes the meaning of “degeneration”: for him. SEH II.”570 In other words. 526-531. 620-21). (ii) when we plant the seed of a plant between others of a different type. and roots. 508-9 and also the introduction to these set of experiments. leaves. 526. what Bacon believes to happen in the seed is a transformation of the existing schematisms. this means that they can also in principle change from one species into another. SEH II. introduction to exp. If the seed manages to dominate the nourishment. but also of an old one. although only superficial changes which will not affect the species. (v) forcing plants to grow contrary to their nature and (vi) depriving them of sun and open air. SEH II. the other plants will have “changed the earth with their juices” and will thereby also work upon the seed we want to change. the work of magic. there are six rules to respect in order to perform the transmutation of species. 507-8. white is the sign not only of a neglected flower. So. and in fact in such a way that it might be an altogether different species. that it doth not expatiate. and the nature of it. Examples of such changes are white hair. all of which aim at changes in the seed: (i) the nourishment must overrule the seed. because “it is the seed. it is impossible to maintain the processes of the body. both processes having the same cause. For. a decline of the senses. degeneration and transmutation are all consequences of the way in which the nourishment is assimilated and in which either the seed overrules the nourishment or vice versa. if creatures can be generated without seed. 225 . 507-8. Bacon discusses the cause of white hair and white feathers in old men. the same action must be performed each time for each particular plant.568 For Bacon. (iii) a mould out of earth. all of them being the effect of dryness. there will be changes in the plant. which locketh and boundeth in the creature. The last two rules are suggestions to be experimentally verified and validated. In century IX. 570 SS. animals or birds. 568 Actually. After what we have seen already.schematisms. But if. being consumed by the inanimate spirits. which will alter the seed. (exp. wrinkled skin. the latter will structure and form the plant differently. 851. in order to have the same changes reproduced. ibid. which will persist down the generations.. If these are different in such a way as to affect the motion of the spirit. etc. insufficient nourishment. by contrast.569 In fact. the nourishment manages to dominate and thereby to change the seed. which is connected with the degree of concoction of the body of plants and their flowers. To bring such effect about is. so that various changes are produced. there will be a genuine transmutation of species. Without nourishment. The process takes place because the vital spirit does not receive enough nourishment and enough moisture. which become very powerful over time. 569 For the rules of transmutation see SS exp. that is. it will not be surprising to hear that Bacon’s model for all such mutations are creatures born out of putrefaction. as we have seen in the previous section. (iv) sowing the seeds into a kind of earth that normally produces plants without seed (plants bred of putrefaction). melioration. a most powerful effect in nature and one by which human power is (as far as it is allowed) raised to the highest degree. namely that of the transformation or metamorphosis of bodies. on the one hand. it would not seem proper at this point to leave out an inquiry about a really noble and rare sum. as well as when food is transformed into the body of a plant. and assimilation is an action of the plant necessary to actualize its potential. 209. Indeed. by reason neither of seminal principles nor predispositions of foods but by the profound and powerful means of metaschematisms. having again as the result a different plant than the one that the seed left by itself would have created. being a combination of the motions of both spirits. It is evident that a significant change takes place when the seed is transformed into a plant or animal. what Bacon does with the help of these six actions is to oblige the seed to develop under different conditions from those found in nature. and metamorphosis on the other. Bacon names “metamorphosis” among the compound motions: However. But this is not how this quotation should be interpreted. When finding other substances than simple water in the earth. the spirit is obliged to transform them into the body of the plant. or at least from one perfect body to another. But the plant or animal pre-exist in potency in the body of the seed. 226 . bring about real changes in the schematisms. and the transformation of food into bodily parts is to be understood as a process of assimilation. but its motion of the animate spirit can be different from those developed in normal conditions and thus the spirit might create different schematisms than it used to. not foreseen by nature and due only to man’s cunning art. by contrast. when natural objects are left to follow their natural course. or in flesh and bones. This occurs most of all when bodies are changed. transplanted. and altered from one species to another. OFB XIII.571 This definition of metamorphosis might at first sight appear to contradict the rules offered in Sylva. When planted in soils which create plants by themselves. if viewed in terms of matter theory.In the Abecedarium. The six actions enumerated by Bacon in Sylva. When 571 ANN. Bacon here distinguishes between generation and alimentation. and by consequence different a plant. the spirit of the plant interacts with other spirits and their combined motion that figurates the matter is also affected. It is in the nature of each seed to transform into a particular plant. because it seems to exclude food or nourishment as a source of transmutation. In his preface to the third book. fruits our fore-fathers knew not. and another is named from Decumiusand Dolabella. the nature of the climate. Again. 5. from the quality of the ground. What of the Peach. another Dolabelliana. namely any change brought about in existing plants with respect to taste. it is varied into many kinds. in its desire to get out of the body and unite with its connaturals. and this leads to changes in its motions. Now so many men's names are honored by it. Nature brought forth but one kind of Pear tree. Manliana from Manlius. the aim of his book on plants is to create new kinds with the help of art and experience. Appiana Claudiana from Appius Claudius. Quinces are of many kinds. What shall I say of Laurel Cherries. Of course. smell. Della Porta explains what he means by “new plants”. 3. colour. that one is called Decumana.” Indeed. but now by the help of Bacchus alone. and the ancestors of Plutarch and Pliny. that it were madness to number them up. the difference in the case of transmutation. were too sharp to eat in the days of Theophrastus. and shows how to intermingle sundry kinds of plants and how to produce new kinds. which will of course produce changes in the schematisms of the body. is that these changes will be transmitted to the seed. must find other ways to develop the plant and sometimes forms the matter in a different way than when planted in a soil that satisfies all the afore mentioned conditions of vivification. The same holds true for the changes that have to do with heat or air: the spirit must find a way to create and develop the plant differently from under normal conditions. found in Pliny his time? What of Citrons? Which as Athenaeus says. or shape: Diodorus writes. Their varieties have made the authors names immortal. New species of things Della Porta’s book on plants carries the following title: “The Third Book of Natural Magic: which delivers certain precepts of husbandry. that the Vine at first was but one. and that was wild. and not worth our time. and the art of planting. The same thing is observed in Figs. compared to melioration and degeneration. and the plant will continue to grow with its “new” nature in any given conditions. Cestiana from Cestius. the spirit. the conditions must be such as to keep the spirit in and not allow its separation from the body. of Livy and Pompey.planted in contrary conditions. some called Mariana from Marius. 4. 4. and Almond-peach nuts. 227 . but Palladius made them to become sweet. It is evident that Bacon was preoccupied with changing and transforming natural objects. as complementary writings. and in fact in almost the same order as they appear in The New Atlantis. 574 See section 3 of this chapter. Here it shall suffice only to show. the print and the compass. in the chapter about making fruit better or worse. with respect to either plants or to other objects. Compounded fruits. as we did in our tract of the Commixtion of diverse kinds of living creatures. to the wholesale transmutation of species. to join more easily. 167. he names the gunpowder. as does his emphasis on the possibility that “new plants” can indeed be generated. 87-88). they prune it. And when it begins to shoot forth. 573 228 . being pleasant and admirable? What of Clovegilliflowers. will have no hard Kernel in them. It is curious that among the activities performed upon plants by the members of Solomon’s House. 58. and some worse than their ordinary kinds. is cloven in the middle. For example. SEH III.575 Admittedly. with a special care that the buds receive no harm in any way.yet now are they eaten. beginning with the change of colour. Fruits without kernels. and to agree better together. 72). but he does not say how this list might be continued. Preface. whereby we may cause those diverse plants which we would intermingle.574 By the same token. “The Materials. that the gardeners art has made so dainty and sweet scented?572 It is evident that Della Porta’s only criterion for considering a plant as “new” is that it has not previously existed possessing the same characteristics. But it is evident that melioration and degeneration do not yield “new species” of plants. and dig often about it. when the Vine branch that is to be planted. and Bacon refrains from indicating when he thinks he has realized a “new object. VII. as Columella writes. This means that a fruit which is made sweeter by art is considered to be a “new plant. it is a great marvel that there can be in them any Kernels at all. which is only a superficial change. 63). and the pieces knit up together again. some better. those things that nature would have never brought about by itself. the “making of new species” figures in the list of desiderata at the end of The New Atlantis. III. new fruits may be produced. SEH III.” The same basic idea returns throughout Della Porta’s book. we have spoken elsewhere more at large. This is another argument in favour of Colclough’s thesis that Sylva sylvarum and The New Atlantis should be read together. See Colclough. for the producing of new and Compounded fruits” ( MN 3. the creation of new species of plants was among the activities of the members of Solomon’s House.” 575 NA. so here also it is met to prescribe certain rules.and it is even 572 MN 3. that by Grafting. and NA. creating new species of plants is alone in not having an analogous section in Sylva. and all the Pith is scraped out.” When he mentions the greatest discoveries of natural philosophy. The Grapes which it bears afterwards. However. are new fruits: “But now. the problem of new species does not occupy an explicit place in Sylva. are also seen as a new species: “Pliny likewise says. which are half one fruit and half another. the product is considered to be a “new fruit”: “Concerning the praises and excellency of Grafting.573 As for Bacon. Then they set the Vine branch in a well soiled ground.” (MN 3. but having no other modification of their kind. XII. all the others do. there is a new invented kind of Grape. 158-59. The transformation of plants discussed in centuries V and VI can be defined as changes of one or several simple natures in a given plant. though never so soft” (MN 3. but that the same stock might become compound. 229 . who is the source of the technique employed. or just separate fruit trees that grow.unclear what status transmutation has with respect to its products. Wherein note (by the way) that unity of continuance is easier to procure than unity of species. 477. but leaves it open as to whether they are really able to produce compound fruits. preserving the “identity” of the species. It does not seem accidental that from Della Porta’s three chapters on compounded fruits. Bacon only borrowed three examples. However. contrary to what Della Porta. as a proof that the change is not temporary. in the sense that it will have fruits from two different species. but yet they will put forth their several fruits without any commixture in the fruit. in close embrace. Bacon does present some methods. What Bacon concludes here is that the fruits will not be compound of two different species. where he criticizes grafting as a method of compounding fruit. where Bacon raises the question concerning “new fruits” occurs in the above-mentioned quote from the section on compound fruits.576 “Unity” and “continuance” seem indeed to be key concepts for the possibility of having new species. where are the borderlines between mere changes of some schematisms. 492. as it were. in the three experiments that follow. and in Sylva in general. but specifies that no method had yet been discovered. After presenting his first techniques. as the title of the section suggests. When one species changes into another. Bacon mentions that new species of plants might possibly come about as a consequence of the compounding of already existing types of fruit. SEH II. and the creation of a completely new one? There is no doubt that the new species must accomplish the rules of transmutation and must transmit the new form.” There is a central question arising from this analysis of Bacon’s concept of transmutation and the creation of new objects. he concludes: they will come upon one stock. The techniques employed by the Neapolitan magus rely either on grafting (which is rejected by Bacon for 576 SS exp. assured in his book. this cannot solve the question of the limit between the two kinds of transmutation – how many changes of its simple natures must a given object suffer in order to be considered “new”? The only place in the two centuries on plants. First. In the introduction to this section. it can be the case that both species exist already in such cases. transmutation does not lead to “new species. if changes can be performed only on existing objects (or species). However. signified by the term “art”—depends upon reconfiguring these nodes of motions. “Francis Bacon and the Art-Nature Distinction.. Sophie Weeks’ article. new species of things: The production of new species therefore depends upon producing new combinations of motions. SEH II. “Francis Bacon.”577 This idea is connected to those discussed in our previous chapter: the unity of fruit can be obtained in a given plant.reasons mentioned earlier) or on different ways of binding the buds (which Bacon deems incapable of realizing a new fruit. Whether the other two of Bacon’s three examples in this section do bring about the desired union is unclear. 136. 203) The creation of new species—trivially. Weeks. doth better unite.” 130-36. given that the author does not qualify their status by any of the terms he tends to use. as Bacon laments. 479. for that the binding doth hinder the natural swelling of the tree. the altered plant will not be able to hand down its new characteristics through its seed to its offspring. OFB XIII. which can be phrased in more technical terms 577 SS exp.” In fact. which. the more wonderful the virtues of the body.. at the end of the last experiment. but rather a composite of the two. discusses the concept of “nova” within Bacon’s philosophy and concludes that the products of art are either imitations of nature or “nova. 579 Ibid.” “doubtful” or “impossible. according to Weeks. (ANN.) The ordinary species of things were formed when nodes of motions haphazardly fused in dynamic tension. such as “possible.” The latter category represents the highest aim of Bacon’s experimental philosophy. making the above-mentioned problem even more complicated. both in mechanics and magic. Weeks’ analysis of Bacon’s concept of nova does not mention the problem of borders. and about Bacon’s matter theory in general. it is evident that Bacon had not performed the experiments himself.579 The fact that Bacon talks about “new species” only in the context of compound fruit raises a series of questions about Weeks’ thesis. while it is in motion.. However. 493. being half one and half the other). 578 230 . (.” which was examined in our first chapter. but if no concomitant unity of the species is obtained.578 These man-made artificialia constitute. The more composed and decomposed the motions are. he adds: “Which seemeth to me the likeliest means that hath been propounded. Thus it is through “the aggregation and control [dispensatione] of the simple motions” that the production of nova is achieved. Bacon’s model of magic is the transmutation of other metals into gold. How mechanics becomes natural magic The purpose of the last few pages has been to examine the ways in which Bacon used Della Porta’s Magia naturalis as a storehouse of materials – or. is 231 . because for him natural magic produces its effects with the help of efficient causes. However. The problem with Weeks’ interpretation is that all these transformations are given in terms of changes of simple motions and that creation of stable configurations of nodes. as a database from which he could draw in building his own. Baconian natural magic can exist without nova. however. but when it comes to living species. There is no doubt that objects such as gunpowder or the compass are nova. they differ on the concept and role of form. It is quite evident that while. for both authors. the issue becomes more complicated. natural magic. acceleration. they turn out to be significantly different. But the difference between the two authors lies in the application of this idea. This. A similarly fragile distinction is that between changes of simple natures in existing species and the creation of completely new species. as we might say today. higher. The second lies between degeneration and transmutation. it has become evident that Bacon’s idea of natural magic differs considerably from Della Porta’s. But. After all. every new change in a plant form implies that there is a “new plant. it is true that magic is. We have seen how Bacon included Della Porta’s experiments in order to explain those processes that are essential for magic (on his understanding of the term). Through a comparison of the two books on plants. In relation to plants. Even if. even if creation of new species would make this science even nobler. in their theoretical considerations. 4. he does not give us examples of the creation of entirely new species. retardation and transmutation are already magical activities.” Bacon’s matter theory requires a more thorough change of nature. when we look at their practice. 5. the two authors seem to adhere to comparable concepts of magic. the science of transforming nature and producing those effects which could be perceived as “miraculous” by those who do not understand the underlying natural causes. alas. the problem is more complex than I suggested above: the first treacherous borderline lies between the change of a simple nature and degeneration. for Della Porta. 4. To begin with. Of course. Della Porta’s explanations do not rely on the manipulation of forms.as follows: how many simple motions should be changed in order to consider that we are dealing with a new species? In fact. It seems that Bacon himself has no clear idea in mind about what this “new object” might be when he talks about transforming old ones. To the Bacon scholar. Time and again. not individual bodies. transmutation or new species.precisely one of the reasons Bacon does not consider Della Porta’s book to contain a true natural magic. 156-64. It should have become clear how Bacon integrated Della Porta’s experiments into his discussion of the relations between simple natures. forms. We have three that collect the experiments of all mechanical 232 . Conclusion: Bacon’s science of magic Every reader of The New Atlantis is inevitably puzzled by various aspects of this island and its institution for the production of knowledge. The results of art are clearly both the product of mechanics and magic. In this enterprise. we have twelve that sail into foreign countries. Bacon takes theory and practice as necessary partners in the scientific enterprise. (for our own we conceal. collect the axioms. who was had little interest in possible theoretical underpinnings for his experiments. What Bacon wishes to achieve with his natural magic is to superinduce forms on a given body. when moving to the offices of the members. and patterns of experiments of all other parts. when the experimenter arrived at the level of natural magic. In essence. appetites. with individual bodies being merely their vehicles. 581 “For the several employments and offices of our fellows. and cover the entire realm of different actions disclosed above. SEH III. spiritual matter. who constitute the institute’s highest level. as we have repeatedly pointed out.”581 In fact. These we call Merchants of Light. under the names of other nations. he uses efficient causes only so as to arrive at the forms. there is not even so much as an allusion to possible applications of these axioms and to what Bacon elsewhere calls “the creation of works.) who bring us the books. The Interpreters of Nature. one of the most intriguing aspects is precisely the absence of a science of the natural magician from the structure of Salomon’s House. we have been able to observe how Bacon does not use the terms of his matter theory (that is. 5. and abstracts. Bacon’s interests are. internal motions and basic appetites. there seems to be no place for magic in the investigations and transformations of nature conducted at Salomon’s House. Surprisingly. but that they represented for him the genuine entities of matter on which experiments had to work. 5. vivification. these are those entities that the magician manipulates. We have three that collect the experiments which are in all books. from simple change of schematisms to new species and new artificial instruments. helping each other in the development and advancement of knowledge. while the results of magical activities in nature are described throughout the text. but their configurations. simple motions and simple schematisms) merely as explanatory terms. Our analysis has shown that in comparison to Della Porta. These we call Depredators. operative 580 See the description of the “preparations and instruments” in The New Atlantis.580 Taken at face value. even when described. and aphorisms. These we call Pioners or Miners. are charged with the task of applying knowledge to create useful things for the benefit of mankind. However. this seems a description of what Sylva does. The only sense in which the materials from Sylva need further refinement is that in which Bacon’s programme is not yet definitive. and he does not say what the relation between natural history and natural magic is. SEH III. At Bensalem. These we call Dowry-men or Benefactors. But. only three members. 164-65). nor of the different kinds of experiments in Sylva. in a very interesting way. where New Atlantis is set. Sylva would only be the starting point for further work and further refinement” (“Materials. there is no comparison of the members of Solomon’s House and the different steps of natural history. but he does not say where. more penetrating into nature than the former. where a large quantity of the experiments are borrowed from other sources. on an island like Bensalem. to give the better light for the drawing of observations and axioms out of them. we have three that take care. of a higher light. and when compared with the latter.” 197). he depended on observations and basic experiments – and if they arts. These we call Lamps. it would seem as though magic – as understood by Bacon – should be in use all the time. and also of practices which are not brought into arts. but he only mentions that fifteen of the members have works connected to Sylva. One would think this to be a paradoxical task. We have three that try new experiments. We have three others that do execute the experiments so directed. to consider of the former labours and collections. 233 . to direct new experiments. These we call Compilers. These we call Mysterymen. Although he identified the similarities between the subjects of the experiments in Sylva and New Atlantis. half of the members of Salomon’s House are said to collect experiments from the practice and the books of Europeans. or how.” Richard Serjeantson compares the hierarchal structure of Solomon’s House with the method of induction as it appears in the Novum Organum. and much more with uncovering the deeper processes of nature. we have three that raise the former discoveries by experiments into greater observations. These we call Inoculators. when read together with Sylva. These we call Interpreters of Nature” (NA.582 Such a comparison will not only benefit our understanding of The New Atlantis. but oriented towards further developments at any level. given that the level of knowledge of the Bensalemites exceeds that of the Europeans. Then after divers meetings and consults of our whole number. means of natural divinations. Lastly. even that of natural magic. 582 In his article “Natural knowledge in the New Atlantis. Indeed. in my opinion. looking into the experiments of their fellows. out of them. Nevertheless. their works are to be found in the multitude of the experiments. and knowledge as well for works as for plain demonstration of causes. but also clarify several puzzling characteristics of Sylva. We have three that draw the experiments of the former four into titles and tables. such as themselves think good. Colclough considered them to be just the starting point for the construction of a natural philosophy: “In the fictional island of Bensalem. There are several aspects of the activity of the members of Salomon’s House that are better understood. axioms. Bacon was clearly less preoccupied with the simple level of observation or of basic experiments. the Benefactors. and report them. But in order to arrive at these deeper levels. We have three that bend themselves. Colclough makes this connection. and also of liberal sciences. But as stated before: it is not even mentioned in the structure of Salomon’s Houese. where nature seems so much improved and technology so advanced that Europeans cannot even imagine their instruments. and the easy and clear discovery of the virtues and parts of bodies. and cast about how to draw out of them things of use and practice for man's life.philosophy in general does not seem to be very prominent among the activities of Salomon’s House. as constituting natural magic. which is based on accumulated previous knowledge. which are more complex and aim at an ontologically deeper level of nature. In precisely this sense. It is in exactly this sense that we may define the invention of new experiments. draws together results into tables in order to bring light upon causes (just as the Compilers do) and invents new experiments.could not be his own. they had to be those of others (as with the Merchants of Light). In summary. with the rule for inducing heat. Following a technique that is already prefigured in the Novum organum. 234 . Bacon tried to perform the activity of all the members in Solomon’s House – and magic is included amongst those activities. Sylva further develops the testing of provisional rules and axioms in what must therefore be considered experiments of fruit. Sylva invents new experiments using previous ones as a starting point (as the Miners at Salomon’s House do). magic experimentally establishes the truth of these axioms by producing effects. then: in the thousand experiments of Sylva. and which are based on the theory that can be inferred from the Compilers’ tables (just as the Lamps do). If truth and productivity go hand in hand. The Baconian science of magic does not begin when the final axioms of nature are all defined. it is only with the confirmation of the rule that the axiom is validated as true. Rather. 227. I have offered a survey of the relevant scholarly literature on Bacon’s natural philosophical project. I have shown that Bacon relied on a varied typology of experiments and that these were used in different stages of his inquiry: in the context of simple natural historical work. SEH III. If the general opinion among scholars has been that Bacon just copied experiments from other authors. must needs lead to the conclusion that at least in a number of experiments of Sylva sylvarum. Let us briefly recapitulate the findings of the various chapters of this dissertation. the implications are evident. however.”583 What Bacon wants to say with this metaphor is that knowledge will never grow beyond the level established by a given author because his followers cannot improve upon it using the same method. First. In the first chapter. putting them to use as a basis for his magical writing. I have tried to support my thesis by means of a wide array of arguments. The maximum they can do is to remain at the same level. 235 . knowledge would be able to advance further by imitating the examples proposed by this method. It should have become evident why. If. which after all was the ultimate objective of his reformation of natural philosophy. and their connectedness with the other elements of his matter theory. metaphysics and. Bacon compares knowledge to water. A last set of arguments was drawn from matter theory. Bacon manipulated forms in order to transform nature. mechanics. When applied to the theme at hand. A reconstruction of Bacon’s theory of forms. in natural magic. in physics. The aim of this dissertation has been to show that Bacon did manage to construct a science of magic in Sylva sylvarum. finally. and to natural magic. to the function of natural histories.Conclusions In his early Valerius terminus. a functioning method for obtaining knowledge were delivered. a new approach is needed. which “will never arise again higher that the level from which it fell. Should Bacon never have performed natural magic. and that it was his intention to show to his followers how they could use and develop it further. I have discussed the way in which Bacon made use of his sources. Secondly. he could of course not have hoped that the sciences would advance on the basis of his method. at least with respect to Sylva. I hope to have shown that Bacon transformed these experiments in a very purposeful and at the same time creative way. As I have 583 VT. to begin with. notably in the last years of his life. an incoherent and paradoxical image of his natural philosophical project will arise. magic can in fact not be separated from Bacon’s theories of experimentation. I have tried to show that if one limits his analysis to only some of Bacon’s works or to a certain issue without connecting it with others. there are issues regarding which Bacon changed his opinion. while he was compiling his Instauratio magna. With regard to Bacon’s natural philosophy. medical receipts. over the past years. from the perspective of the present dissertation. is inferior to the other histories. that in the latter. commonsense experience. A particular lacuna. and directions for further inquiry – the presence of all this variety does not render Sylva an inferior history with respect to the Latin ones. In his description of the histories to be included in the Historia naturalis et experimentalis. The main difference between Sylva and the Latin histories resides mainly in this. which we encounter indeed in all three Latin natural and experimental histories. The problem with several of these analyses is that they only reflect on Bacon’s theoretical works. Bacon mentioned the importance of the inclusion of all of these instances in his histories. one examines all of Bacon’s works. that is. in his natural and experimental histories. experiments of fruit. focussing on a single among Bacon’s key terms. while in Sylva. a few themes have been analysed time and again in the secondary literature. his natural histories and his matter theory have been discussed in relation to his practical works. induction and matter theory. a coherent system will be found to emerge. or a subset thereof. experiments of light. they are all labelled as 236 . such changes of mind provide us with essential information on Bacon’s intellectual development. Chapter two has had at its aim the placement of Sylva in the context of Bacon’s overall philosophy. Some of these discussions have displayed a somewhat fragmentary character. The views according to which Sylva is a commonplace book. while these themes are very much at work in his practical writings.shown. evidence that Bacon did indeed intend to publish this book. There is. In fact. If. they appear under the proper Baconian terminology. methodological advice. as they display the same characteristic. while it is true that Sylva is composed of paragraphs of a very heterogeneous nature – variously containing theoretical considerations. or is a notebook never meant for publication have been shown to be wrong. Fortunately. Furthermore. his theory of experimentation and his method of induction. spiritual magic. These are notably the operative character of Bacon’s philosophy. Of course. was the inexcusable neglect of Sylva in the relevant scholarship. by contrast. Almost never has his theory of matter been considered as a coherent system. if every instance in Sylva is called “experiment. Their result can be tabulated in the same way as happens in the Historia densi et rari or in the second book of the Novum organum. They are also fundamental for the progress of knowledge. However. because without them. experimental results do not always become visible for the experimenter. their results allow for the design of new experiments and a better understanding of a given process. While I do not claim that my classification is exhaustive.” that is. Another way of proving that Bacon’s conception on experimentation is robust is by investigating the way in which Bacon constructs and uses experiments in Sylva. However. concerning the terminological issue. while the histories have each a single subject matter. I have started with the less complex type of experiments. This was precisely the purpose of chapter three. The two following classes have the function to test and refute experiments or theories. I believe it to be more accurate and complete than the existing ones.” this does not mean (as I have tried to show) that Bacon did not have a strong conception of what constitutes an “experiment.” In order to demonstrate his coherent conception of that term. of those experiments designed by Bacon for the production of knowledge and the discovery of causes. This is where the fifth type of experiments comes into play. which provided a classification of the “experiments of light. Moreover. I have argued that this fragmentary structure is used by Bacon as a method to select his readers – only the prepared ones are able to see the connection and the unity between separate phenomena. They have the virtue of transforming imperceptible changes or qualities of the bodies into perceptible ones. that is. those designed to illustrate Bacon’s matter theory as set down in his speculative philosophy. The criteria of my classification were the complexity of the experimental set-up and the type of results they provide. with its precisely 1.“experiments.” I do not believe this mystery can be solved unless new archival or textual evidence is found. The first (which is the forth type in our classification) explores the qualities of bodies that change during a certain process. Sylva treats of just about everything. The last class of experiments I discussed were those in 237 . The last three classes of experiments are those “of light” properly speaking. I have ignored the issue of the particular structure of Sylva. It is true that these experiments do not produce new knowledge. correct experiments and theories would never find their proper place.000 socalled “experiments. I have analysed the way in which he uses it in his other natural histories.” Moreover. but they are essential to the construction of a natural history. as they cleanse it from fruitless experiments and dangerous ideas. Moreover. that sheds light on this issue. which are capable of being recorded by the experimenter. we encountered his methodological criticism. while Bacon interprets it in terms of the assimilation of nourishment. however. but not the theory associated with it. This example. The second part of our fourth chapter analysed individual instances that Bacon borrowed from Della Porta and established three major changes that he introduced into them.which a process studied in one class of objects can be applied to more complex ones.” who copied experiments from others in order to arrive at the magic number of 1. As they will play an essential role in the operative side of natural philosophy. Chapter four has argued against another myth surrounding Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum. grafting figuring as the central technique in his book on plants. Della Porta uses grafting whenever he wants to perform changes in plants (sometimes in combination with other methods). Once we compare Della Porta’s and Bacon’s extensive sections dealing with plants. is in reality essential for both authors. which both authors regard as simplified models of animals and men. Bacon signalled a number of experiments reported by Della Porta as “mere fictions. which casts Bacon in the role of a mere “transcriber.” It had become clear from the previous chapter why the 238 . Indeed. but transfers the results to men in the context of an improved nutrition. who changes the meaning of this process. on the basis of their unity at the level of hidden structures and hidden motions. we could see the selective and original ways in which Bacon borrowed some. In fact. Bacon. First. it suffices to compare Sylva with Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. it is in this context that it figures in the Historia vitae et mortis. but not all. uses it only for the betterment of plants. too. In our close examination of their analysis of the process of grafting. Bacon does not. despite what is generally said about the absence of mathematics from Baconian science. During my exercise in classification. we find how much Bacon changed the material he found in Della Porta. which to us might seem trivial. which has the aim of prolonging human life. I have emphasized the role of instruments and the importance of measurement for Bacon. Measurement. Instruments are not just replacements for the senses. The reason is that Della Porta takes grafting to be analogous to copulation in animals. is important for Bacon. they might be recorded in the speculative one. as Sylva and its extant manuscript source clearly document. criticise Della Porta only at the level of concepts. They are also indicators of the relevant parameters to be applied to the understanding of a process of experimentation and play an important role when it comes to the further development of a given experiment.000 experiments. In order to rebut that view. of Della Porta’s experiments. the book out of which Bacon has always been said to have “borrowed” the greatest number of instances. quantitative features are often given in quite some detail. Both generalizations and the causes are given in terms of his matter theory. While Della Porta was interested in the transformation of individual plants. which in turn will activate again the appetites and thereby lead to further changes. In my chapter. I explain how these motions can be influenced. depending on the schematisms existing in the body. then. In his two centuries dealing with plants. almost all the experiments he narrates contain a causal explanation added at the end. However. is the operative side of metaphysics. In one word. what the natural magician must do is to understand which appetite must be activated so that in combination with the existing schematisms of a given body a certain 239 . Besides what has just been said. I have attempted to redefine Bacon’s concept of form. for example. to cite just the most completely developed case. These interactions are the reason why the actual state of nature is characterized by continuous change and motion. The idea of grafting as assimilation. it produces one motion or another. Moreover.exclusion of wrong experiments is important in a natural and experimental history. Magic. Bacon was interested in groups of plants and types of processes. by manipulating the basic appetites of matter. it presents a new source of Sylva: Hugh Platt’s Floraes paradise. is a combination of three simple natures and their measurements. in Bacon’s vision. chapter four wishes to make two further contributions to Baconian studies. Bacon took several experiments from Platt’s then wellknown horticultural book. finally. Chapter five. The result of the motion will be a change in the schematisms of bodies. is to be found also in the Floraes paradise. Bacon’s level of theory. it shows how Bacon combined the two authors – Della Porta and Platt – in choosing and reformulating the experiments to be included in Sylva. which is high in comparison to the Magia naturalis. When an appetite is manifest. Through a detailed analysis of the second book of the Novum organum and the Abecedarium novum naturae. even where he agrees with Platt. The form of heat. It had also been shown how Bacon generalised the subjects under experimentation. In other words. adds to the results of the previous chapters. Secondly. because what Bacon clearly seeks are operations on the forms and simple natures of bodies. takes us to the theme of metaphysics and magic. However. Bacon develops his criticisms further to include arguments from his own matter theory. it cannot be their unique causes. magic is the manipulation of forms with the aim of transforming natural bodies. in order to show how a consistent number of experiments in Sylva qualify as experiments in natural magic. and metaphysics is the knowledge of forms. because each appetite can cause more than only one motion. First. thereby using Platt’s experimental reports in order to correct and criticize Della Porta. The magician. however. mark the transition into the realm of metaphysics. What Bacon meant with this distinction is that the first pair of disciplines studies changes in individual bodies. while the second studies the general patterns of hidden changes and explains them in term of forms. precisely the characteristics of physics and mechanics (recognizable in Della Porta’s philosophy). this is precisely what several experiments of fruit in Sylva deal with. then.motion will be produced. which in turn study and apply the formal causes. appetites and motions and even recognizes which changes are possible in subjects that have not yet been investigated. or the forms. but the level of matter at which they operate is different: the mechanic will just put bodies together and provoke some changes. Those experiments that transform the imperceptible into the perceptible. but their combinations are every time different. 240 . sometimes mechanics and magic can produce the same changes in the bodies. for they study visible changes. Experiments that investigate into the changes of a body during a given process belong to the realm of physics. Della Porta was interested in changes of individual bodies and not in the underlying hidden processes that caused them. There are. two reasons why Sylva may be identified as a work of natural magic. The last class of experiments transfers knowledge from one class of objects to another. The appetites. The second reason why we may speak of the Sylva’s transition to metaphysics and magic has to do with the changes that are introduced with respect to Della Porta’s text. The first has to do with the classification of experiments that was proposed in our third chapter. based on the knowledge of the unity of nature. A very important distinction in Bacon’s philosophy is that between physics and mechanics. in contradistinction to metaphysics and magic (Bacon’s transformation of the same experiments): for the latter pair the objects under investigation are no longer individual plants. which study and apply respectively the material and efficient causes. Importantly. By applying his knowledge to a new and bigger class of object. motions and schematisms are the same in all bodies. For this reason. his magic can also provoke changes that are not simple imitations of natural processes. In fact. Bacon’s transformations of Della Porta’s experiments match. the natural philosopher performs magic. Bacon does not think of his text as one on natural magic. We recall that last three classes of “experiments of light” mark the transition from physics to magic. and because he possesses this knowledge. knows the relations between schematisms. which studies the hidden activities taking place within the bodies. however. however. and metaphysics and magic. but the magician will manipulate the appetites in order to produce such changes. the Instauratio magna will never come to an end. Bacon appears to have hoped that he could raise the awareness of these possibilities in a major way. For this reason alone. the grand project of Bacon’s Instauratio magna was still not complete. When working on Sylva sylvarum. hitherto unstudied objects. If we accept that Sylva was indeed Bacon’s book on natural magic. in the last months of his life. This dissertation has produced. With Sylva in hand. Likewise. humanity could progress more speedily. ordered. a sufficient number of arguments in favour of a reading of Sylva sylvarum as a treatise that deals with natural magic. the science of natural magic will continue to grow and to be perfected. this treatise contains numerous instances in which Bacon manipulated the appetites of matter with the aim of bringing about certain transformations within the body. Rather. and explained. Still. however. which can improve human life. After all. there will be no point when all possible inventions will have been made. With respect to theory. the experimental results can be easily transferred and applied to other. With respect to practice. This does not mean that each experiment reported in it does indeed belong to magic as defined by Bacon. Moreover. our understanding of the natural forms will always remain subject to further improvement. Bacon’s project is thus based on the assumption that there will always be new inventions. Bacon believed in a model of science that was cumulative. and it can never be cleansed and purified of all the errors and idols that beset it. catalogued.but the invisible schematisms. or so I hope.” which started with natural histories and provided models of speculative philosophy in the Novum organum – definitions of forms – and of operative philosophy in Sylva sylvarum – superinduction of forms. the human mind has been hampered and distorted since the Fall. 241 . we have seen the diversity of the reported instances to be large. as I claim. We must realize. Bacon thus managed to deliver a complete “method. motions and appetites that are involved in the processes that are studied. by repeating and improving the numerous experiments he had accumulated. this will permit us to conclude that Bacon did fulfil his original plan of delivering examples of how natural philosophy had to be performed in all of its facets and disciplines. He may not even have believed in the possibility of ever garnering all possible knowledge. that even if Sylva is indeed about natural magic. (London 1875–94). Reid: “Bacon. 5-28. 215-42. Viscount St. Lingua.” in Marta Fattori. Atomism and Imposture: The True and the Useful in History. Anstey. Peter: ‘Experimental versus Speculative Natural Philosophy’. C. The Science of Nature in the Seventeenth Century (Dordrecht. 7 vols. F. Anderson. Complete Works (translated into English by Jonathan Barnes.) Collected and edited by James Spedding. 1948). and Lord High Chancellor of England (14 vols. vol. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. pp.. Francis: The Oxford Francis Bacon (15 vols. Eduard: A Transcript of the Register of the Company of Stationers of London. 1984). 1991).Bibliography Francis Bacon’s editions: Bacon. pp. Peter: “Francis Bacon and the Classification of Natural History. cultura e scienza in Europa all’initio dell’età moderna (Berlin. Balbiani. Boyle e le ‘forme’ della materia. Francis 242 ..” in D. Barbour. to date) General editors: Graham Rees and Lisa Jardine (1996–2006). in Peter Anstey and John Andrew Schuster. Francis: The Works of Francis Bacon. 1990). pp. Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon Heath (London. Westman. Baron of Verulam. Limberg and R. H.: The Philosophy of Francis Bacon (Chicago. Aristotle. ed.: “Natural history and the emblemtic world view. 1554–1640. 1999). Reappraisals of the Scientific Revolution (Cambridge. 4. S. F.” in Julie Robin Solomon and Catherine Gimelli Martin.. Arber. Sir Brian Vickers (Oxford. 2005). Laura: La Magia Naturalis di Giovan Battista Della Porta. Alban. eds. 5 vols. facsimile reprint Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1961–1963). Francis Bacon. and Theory. 2006–).” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012). William B. Secondary sources: Abbri. eds. pp. 11-31.. 303-32. Ashworth. 1857–1874. Myth. eds. Anstey. Bacon. Princeton. planned.: “Bacon. Books and the Sciences in History (Cambridge. Marie: Scientific Renaissance (London. 172-199. 1. 1500-1700. Ian: “Bacon’s moral philosophy. 17-43. Borrelli. vol. Experienza (Firenze. 189-227. Ann: “Authorship in the popular ‘Problemata Aristotelis’.” in Claus Zittel. 260-282. 101-168. pp. Roberto: “Experientia. Böhme. Gisela Engel.” Journal for Early Modern Studies 2/I (2013). pp. Bruyn. pp. Frans De: “The Classical Sylva and the Generic Development of Scientific Writing in Seventeenth Century England.. Buccolini. 1996). 1996). 243 . John Channing: Francis Bacon and the Rhetoric of Nature (Cambridge. Studien zur Wissenschaftsentwicklung (Berlin. Box. Busa. ed. Claudio: “Mersenne Tranlator of Bacon?.. pp. 1962). Essays to Commemorate The Advancement of Learning (1605-2005) (Aldershot. pp..” in Marku Peltonen. pp. Briggs. Bianchi. Massimo Luigi: “Il tema dell’experienza in Paracelso. pp.” in Marco Veneziani. experior.” Journal for the History of Ideas 64/1 (2003)..” in Marina FrascaSpada and Nick Jardine ed. 2008). pp. experimentalis.. pp. Karafyllis.Bacon and the Refiguring of Early Modern Though. Romano Nanni and Nicole C.” in Marku Peltonen. 11-28. (Leiden. inexperientia. Philosophies of Technology: Francis Bacon and His Contemporaries. Boas. 2003).. 2002). ed.” in Marco Veneziani. Ann: “Strategies for Coping with Information Overload ca. Bushnell. 347-373. 2002). 67-130.” New Literary History 32/2 (2001). John Channing: “Bacon’s science and religion. Ann: “Annotating and Indexing Natural Philosophy. Gernot: Am Ende des Baconschen Zeitalters. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. Blair. 6989. Arianna: “The Weatherglass and its observers in the Early Seventeenth Century. inexpers nell’Aquinare e negli altri autori censiti nell’Index Thomisticus. ed. Blair. eds. pp. 1983). Briggs. 33-59. ed..” Early Science and Medicine 4/3 (1999). 2000). Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. pp. 1989). Mass. 199-216. 2005). Rebecca: Green Desire: Imagining Early Modern English Gardens (Ithaca. Blair. 2 vols. Experienza (Firenze. experimentum. Clucas. History. and the Prehistory of Objectivity. 337-363. Francis Bacon. Language and Politics (Arizona 1997). English Renaissance Prose.” Intellectual History Review 20/2 (2010).” in Journal of the History of Ideas 41/2 (1980). Sorana and Vermeir. pp. David: “ ‘Non canimus surdis. Cocking. pp.. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. Colclough. Hasok: Inventing Temperature: Measurement and Scientific Progress (Oxford 2004).” in Marta Fattori.” in Neil Rhodes. Bernard. ed. Lorraine: “Baconian facts. Colclough. The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy (Cambridge. eds. Academic Civility. reprinted 1996). pp. 43-58.. pp. eds. Cohen. Copenhaver. 219-31. pp.. Mary Jean: Books of memory: a study of memory in medieval culture (second edition. Daston. Daston. 245–260. Lorraine: “Marvelous Facts and Miraculous Evidence in Early Modern Europe. 181–200. 183206. J. pp. 1988. Brian: “Astrology and Magic.: “The Eighteenth-Century Origin of the Concept of Scientific Revolution. 2003).” in Charles B. Schmitt and Quentin Skinner. Colie Rosalie: “Cornelis Drebbel and Salomon de Caus: Two Jacobean Models for Salomon’s House.. 452-77. Stephen: “ ‘A Knowledge Broken’: Francis Bacon’s Aphoristic Style and the Crisis of Scholastic and Humanist Knowledge-Systems. 244 . Katherine.: “Bacon’s view of imagination. M. 93-124. pp. ed. pp.” in Philippa Berry and Margaret Tudeau-Clayton. pp. Jonathan: “Some historical remarks on the Baconian conception of probability. Lorraine and Park. pp. eds. Daston. Daston. Koen: “Idols of the Imagination: Francis Bacon on the Imagination and the Medicine of the Mind. 264-300. Lorraine: “The factual sensibility. pp. 1998). 147-172.” Annals of Scholarship 8/1 (1991).” Journal of the History of Ideas 37/2 (1976). David: “ ‘The Materialls for the Building’: Reuniting Francis Bacon's Sylva Sylvarum and New Atlantis. 257-88. I.” Huntington Library Quarterly 18/1-4 (1954/55). pp. respondent omnia sylvae’: Francis Bacon and the transmission of knowledge. 81-97. 1984).” Perspectives on Science 20/2 (2012). Corneanu.Carruthers.” Critical Inquiry 18/1 (1991).: Wonders and the Order of Nature 11501750 (New York.” in Isis 79/3 (1988). Cohen. 2008) Chang. Cambridge. Textures of Renaissance Knowledge (Manchester. Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon Heath. 2006). London. pp. Collected and edited by James Spedding. Dumitru. 1658). Baron of Verulam. William: “A comparison of the Scientific Method and Achievement of Aristotle and Bacon. and Hooke.” in Loraine Daston and Elizabeth Lumbeck. vol. pp.” in Katherine Park and Lorraine Daston. 1500-1700 (London. 21-67. 2008).” Societate şi politică 7/1 (2013). Dear. Alban. Ellis. 471-94.” Isis 55/1 (1964).). Peter: “The Meanings of Experience.). Debus. Peter: Discipline and Experience: The Mathematical Way in the Scientific Revolution (Chicago. Claudia: “Crucial Instances and Crucial Experiments in Bacon. Giambattista: Magia naturalis (Frankfurt. III: Early Modern Science (Cambridge. European Knowledge and its Ambitions.” in The Works of Francis Bacon. Didier: “Experientia-Experimentum ou le mythe du culte de l’expérience chez Francis Bacon. Francis Bacon. 2001). Alban. Alan: “The Paracelsian Aerial Nitre. Aude: Pliny’s Encyclopedia: The Reception of the Natural History (Cambridge. Della Porta. I. Histories of Scientific Observation (Chicago. 1995). Dennis: Francis Bacon and the Limits of Scientific Knowledge (New York. William: Science and the Secrets of Nature.” Philosophical Review 31 (1922). and Lord High Chancellor of England (14 vols. eds. Robert Leslie: “General preface to Bacon’s philosophical works.. and Lord High Chancellor of England (14 vols. pp. 1581. 1996). 59-72. Peter: Revolutionizing the Sciences. Viscount St. 81-113. ed. Doody. pp.” in Marta Fattori. vol. Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon 245 .. The Cambridge History of science. pp. Dear. Robert Leslie: “Preface to the Novum organum. translation into English Natural Magick. 2010). 1600-1800. Deleule. Eamon. Books of secretes in medieval and early modern culture (Princeton. Viscount St. Collected and edited by James Spedding. 45-61. Boyle. Dear.” in The Works of Francis Bacon.Daston. 43-61. Baron of Verulam. pp. 2011). 1984). 106-131. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. pp. London.. Lorraine: “The Empire of Observation. eds. Dickie. 1857–1874 (facsimile reprint Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1961–1963). Desroches. Ellis. London.. Robert Leslie: “Praface to Sylva sylvarum”... 243-258.Heath. pp. 1990). Experienza (Firenze.” in Robert E. pp. Ellis. Spunti di un dibattito. Findlen. Cambridge History of Science (Cambridge. 1984). 272-289. 71-102. Feyerabend. Farrington. Collected and edited by James Spedding. eds. Butts and John E. Fox Keller. Findlen. Benjamin: Francis Bacon: Pioneer of Planned Science (London. pp. Conn. Davis. 1963). Gemana: “I poteri della streghe tra cause naturali e interventi diabolici. 2002). eds. Giovan Battista della Porta nell’Europa del suo tempo (Naples. vol. 292331.” in Marta Fattori. Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon Heath. Paula: “Sites of Anatomy. and Lord High Chancellor of England (14 vols. Kelley. 117138.. ed. Benjamin: The Philosophy of Francis Bacon: An essay on the development from 1603 to 1609 with new translations of fundamental texts (Liverpool. pp.. 23960. ed. 150-170.” Renaissance Quarterly 43/2 (1990). II. History and the Disciplines (New York. Francis Bacon. 1964). London. pp. Fattori.” in Marco Veneziani. in Maurizio Torrini. 167-198.” in Katherine Park and Lorraine Daston. 32532.. Paula: “Jokes of Nature and Jokes of Knowledge: The Playfulness of Scientific Discourse in Early Modern Europe. Marta: “Experientia-experimentum: un cofronto tra il corpus latino e inglese di Francis Bacon. 1857–1874 (facsimile reprint Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1961–1963). in The Works of Francis Bacon. Benjamin: Francis Bacon: Philosopher of Industrial Science (London. ed. 1970). 2006). Botany and Natural History. pp. ed. 1997). Evelyn: Reflections on Gender and Science (New Haven. I. The Methodological Heritage of Newton (Toronto.” in Donald R. pp.). Fattori. Paula: “Francis Bacon and the Reform of Natural Histories in the Seventeenth Century. vol. Fattori. Ernst. Viscount St. 1857–1874 (facsimile reprint Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1961–1963).. Farrington. Alban. 2012). Paul: “Classical Empiricism. 246 . Marta: “Phantasia nella classuficazione baconiana delle scienze. 1985). Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. pp. Baron of Verulam. Farrington. Findlen. Marta: Études sur Francis Bacon (Paris. 1951). pp. eds. Mădălina: “Redefining the Role of Experiment in Bacon’s Natural History: How Baconian was Descartes before Emerging from His Cocoon?. 158-180. Garber. Laura: “A new form of knowledge: experientia literata. G. pp. J. 1-17. pp. 1950). Scientia in Early Modern Philosophy (London. Gemelli. pp. 61-79. J. Guido: “The Hidden Life of Matter: Techniques for the Prolongation of Life in the Writings of Francis Bacon. Historia. Mathematica: Shifting Sands in the Disciplinary Geography.” paper presented at the colloquium entitled “Francis Bacon’s Art of Discovery and The Cultivation of Mind. Giglioni. Daniel: “Bacon. 2006). 37-45. Reginald Walter: Francis Bacon: A bibliography of his works and Baconiana to the year 1750 (Oxford. pp. 21-69. Garber. 11-12 November 2011. 134157.. A. Gaukroger. Benedino: “Isaac Beckman as a Reader of Francis Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum. 3 Early Modern Sciences. Rogers. G. eds. Scientia in Early Modern Philosophy (London. Daniel: “Bacon. Laura: “Francis Bacon: The Theological Foundation of Natural Philosophy. pp. pp. Gaukroger. A. 2001). 247 . the New Atlantis and the Uses of Utopia.” Journal for Early Modern Studies 2/I (2013).” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012).” in Tom Sorell.” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012).” in Studii de Ştiinţă şi cultură 23/4 (2010).” in Tom Sorell. Stephen: Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Early-Modern Philosophy (Cambridge.. Cambridge History of Science..” held at the Maison Franҫaise d’Oxford. Garber. pp. 2010). Gaukroger. (Cambridge. pp. Georgescu. Daniel: “Philosophia. 19-34. Laura and Giurgea. 74-87. and Jill Kraye.” in Julie Robin Solomon and Catherine Gimelli Martin. vol.” Studii de Ştiinţă şi Cultură 23/4 (2010). Georgescu. Rogers. “Physics and Foundations. the New Atlantis and the Uses of Utopia. Stephen: The Emergence of a Scientific Culture: Science and the Shaping of Modernity 1210-1685 (Oxford. Stephen: “The Unity of Natural Philosophy and the end of Scientia. and Jill Kraye. Gibson. Georgescu. 104-120. eds. 2010). Gemelli.” Society and Politics 5/2 (2011). 2006). pp.Daniel Garber. Benedino: “The History of Life and Death: A ‘Spiritual’ History from Invisible Matter to Prolongation of Life.” in Katherine Park and Lorraine Daston. 248 . Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. Gouk. Peter: The Fall of Man and the Foundations of Science (Cambridge 2007). 62-86.eds. 2007).. Harkness. Giglioni. The Philosopher in Early Modern Europe (New York. 202-229. Deborah E. 91-104. Experienza (Firenze. pp. 9-17.” in Marta Fattori.: The Jewell House: Elizabethan London and the Scientific Revolution (New Haven. 1983). and Ian Hunter. in Charles T. Harding. 27-54. pp.” Studii de Ştiinţă şi Cultură 23/4 (2010).” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012). forthcoming 2013. Guido: “How Bacon Become a Baconian. eds. M. Giglioni.” in Nouvelles de la République des Lettres 26/II (2006).. pp. 2005). eds. Stephen Gaukroger. pp. 1984). 139-154. Giglioni. Peter: “The natural philosopher and the virtues.. pp.” in The Body as Object and Instrument of Knowledge: Embodied Empiricism in Early Modern Science. Wolfe and Ofer Gal. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. Ian: Representing and Intervening: introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science (Cambridge. Halford. P. Giglioni. The Mechanization of Natural Philosophy (Boston.. Guido: “Learning to Read Nature: Francis Bacon’s Notion of Experiential Literacy (Experientia Literata).. 1986). Harrison. ed. Harrison.” Perspectives on Science 20/2 (2012).” Studii de Ştiinţă şi Cultură 23/4 (2010). Miguel Ángel: “Bacon and Scepticism. 159-182.” in Daniel Garber and Sophie Roux. Francis Bacon and the Refiguring of Early Modern Though: Essays to Commemorate The Advancement of Learning (1605-2005) (Aldershot. 2012).” Early Science and Medicine. Sandra: The Science Question in Feminism (Ithaca. ed. Guido: “Mastering the appetites of Matter: Francis Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum. Francis Bacon. Granada.” in Conal Condren. pp. 25 (2010). Giglioni. 77-90. eds. Guido: The Material Foundation of Francis Bacon’s Utopia. 129-144. 149-67. 2002). Jacob: “Models of Exemplarity: Uraniborg and Solomon’s House.: “Music in Francis Bacon’s natural philosophy. pp. Giglioni. Hacking. pp. Guido: “Historia and Materia: The Philosophical Implications of Francis Bacon’s Natural History. Hamesse. 2006). Jaqueline: “Experientia / Experimentum dans les lexiques médiévaux et dans les textes philosophiques antérieurs au 14e siècle.” in Marco Veneziani. pp. Guido: “Philosophy According to Tacitus: Francis Bacon and the Inquiry into the Limits of Human Self-Delusion.. 91-110. pp. Obli.Harrison. pp. Hutton. Companion to the History of Modern Science (London. Essential Articles for the Study of Francis Bacon (London. Dana: “Bacon’s Brotherhood and Its Classical Sources: Producing and Communicating Knowledge in the Project of Great Instauration. 2008). 241-278. pp. R..”. pp. 1964). ed. ed. eds. G. 1. 583-96. Cantor. Alfonso: “Cardano e Della Porta: alcune premesse per un confronto. 2002). Natural Philosophy. 43/3 (1982).” in D. Mary: “In defence of Francis Bacon. ed. pp. in Claus Zittel. ed.” in Journal for the History of Ideas 39/2 (1978).. Hattaway. John: “Magic and Science in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. 141-152. J..” Garden History 36/1. Mary: “Francis Bacon. Horton.. S. Hodge. pp. Ingegno. The Philosophy of Scientific Experimentation (Pittsburgh. 2003). Dana: “Experimental philosophers and doctors of the mind: the appropriation of a philosophical tradition. pp. 487-504). 138-151. pp. 2 vols. pp. J.” Garden History 20/2 (1992). 48-59. 1968). Jalobeanu. 2006).” in Robert Theis and Vlad Alexandrescu. pp. Mary: “Francis Bacon’s Philosophy of Science” in Brian Vickers. Michael: “Bacon and “Knowledge-Broken”: Limits for Scientific Method. New interdisciplinary essays (Manchester. Dana: Inventarea modernității (Cluj-Napoca. Giovan Battista della Porta nell’Europa del suo tempo (Naples. N. Karafyllis. pp. Paula: “Sir Francis Bacon’s Essay ‘Of Gardens’ in Context. Christie and M.. ed. Henderson. Heidelberger. pp. 229-242. Jalobeanu. 1990)..” in Journal for the History of Ideas. Gisela Engel. eds.” Perspectives on Science 20/2 (2012).” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 4 (1973). Henry. Romano Nanni and Nicole C. (Leiden. 183-197. Jalobeanu.197-230. pp. Hesse. Francis Bacon’s New Atlantis.. 139-158. 116-131. Paula: “Sir Francis Bacon’s Water Gardens at Gorhambury. and the Cultivation of the Mind. Michael: “Theory-Ladenness and Scientific Experimentation.” in Bruce Prince.. Hesse. Philosophies of Technology: Francis Bacon and His Contemporaries. Henderson. 59-84. O’Connor. pp. R. 114-139. A Cultural History of Western Philosophy (London. Peter: “Francis Bacon. 1990). Horton. J. 249 . eds.” in Robert C. Sarah: “Persuasion to Science: Baconian Rhetoric and the New Atlantis.” in Maurizio Torrini.” in Hand Radder. vol. Mary: “Bacon and ‘Knowledge Broken’: An Answer to Michael Hattaway. Naturel et surnaturel. 5-27. Jalobeanu. Laura: “The Modes of Experientia Literata and the Making of Sylva Sylvarum. Jalobeanu. pp. Jalobeanu. Jalobeanu. Sessions. 1427 May 2012. Dana: “Idolatry.” unpublished manuscript. Jalobeanu. pp. Dana: “The philosophy of Francis Bacon’s Natural History: A research Program.” Society and Politics 5/2 (2011).” forthcoming 2013. pp. Discovery and the Art of Discourse (Cambridge. 88104. 2010). Jalobeanu. Dana: “Francis Bacon’s Natural History and the Senecan Natural Histories of Early Modern Europe. Jalobeanu. Philosophies de la nature et métaphysique aux XVI–XVII siècles (Hildesheim. 207-226. Jalobeanu. Francis Bacon’s Legacy of Texts (New York. Lisa: “Experientia literata or Novum Organum? The Dilemma of Bacon’s Scientific Method. 47-67.” forthcoming 2014. Dana: “Bacon’s experimental series and the art of experimenting.” Societate şi politică 7/1 (2013). 197-229. 1990). 18-37. Early Modern Baconians. Jardine. Dana: “Empirical Aspects of Medicina Mentis: ‘Stoic’ Natural Histories of Mind and Body in the Late 16th Century. 1974). Lisa: Francis Bacon.” unpublished manuscript. pp. Dana: “Core experiments. and Spiritual Medicine: Francis Bacon and the Neo-Stoic Protestantism of the late Sixteenth Century. pp. Jalobeanu. Dana: “Learning from experiment: classification. Jalobeanu.” forthcoming 2014.” paper presented at the colloquium “Francis Bacon on Natural History and Natural Magic: the Mystery of Sylva Sylvarum” held at Princeton University. Jalobeanu. Dana: “Natural History and Medicine of the Mind: The Therapeutic Value of Experimentation in Bacon’s Late Works. Dana and Georgescu. Jardine. natural histories and the art of experientia literata: the meaning of Baconian experimentation. mathematics and the construction of a mathematical physics. Dana: “Four idols of Baconian Scholarship.” Studii de Ştiinţă şi cultură 23/4 (2010).. Dana: “Francis Bacon. pp.” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012).” Perspectives on Science 20/2 (2012). pp. 37-63. ed. concept formation and modeling in Francis Bacon’s experimental philosophy” forthcoming 2013. 250 . and the Idols of Baconian Scholarship. Dana: “ ‘The marriage of physics with mathematics’: Francis Bacon on measurement. Natural History.” in William A. Jalobeanu. Edward N. Adrian: “Identity. Alan: Hostage to Fortune. and the Secrets of Nature. The troubled life of Francis Bacon (London. 23-40. eds.stanford. 21-50. pp.edu/archives/win2012/entries/francis-bacon/>. Zalta. Lisa: “Introduction” in The Novum Organum. vol. Jürgen: “Francis Bacon’s Scientia Operativa. eds. pp. 1998). Philosophies of Technology: Francis Bacon and His Contemporaries. Kusukawa. 1. 1966). 1996).” Revue philosophique de la France et de l’étranger 128/1 (2003). pp. pp. D. Kodera. Thomas: “Mathematical versus Experimental Tradition in the Development of Physical Science. Practice. Karafyllis. and Gender in Renaissance Natural Philosphy (Toronto. Christopher. Jardine. Klein. Medicine. Gisela Engel. Johnson. reprinted in Kuhn. Lisa Jardine and Michael Silverthorn. ed.” Society and Politics 5/2 (2011). Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge.Jardine.” in Marku Peltonen. Kiernan. 2000). (Leiden. Lisa and Stewart. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2012 Edition). Michael: “Introduction” in Oxford Francis Bacon IV (Oxford. and Browne. URL Consulted = on 26 February 2013..” Historical Journal 42/4 (1999).” in Claus Zittel. The Tradition of the Workshops. Joly: Bernard: “Francis Bacon réformateur de l’alchimie: tradition alchimique et invention scientifique au début du XVIIe siècle. 2010). Romano Nanni and Nicole C. ed. pp. pp. Kennington. Thomas: The Essential Studies. Richard: On the Modern Origins: Essays in Early Modern Philosophy (Maryland. Jürgen: “Francis Bacon”. Robert Hugh: Atomism in England from Hariot to Newton (Oxford. Johns. xvii-lxxxv. Kuhn. <http://plato. 1-31. Sachiko: “Bacon’s classification of knowledge. 2008). pp. Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change (Chicago. 2003). 1977). 251 .. Comenius. (Cambridge. 9-31. 1125-1145. Klein. and Trust in Early Modern Natural Philosophy. 2004). 47-74. vii-xxviii. Sergius: Disreputable Bodies: Magic. Kargon. 31-65.: “Making the ‘Round of Knowledge’ in Bacon’s Wake: Naudé. pp.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 7 (1976): pp. 2 vols. pp.. 1994). 252 . and Eyelashes: Problems for Natural Historians in the Reception of Logic and Biology from Pomponazzi to Bacon. Lüthy. eds. 1984). Michel: “Bacon’s Method of Science. Christoph: “What to do with Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy? A Taxonomic Problem. Michele: “Man and nature in the Gardens of Science. 2005).. Essential Articles for the study of Francis Bacon (London. pp. 164-195.” in Journal of the History of Ideas 23/4 (1962). Historia: Empiricism and Erudition (Cambridge.. 443-479. pp. 179-200. Lancaster.” in Brian Vickers. 435-450. pp. C. Malherbe. Leary.: “The Aristotelianism of Bacon’s Novum organum. Lemmi.” Perspectives on Science 8/2 (2000). Francis Bacon. the Ars Memoriae. and the Foundations of Francis Bacon’s Principle of the consistency of Matter. Greying Hair. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. pp. 114-26. pp. 51-92. 1990). W.: “Mythology and alchemy in The Wisdom of the Ancients. Christoph: “The Fourfold Democritus on the Stage of Early Modern Scince.” Early Science and Medicine 4 (1999). pp. Larsen.” Intellectual History Review 19/2 (2009). John E. 1962). Lüthy.Lancaster. ed.” Perspectives on Science 20/2 (2012).” in Gianna Pomata and Nancy Siraisi. 119-138.” Isis 91/3 (2000). Malherbe. Francis Bacon’s Legacy of Texts (New York. Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Natural History. Le Doeuff. ed. James: “Natural Histories of Religion: A (Baconian) «Science»?. 155-75. Lewis. Sessions. 1968). 181-196. 1996). Robert E.” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012). Lechner. Joan Marie: Renaissance concepts of the commonplaces: an historical investigation of the general and universal ideas used in all argumentation and persuasion with special emphasis on the educational and literary tradition of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Westport. ed. pp. Maclean. ed. Manzo. pp..” in Marta Fattori. and the Pursuit of Natural Knowledge. pp. 147-79.” in William A. Silvia: “Holy Writ. Rhodri: “ ‘A Kind of Sagacity’: Francis Bacon. pp. Ian: “White crows. 75-98.. Mythology. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. pp. Michel: “L’induction baconienne: de l’échec métaphysique à l’échec logique. James: “Natural Knowledge as a Propaedeutic to Self-Betterment. 246-267.: Francis Bacon and the Politics of Science (Iowa.” in Markku Peltonen. José. Laursen. Murdoch and William R. Studio sul tema trinitario e sulla terminologis bilbioca nel corpus baconaino. 3 (1976). 111-29. instrumentos científicos y cuantificación en el método de Francis Bacon. Manzo. Notes on the Iberian Background of Francis Bacon’s Project” Studii de Ştiinţă şi Cultură 23/4 (2010). eds. Matei. E.” in Marta Fattori. Francis Bacon. Sebastian: “Francis Bacon on Potential Heat. pp. pp. Gianni Paganini and John C. 45-68..” Revista de filosofía 29 (2004).” Manuscripta XX.” Manuscrito (2001).” The British Journal for the History of Science 36 (2003). 2009). pp. Manzo. McCanles. 209-44. 1984).” Societate şi politică 7/1 (2013). Silvia: “Utopian Science and Empire. Michael: “Two Montpellier Recipe Collections. John E. De: “Scienzia e creazione. pp.” in Neto Maia. 2005). 2006). 26-43. 84-102. Michael: “The New Science and the Via Negativa: a Mystical Source for Baconian Empiricism. Silva: “Francis Bacon y la concepción aristotélica del movimiento en los siglos XVI y XVII. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. 175-180. and Facts in Francis Bacon’s Natural Histories. Late Medieval and Early Modern Corpuscular Matter Teories (Leiden. Manzo. eds. Oana: “Husbanding Creation and the Technology of Amelioration in the Works of Gabriel Plattes. 2001). pp. A Double Attitude towards Skepticism. 123-138. Stephen: The Religious Foundation of Francis Bacon’s Thought (Columbia. Manzo. 2006). Silvia: “Experimentación. Matthews. 49-84. McKnight. Mateiescu. pp.. 77-97. Manzo. pp. pp. Newman. R.. Mas. Skepticism in the Modern Age: Building on the Work of Richard Popkin (Leiden. Manzo. Silvia: “Probability.” Societate şi politică 7/1 (2013). pp. ed. (Aldershot. 28-44. Certainty.” in Julie Robin Solomon and Catherine Gimelli Martin. Silvia: Entre el atomismo y la alquimia: la teoría de la materia en Francis Bacon (Buneos Aires. Silvia: “The Argumentation on Void in the Seventeenth Century: The Case of Francis Bacon. 253 .” in Christoph Lüthy. eds. Essays to Commemorate The Advancement of Learning (1605-2005). 2008). McVaugh. 73-90. Silvia: “Francis Bacon and Atomism: A Reappraisal. Francis Bacon and the Refigurin of Early Modern Though..Manzo. pp. pp. Steven: Theology and Science in the Thoughts of Francis Bacon (Aldershot. . pp. Jonson and Shakespeare (Nebraska. pp. The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy (Cambridge. 2004). Carolyn: The Death of Nature (San Francisco. Monardes. 1996). 1565.” in Allen G. 147-62.. and into Latin by Charles de l’Écluse’s De simplicibus medicamentis ex occidentali India delatis quorum in medicina usus est. pp. Milton. Joyful news of the new Found World. Merchant. Newman.Mebane. 2011). John R. Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature (Chicago. Antwerp.: Renaissance Magic and the Return of Golden Age.” in The Seventeenth Century 25/1 (2010). Ayesha: “The Secrets of Sir Hugh Platt. 1978). 1577. 1980). Carolyn: “Secrets of Nature: The Bacon Debates Revisited. Newman. 254 . 1998). 1. Chymistry and the Experimental Origins of the Scientific Revolution (Chicago.” in Elanie Long and Alisha Ranon. 2006). William Royall: Atoms and Alchemy. pp.” ISIS. Debus and Michael T. 81-90. London. (Chicago.” in Daniel Garber and Michael Ayers eds. The Occult Tradition and Merlow. 680701. Mukherjee. Reading the Book of Nature: The other side of the Scientific Revolution (Kirksville. Newman. 97/3 (2006). 1998). pp. Ogilvie. vol. John. Merchant. 124-64. Ayesha: “Floraes Paradise: Hugh Platt and the Economy of Early Modern Gardening. Nicolas: Historia medicinal de las cosas que se traen de nuestras Indias Occidentales (Sevilla.” Journal of the History of Ideas. S. 513-33. pp. 2006). 69/1 (2008). Muraro. pp. eds. 1992). Mukherjee.. translated into English by John Franton. Merchant. 1-26. Secrets and Knowledge in Medicine and Science 1500-1800 (Farnham. 69-86. 1574) Moss.” in Journal for the History of Ideas 58/2 (1997). Benjamin: “The Theological Foundation of Valerius Terminus. Luisa: Giambattista Della Porta mago e scienziato (Milano. Milner. Ann: Printed Commonplace Books and the Structuring of the Renaissance Thought (Oxford. William Royall: Promethean Ambitions. Walton. William Royall: “Alchemical and Baconian Views on the Art/Nature Distinction.: “Laws of nature. eds. Brian: The Science of Describing: Natural History in Renaissance Europe. Carolyn: The Scientific Revolution and the Death of Nature. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. Laura: Giovan Battista Della Porta (1535-1615): His Works on Natural Magic. ed.” Early Science and Medicine 14/5 (2009).: Francis Bacon e a fundamentaçāo da ciência como tecnología (Belo Orizonte..” in Maurizio Torrini. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. 101-112. eds. Pérez-Ramos. 290-302. Pastorino. 630-660. pp. Katharine: “Response to Brian Vickers. ed. Bernardo. 500-1500. pp. Passmore. Katharine: “Bacon’s ‘Enchanted Glass’.. Markku: “Bacon’s political philosophy. pp. 1996). Enrico: “Aspetti della medicina nell’opera di Giovan Battista Della Porta. Pérez-Ramos. Pérez-Ramos. Grazia: “Galen and Francis Bacon: Faculties of the Soul and the Classification of Knowledge. Katharine: “Observation in the Margins.” in Donald R.Oliveira. Paparelli. Histories of Scientific Observation (Chicago. 53-68. pp. Popkin. pp. pp. 1974).. John: Man’s Responsibility for Nature. Pastorino. 542-570. ed.” Early Science and Medicine 16/6 (2011). Park.” in Maurizio Torrini. Antonio: “Bacon’s legacy. 2011). Orsi.. 1990).” Isis 90/1 (1999). 99-120. Giovan Battista della Porta nell’Europa del suo tempo (Naples. ed. 1997. Feminist Historiography and the Dominion of Nature’. eds. 1996). Antonio: Francis Bacon’s Idea of Science and the Maker’s Knowledge Tradition (Oxford.” in Marku Peltonen. Kelley and Richard H. The Shapes of Knowledge from the Renaissance to the Enlightenment (Dordrecht. Antonio: “Bacon’s forms and the makers knowledge tradition. Cesare: “The Mine and the Furnace: Francis Bacon. pp. Gioacchino: “Dalla Magia naturale alla Taumatologia. pp. 255 .. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. PhD dissertation. and Early Stuart Mining Culture. Pesic. Park. Peter: “Wrestling with Proteus. ed.” Journal of the History of Ideas 69/1 (2008). 1996). 61-81. pp. University of London. 81-94. pp. Francis Bacon and the ‘Torture’ of Nature. pp. ‘Francis Bacon.” Loraine Daston and Elizabeth Lumbeck. Park...” Isis 75/2 (1984). Peruzzi. 283-310. Ecological Problems and Western Traditions (New York.” in Marku Peltonen. Peltonen. 143-46. 311-334. 1991).” in Marku Peltonen. Cesare: “Weighing Experience: Experimental Histories and Francis Bacon’s Quantitative Program. Oeconomics and Physiognomy. J. Giovan Battista della Porta nell’Europa del suo tempo (Naples. 15-44. 2002). pp. 1988). 1990). Olivieri Tonelli. Thomas Russell. Pesic. Il filosofo. by the industrious labour of H. London. pp. 123-132. fitting the times (London. 1605). (being a present. 1-39. Plat. with Divers Chymical conclusions concerning the Art of Distillation. 1594) Plat.. il retore.. 1972). 140-163. Popper. pp. Reconsidering the ‘Torture of Nature’. 1608). eds. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma 1984). for the preservation of Health. Gianna and Siraisi. Peter: “Proteus Rebound. Quersetanus. pp. Francis Bacon. Pousseur.. Karl: The Logic of Scientific Discovery (London & New York. 1855) Pomata. Maxwell: “Outline of a Reinterpretation of Francis Bacon’s Philosophy.” in Gianna Pomata and Nancy G. ed. 1500-1650” in Loraine Daston and Elizabeth Lumbeck. 1601) Platt.-M. Popper. Josephus: The Practise of Chymicall. and Hermeticall Physicke. pp. pp. by John Bostock and H. 201-222. Hugh: The New and Admirable Art of Setting Corne (London.” Isis 99/2 (2008). Nancy G. and the rare practices and uses thereof (London. eds. and pleasing remedy in violent feavers. 2002. 204-317. Pomata. Karl: Conjectures and refutations (London & New York. Essential articles for the study of Francis Bacon (London. easie. J. trans. 2002. Primack. 2011). 45-80.. E. Minister (London. Siraisi. and intermittent agues) as alwo of some other rare invetions. Hugh: The jewel house of art and nature: Containing divers Rare and Profitable Inventions. first published 1934). Gianna: “Observation Rising: Birth of an Epistemic Genre. Knight: with an offer of an English antidote. M. Pliny the Elder: Historia naturalis (translated into English Natural history.” in Brian Vickers. Piccari.: “Introduction.: “La distinction de la ratio et de la methodus dans le Novum Organum et ses prolongements dans le rationalisme cartésien. Historia: Empiricism and Erudition in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge. Prior. Histories of Scientific Observation (Chicago.” in Marta Fattori. Hugh: Floraes Paradise beautified and adorned with sundry sorts of delicate fruites and flowers. Paolo: Giovan Battista Della Porta. Thomas Tymme. 256 . first published 1935). 2005).” Journal of the History of Philosophy 5 (1967). Thomas Riley.: “Bacon’s man of Science. pp. lo scienziato (Milano. together with Experiments in the art of Husbandry.P. ed. 2007). Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon Heath. 2003). 110-125. vol. 1857–1874 (facsimile reprint Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1961–1963). Rees. Rees.). pp. 127.Quiviger.. pp. Graham: “The Fate of Bacon’s Cosmology in the Seventeenth Century. London. pp. 549-571. Graham: “Un Unpublished Manuscript by Francis Bacon: Sylva Sylvarum Drafts and Other Working Notes. and Lord High Chancellor of England (14 vols. Alban. vol. III. and Lord High Chancellor of England (14 vols. Rawley.” in Graham Rees assisted by Chrisopher Upton eds. Graham: “Francis Bacon’s Semi-Paracelsian Cosmology. pp. 223-244. Rees. Rees. 1984). Francois: “Honey from Heaven: Aspect of the topos of the bees in the Renaissance Artistic Literature. Francis Bacon. Francis Bacon’s Natural Philosophy: Anew Source. Rees.). Collected and edited by James Spedding. 1984). Graham: “Atomism and Subtlety in Francis Bacon’s Philosophy. Baron of Verulam. Rees.” Annals of Science 37/5 (1980). A transcription of Manuscript Hardwick 72A with translation and commentary (Cumbria. 257 .” Annals of Science 38/4 (1981). Graham: “Francis Bacon on the Verticity and the Bowles of the Earth. “To the reader” in The Works of Francis Bacon. Collected and edited by James Spedding. eds. William. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. Visuelle Topoi: Erfindung und tradiertes Wissen in den Künsten der italienischen Renaissance (MünchenBerlin. pp. Graham: “Matter Theory: A Unifying factor in Bacon’s Natural Philosophy. Graham: “The commentary.. 3-78.” Ambix 22/2 (1975). pp. Viscount St. Graham: “Bacon’s Philosophy: some new sources with special references to Abecedarium novum naturae. 377-412. II. Rees. 1857–1874 (facsimile reprint Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt 1961–1963).” Ambix 24/1 (1977). Rees. 317-21.” Ambix 22/3 (1975). pp. “To the reader” in The Works of Francis Bacon. pp. pp.” Ambix 24/2 (1977).” in Ulrich Pfisterer and Max Seidel.” in Marta Fattori. Baron of Verulam. Viscount St. 27-38. 81-101. Graham: “Francis Bacon’s Semi-Paracelsian Cosmology and the Great Instauration. p.. Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon Heath. William. Rees. 163-173. London. Alban. pp. ed. 202-2011. Rawley. pp.” Ambix 26/3 (1979). 335-37. pp. Robin Solomon. Doina-Cristina. Rossi. Rees.” in Cesare Vasoli. Francis Bacon and the Refiguring of Early Modern Thought. Rossi. pp. Graham: “Introduction” to Oxford Francis Bacon XIII (Oxford. pp. xviilxxxiii.” Marku Peltonen. 1957). 1984).: “Seated between the Old World and the New: Geopolitics. ed. 258 .” in Brian Vickers.. Paolo: “Ants. 269-287.. ed. Julie: Objectivity in Making: Francis Bacon and the Politics of Inquiry (Baltimore.” Studii de Ştiinţă şi cultură 23/4. Paolo: “Francesco Bacone e l’eredità della magia. Paolo: “Bacon’s Idea of Science. 2005). 1976). Rees. pp.” in Marku Peltonen.. 121-145. 223-46. Bari. 2010. Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance (Cambridge. Epistemologists.. Spiders. 1998). 297-314.. Rees. Magia e scienza nella civiltà umanistica (Bologna. 59-73. 1987. Rossi.” in Marta Fattori. Reiss. Graham: “Quantitative Reasoning in Francis Bacon’s Natural Philosophy. ed. ed. 2000).” in Julie Robin Solomon and Catherine Gimelli Martin.” Nouvelle de la republique des lettres (1985).” in Maurizio Torrini. 2006). pp. 1962). Rusu. Paolo: Francis Bacon. 2007). eds. Graham: “Mathematics in Francis Bacon’s Natural Philosophy. first published in Italian: Francesco Bacone: dalla Magia alla Scienza. Graham: “Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum: Prelude to Remarks on the Influence of the Magia naturalis. pp.. Graham: “Bacon’s speculative philosophy.” Revue internationale de philosophie 159/4 (1986). pp. “Virtues and Collaborative Research in Solomon’s House. 1996). 25-46. Rossi. and Proficient Method. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. Graham: “Francis Bacon’s Biological Ideas: a new manuscript source. xixxcvi. pp. 1970. Paolo: Philosophy. 245-260. Rees. Technology and the Arts in the Early Modern Era (New York. Rees. ed. Essays to Commemorate The Advancement of Learning (1605-2005) (Aldershot. 1984). Milano.. pp. 1990). Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. Giovan Battista della Porta nell’Europa del suo tempo (Naples. 261-272. 27–48. 399–426. Rees. From Magic to Science (Chicago. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. Rossi.Rees. first published in Italian: I filosofi e le macchine: 1400-1700. pp. Natural Philosophy. ed. Graham: “Introduction” to Oxford Francis Bacon XII (Oxford. pp. Timothy J. pp. Francis Bacon. and what else either of Antiquity. Sicilia. 2008). Law and Literature (Princeton. OF Aegipt. Barbara: Probability and Certainty in Seventeenth Century England. 1972). pp. and Religion of the Aegyptians: A Voyage on the River Nilus. pp. Religion. Italy described and the Islands adjoining. ed. Discipline. Magia e scienza nella civiltà umanistica (Bologna. pp. 169-198. Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge 1996).. ed. of Rome. OF Armenia. Experienza (Firenze. 109-120.: Used Books. Lastly. Sherman. Policy. Francis Bacon’s New Atlantis. Butler (Toronto. Making Readers in Renaissance England (Philadelphia. A Study of the Relationship between Natural science. 259 . Sargent. Syracusa. and Commerce. Naples. Sennert. Vernon F. Aetna. A study in Intellectual Patterns (California.” in Bruce Prince. medioevo ed età cartesiana. pp. Crete. of Jerusalem. the Aeolian Islands. Shapiro. and other places of note (London. The Grand Signors Seraglio.. 112-133. Rose-Mary: “Bacon as an advocate for cooperative scientific research. and his manner of living: Also OF Greece. William H. Snow..” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012). Doina-Cristina: “Francis Bacon: Constructing Natural Histories of the Invisible. Malta. New interdisciplinary essays (Manchester. Wayne: The Occult Sciences in the Renaissance.. Customes. 1617 and 1623). Wayne: “ ‘La magia naturale’ come forma ‘premoderna’ della scienza. Sandys. as Cyprus. the Pyramides. pp. 1983). Milton. Serjeantson. George: Travailes: Containing a history of the Original and present state of the Turkish Empire: Their Lawes. Grans Cairo. Scylla and Charybdis. 1976). History. Shumaker.” in Marku Peltonen. A description of the Hopy-Land.Rusu. Temple of Solomon. The former flourishing anf present state of Alexandria. Sepulchre of Christ. The Mahometan Religion and Ceremonies. Alvin: Origin and Authority in Seventeenth-Century England: Bacon. Spinosa.” Huntington Library Quarterly 23/1-4 (1959/1960). Masena. A Description of Constantinople. pp. Rites. courts of Justice. 2002). 369-378. or worth observation. with the Religion and the Custumes of the Graecians. Daniel: Epitome naturalis scientiae (Wittenberg. Government. Colossus. Giacinta: “Eµπειςία / experientia: modelli di ‘prova’ tra antichità. Shumaker. 82-105. pp. Venice. Hieroglyphicks. The Antiquity. 146-171. 1994).” in Marco Veneziani. Snider. Military force. of the Jews and severall Sects of Christians living there. 1615).” in Cesare Vasoli ed. ed.: “Francis Bacon's Advice to Fulke Greville on Research Techniques. 108-120. Rhodes. Richard: “Natural knowledge in the New Atlantis. 2002). Stephens. Lynn: “La critica della magia e del suo carattere non scientifico ed «eretico» in Cesare Vasoli. 1997). Vasoli. Torrini. ed. (Supplement. pp.” in Maurizio Torrini. 1923-1958). 1984). 2002). ed. ed. Peter: Francis Bacon’s Philosophy of Science: An Account and a Reappraisal (Illinois. 2010).” Perspectives on Science 10/4 (2002).. ed. Jan G. veluti per Machinas. ed. Stabile. 1976). E. Dec. 1953).. 1987). 63-88.. Georgio: “Il concetto di esperienza in Galilei e nella sciola galileana. Friedrich: “Entering New Fields. S65-S74. Thorndike.Spitz.. 59-81. Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. Conficiatur: Natural History and the ‘Mechanical’ Reform of Natural Philosophy. Stewart. Proceedings of the 1996 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Styers. Magia e scienza nella civiltà umanistica (Bologna. 1975).” in Marta Fattori. 408-32. Giovan Battista della Porta nell’Eluropa del suo tempo (Naples. Thorndike. Cesare: “ ‘L’analogia universale’: la retorica come ‘semiotica’ nell’opera del Della Porta. Randall: Making Magic: Religion. pp. 2004). Magic and Science in the Modern World (Oxford. Experienza (Firenze. 260 . 31-52. pp. Steinle. Thick. 261-280. Part II: Symposia Papers. Maurizio: “Il topos della meraviglia come origine della filosofia tra Bacon e Vico. 87-111.. Science. 217-242. 1990). Friedrich: “Experiments in History and Philosophy of Science.” Midwest Journal of Political Sciences 4/1 (1960). Francis Bacon. pp. James: Francis Bacon and the Style of Science (Chicago. Urbach. Thorndike.” Early Science and Medicine 17/1-2 (2012). Ashworth. 451-54.” Philosophy of Science 64. Medicine and History: Essays on the Evolution of Scientific Thought and Medical Practice written in honour of Charles Singer (Oxford. Lynn: “The Attitude of Francis Bacon and Descartes towards Magic and Occult Science. 8 volumes (Cambridge. Exploratory uses of Experimentation..: “Res. 7/4: pp. pp. pp.” in Marco Veneziani. Steinle. Malcolm: Sir Hugh Plat: The Search for Useful Knowledge in Early Modern London (Devon. pp. pp.” in Underwood. 52-61. David: “Francis Bacon’s New Atlantis: A Reinterpretation. Lynn: A History of Magic and Experimental Science. pp. Waters. Brian: “Bacon’s so called ‘Utilitarianism’: sources and influence. ed. Sur la Nature et la Magie” in Maurizio Torrini. pp. 2004). Karl: Francis Bacon on Communication and Rhetoric or The Art of Applying Reason to Imagination for the Better Moving of the Will (North Carolina. pp. 1987). Steven: The Limits of Influence. C. Brian: “Francis Bacon and the Progress of Knowledge. 495-518. P. Vickers. pp.” Studii de Ştiinţă şi Cultură 23/4 (2010). Craig: “Ramus and Bacon on Method. Brian: “Bacon among the literati: science and language. Walton. Wallace. ed. 1984).” Studies in Philology 94/2 (1997). pp.” in Marta Fattori. and the crisis of Renaissance astrology (Leiden. ed. 1990). Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. 281314. Vickers. pp.Vander Broecke. Brian: English Science. pp.” History and Philosophy of Life Sciences 29/3 (2007). Vickers.” in Marku Peltonen.: “Spiritus in Francis Bacon. ed. Hélène: “Della Porta et Bruno.” in Marta Fattori.. Brian: “Francis Bacon. Vickers.. 289-302. 1991). 1943). Brian: Francis Bacon and the Renaissance Prose (Cambridge. Brian: “On the goal of the occult sciences in the Renaissance. Bacon to Newton (Cambridge. pp. D. 261 . Vickers. pp. 248-296. 1-9.” Journal of the History of Ideas69/1 (2008).. pp... Dir Renaissance im Blick der Nationen Europas (Wiesbaden. Vickers.” Comparative Criticism 13 (1991). pp.” Journal for the History of Philosophy 9/3 (1971). 1996). pp. Kenneth: “The Nature and Context of Exploratory Experimentation. 1968). Pico. Louvain. Vickers. Feminist Historiography and the Dominion of Nature. Francis Bacon.” in Georg Kauffmann. 5193. Giovan Battista della Porta nell’Europa del suo tempo (Naples. 243260. 249-271. 200-231. 133-43. 1984). Vickers. 117-41. pp. Vendrine. Francis Bacon. Grigore: “The problem of esotericism in Bacon’s Science. ed. 315-327. Vickers. Brian: “The Authenticity of Bacon’s Earliest Writings. Georgics (Oxford. Walker. 1990). Terminologia e fortuna nel XVII secolo (Roma. Vergil.” Journal of the History of Ideas 53/3 (1992). Cambridge Companion to Bacon (Cambridge. Vida. Brian: “Bacon and rhetoric. Whitney. Muriel: “Notes on the Importance of Alchemy to Modern Science in the Writings of Francis Bacon and Robert Boyle. Romano Nanni and Nicole C. 262 . 1998). Peter: “Echoes of nature in Solomon’s House. Early Modern Philosophy and the Invention of the Microscope (Princeton. Yates. Weeks. 1964). Wilson. pp. 2 vols. Frances A. New interdisciplinary essays (Manchester. 215-237. Magia e scienza nella civiltà umanistica (Bologna. 1972). 1995). West. 1976). vol. pp. Sophie: “Mechanics in Bacon’s Great Instauration. 2002).” in Journal for the History of Ideas 43/2 (1982). 117-145.: “Magia e scinza nel Rinascimento.” in Bruce Prince. Wortham. Zagorin. Francis Bacon’s New Atlantis. 179-93. 102-114. Perez: “Francis Bacon’s concept of objectivity and the idols of the mind. 1979). 133-96. Yates. Weinberger. 2008). Weeks. 1975). Karafyllis. 180-198. Yeo..” Ambix 54/2 (2007). Catherine: The Invisible World.” in Cesare Vasoli ed. 371-90. Frances A. 2007). Medicine and Reform 1626-1660 (London. pp. pp. Weeks. ed. Zagorin. pp. Yates. (Leiden.: Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (Chicago. Charles: The Great Instauration: Science. Sophie: Francis Bacon’s Science of Magic. ed.. pp. pp. pp. Simon: “Censorship and the institution of knowledge in Bacon’s New Atlantis. 379-93. Richard: Encyclopaedic Visions: Scientific Dictionaries and Enlightenment Culture (Cambridge 2001). pp. Magic and the Making of Modern Science (Cambridge. Jerry: “On the miracles in Bacon’s New Atlantis. New interdisciplinary essays (Manchester.” Ambix 9 (1961).: The Rosicrucian Enlightenment (New York.Webster. Sophie: “Francis Bacon and the Art-Nature distinction.” in Journal for the History of Ideas 50/3 (1989). Perez: Francis Bacon (Princeton. Philosophies of Technology: Francis Bacon and His Contemporaries.: The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age (New York. Charles: From Paracelsus to Newton.” in Claus Zittel. 1.. Yates. Gisela Engel. PhD dissertation (University of Leeds. Frances A. 1982). 2002). Charles: “Francis’s Bacon’s Instauratio: Dominion of and over Humanity. 106-128.” in The British Journal for the History of Science 34/2 (2001).. Francis Bacon’s New Atlantis.” in Bruce Prince. Frances A. Webster. eds. Zetterberg. *** Catholic Church and Modern Science. tome 3 (1507-64). 1. 2009). vol. Documents from the Archievs of the Roman Congregations of the Holy Office and the Index (Rome. 263 . Appendix 1: Bacon’s classification of sciences according to De augmentis scientiarum Generations Natural Heavenly bodies Meteors Globe of Earth and Sea Masses or Greater Colleges Species or Lesser Colleges Preter-generations Arts Narrative Inductive History Ecclesiastical Civil Of the Church Of the Prophecies Of Providence Literary Civil Memorials Antiquities Perfect history Chronicles of Times (Universal and Particulars or Annals and Journals) Lives of Persons Relations of Actions Pure Mixed Appendices: History according to words History according to actions Appendices Poesy Orations Letters Apophthegms Narrative Dramatic Parabolic 264 . Cosmography. Architecture.Deity Appendices: Angels and Spirits Principles of things Fabric of things Variety of things Physic Concrete Abstract Speculative Philosophy Nature (Same divisions as natural history) Schematisms of Matter Motions Simple Compound Material cause Efficient cause Appendices: Natural problems Dogmas of the ancient philosophers Metaphysic Schematisms of matter Motions Simple Compound Formal Cause Final cause Operative Mechanic Magic Appendices: Inventory of the possessions of man Catalogue of the Polychrests Appendices: Mathematics Pure Geometry (quantity continued) Arithmetic (quantity dissevered) Mixed (Perspective. Machinery.) 265 . etc. Music. Astronomy. Medicine Body of Man Preservation of Health Cure of Diseases Prolongation of life Cosmetic Athletic Voluptary Humanity Soul of Man Breath of Life Sensible Spirit Motion Sense Substance and Faculties of the Soul Use and Objects of the Faculties Man Logic Ethics (SEE NEXT PAGE) Appendices: Natural Divination Fascination Person of Man Nature or State of Man League of Mind and Body Civil Conversation Negotiation Scattered Occasions Advancement of life Extension of the Bounds of Empire Universal Justice/Fountains of Law Empire or State Government Primitive philosophy Miseries of Man Prerogatives of Man Indications Physiognomy Interpretation of Natural Dreams Impressions General principles and axioms Transcendentals 266 . Continuation Arts of Discovering of Arts Arguments Learned Experience The New Organon Promptuary Topics General Particular Induction Reduction Direct Reduction Inverse Arts of Judging Syllogism Logic Analytic Sophistical fallacies Fallacies of Interpretation Detection of Fallacies Tribe Idols Cave Market-place Appendix: Analogy of Demonstration according to the nature of the subject Arts of Retaining Helps of Memory Memory itself Use and Objects of the Faculties Prenotion Emblem Notations of Things Organ of Discourse Speech Writing Arts of Transmitting Hieroglyphs Real Characters Poesy Ciphers Method of Discourse Illustration of Discourse Appendices: Promptuary Colors of Good and Evil (simple and comparative) Antitheses of things Lesser forms of Speech General appendices: Critical Pedagogical 267 . Individual Good Simple Good Active Passive Conservative Perfective Exemplar or Platform of Good Good of Communion Ethics Comparative Good Characters of Minds Affections Remedies Appendix: Congruity between the Good of the Mind and the Good of the Body Georgics or Culture of the Mind 268 General Duties Respective Duties . Appendix 2: Simple schematisms of matter according to the Abecedarium novum naturae Dense and rare Heavy and light Hot and cold Quantity of matter Tangible and pneumatic Volatile and fixed Stable and fluid Liquefiable and non-liquefiable Glutinous and pure consistency Fluids and determinate parts Moist and dry Hard and soft Fragile and tensile Porous and compact Spirituous and insipid Sharp and gentle Proportion of spirits Perfectly and imperfectly mixed Simple and compound Fibrous and venous and of simple arrangement Internally similar and dissimilar Integral and non-integral Inequality of inanimate parts Specific and non-specific Interspecific and the true specific Animate and inanimate Type of spirits Sensible and non-sensible Sulphurous and mercurial The most profound 269 . Appendix 3: Simple motions and their corresponding appetites according to the Abecedarium novum naturae Of resistance Of connection Of liberty self-preservation Of self-continuity Of hyle Of the mayor congregation Of the minor congregation bettering of their condition Of disposition Of assimilation Of excitation Of impression propagation of their nature Media of motion Royal motion Spontaneous motion Of repose enjoyment of their nature Of trepidation 270 . Appendix 4: Sums of motions and measurements of motion according to the Abecedarium novum naturae Sums of motions: Disarrangements of parts Separations Compounding and mixture Putrefaction Generation Corruption Conservation Alimentation Growth Diminution Metamorphosis Alteration Local motion Path of motion Measurements: Measure of quantity Measure of bonding Measure of time Measure of distance Measure of strength Measure of surrounding circumstances 271 . 3.) 1. without wick: Body Time Spoonful of wine 116 pulses The same mixed with: A sixth part of a spoonful of nitre 94 A sixth part of a spoonful of bay-salt 83 A sixth part of a spoonful of gunpowder 110 A cube of pellet of wax (only half of the quantity of wine) 87 A sixth part of a spoonful of milk 100 (note: the milk was crudled) A sixth part of a spoonful of water 86 The same quantity of the spirit of wine and water 4 The spirit of wine with a pebble in the middle 94 The spirit of wine with a piece of wood (the bigness of 94 an arrow and the length of a finger) 272 .Appendix 5: Tables for the experiments exploring the properties of a body during the development of a process (section. 3. 4. Experiment 366 (SEH II. 463-63): Experiment touching the continuance of flame (the table can be arranged in an ascending or descending order) Bodies inflamed wholly and immediately. “Unpublished. liker to the silver. whiter lost 23 gr.584): Experiment touching induration of bodies Bodies put in earthen vessels. I take the spoon to be made of pewter. Chalk much harder lost nothing Free-stone much harder lost nothing 584 The page is quoted in Rees. Cheese very hard and not well to cut lost 38 gr.693” (folio 44r. 38.” 406. 585 273 . more flexible (lost 10 gr. The manuscript mentions a spoon. into boiling water for twelve hours: Free-stone received water lost nothing Pewter whiter.2. Experiment 88 (SEH II. but given that all the other substances are identical. 376-77) and “Additional Manuscripts. into boiling water for twelve hours: Clay hard as a stone.585) Bodies put in earthen vessels. in October. Table 1: substances listed according to the time of germination: Dung Urine Soot 6 days Chalk Ashes Salt No substance normal time of germination Warm water retardation of germination Claret of wine Malmsey no germination at all Spirit of wine Table 2: the substances creating the highest.Experiment 402 (SEH 475-76): Experiment touching the acceleration of germination Wheat steep in substances (one fourth substance. and most lusty plants (among those germinating in 6 days): Urine Sung Chalk Soot Ashes Salt 274 . thickest. three forth water) for twelve hours. 119. 123* 3.157 * 3.167-69 3. 73. XI. Flores paradise I. 162 * 3. 123 and XVII. 84 I. 99-100 II.Appendix 6: Table of borrowings from Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia Naturalis and Hugh Platt’s Floraes paradise in Sylva sylavrum. 20. XI. 41. 145 II. 105&106. 102. 123* (also XIX) 3. 11. XIX. 30. VIII. VIII. 90-92 I. 123* 3. 124* 3. 132 3. centuries V and VI Francis Bacon. XIX. 161 II. XIX. 18. XVII. 130. The Natural Magic Hugh Platt.100) 105 (99) 106 98 98 99 101-2 98 (81-82) 83 275 . 19-20 II. VIII. XIX. 127-28* 3. 161* 3. XVII. XVII. Sylva sylvarum 403 (476-77) 405 (477) 406 (477) 413 (479) 414 (479) 419 (480) 421(480) 422 (481) 426 (482) 427 (482) 430 (482-83) 435 (484) 436 (484) 437 (484) 440 (484) 444 (485) 445 (485) 446 (486) 447 (486) 448 (486) 449 (486) 451 (486-87) 455 (488) 456 (488) 457 (488) 458 (488) 459 (488) 460 (488) 461 (488) 462 (488-89) 463 (489) 464 (489) 465 (489) 466 (489-90) 467 (490) 468 (490) Giambattista Della Porta. 23 I. 155-58 II. X . XIX. 123. XIX. XVII. 136 79-80 84-85 II. X. 162-63* (also VIII. XVII. VIII. 156* 3. 85. 162* 3. 106. XIX. 146-48 I. 123* 3. 156* 3. 163* (also XVII. VIII. 57 3. 125* 3. 164* 3. XIX. 157) 3. 146-48 I. 37-38 II. 133* 76 76 77 76 77 82 76 103-104 104 104 104 104 105 (76. 157) 3. VIII. 153* (also XI) 3. 161* 3. 156* 3. 161-62* 3. Magia naturalis (1581) Giambattista Della Porta. 113-14* I. 149-51 II. 3. 99* 60 60 60 60 60 59 59 59 59 II. II. 164-65* 3. 25. II. XII. 70. 152* 13. I. 103-4* 3. 102-3* 3. 97. XX. I. 40-44 II. I. 97-99 3. 134* 3. 142* 3. 109. 118. 133. 141-42 I.469 (490) 470 (490) 471 (491) 474 (491) 476 (492) intro to 477 (492) 477 (492-93) 478 (493) 479 (493) 480 (494) 481 (494) 499 (498-99) 500 501 (501) 502 (501) 503 (502) 504 (502) 506 (502-03) 513 (505) 514 (505) 515 (505) 516 (505-06) 517 (506) 518 (506) 519 (506) 520 (506) 521 (506-07) 522 (507) 524 (507) 525 (507) 534 (510) 535 (510) 547 (512) 548 (513) 549 (513) 550 (513) 551 (513) 563 (516) 564 (516) 566 (516-17) 574 (518) 575 (518) 592 (524) 3. I. 109-10* 3. 138-39* 3. 103-4* 58 66-7 69 69 9 97 106-8 106-8 106 101-103 103 103 94-95 (62-3) II. II. 104) 3. I. 101-02 II. I. 100* 3. 171-72 3. XVIII. 101* 3. 101* 3. 14 3. I. 32. 139-40* 3. II. 113* 3. 139* 3. XII. XVIII. 103* 3. 148-50* (also II. V. VII. 100* 3. II. 276 . XVI. V. 165-67* 3. 100* 3. 143-44 The experiments with * are those identified by Robert Ellis. XIX. 103-04 II. 22. 105 * 3. 100* 3. Proemium. XII. 160-1* 3. 100* 3. 81-82 I. 155 3. II. 100 3. 104* 3. 158-60* 3. XII. 160* 3. XVIII. I. XX. IV. XI. 100. 78-80 87-88 87 86-7 89 61-63 61-62 62 62 63 62-3 62-3 I. 102-5 * 3. 134* 83 83-84 3. X. XI. 67. XI. I. 65-67 3. II. XV. 136 83 II. How to procure fruits to be of divers colours. and the excrescences of plants. How divers kinds of fruits. may be made medicinable Experiments in consort touching the acceleration of germination Experiments in consort touching the putting back or retardation of germination Experiments in consort touching the melioration of fruits. How fruits and slowers may be made to yield a better savour then ordinary XVII. How Plants are changed. How new kinds of plants may be generated of putrefaction II. Of another device whereby strange fruits may be generated. How we may have fruits and flowers at all time of the year X. How fruits may be made to be more tender and beautiful. and of the transmutation of them into another Experiments in consort touching the procerity and lowness and artificial dwarfing of trees Experiments in consort touching the rudiments of plants. may be made to receive and resemble all figures and impressions whatsoever XIX. How we may cause fruits to grow bigger than their ordinary kind XII. How to produce ripe fruits and flowers before their ordinary season IX. How the colour of fruit may be also changed XVI. How to make one fruit compound on many IV. How fruits may be produced without any outward rines or shells XIV. How a double fruit may be made whereof the one VII. and likewise wines. one of them generating into the form of another III. trees and plants Experiments in consort touching compound fruits and flowers Experiments in consort touching the sympathy and antipathy of plants Experiments in consort touching the making herbs and fruits medicinable Experiment in consort touching curiosities about fruits and plants Experiments in consort touching the degenerating of plants. How fruits that are in their growing. or super-plants Experiments in consort touching the producing of perfect plants without seeds Experiments in consort touching foreign plants Experiments in consort touching the seasons in which plants come forth Experiments in consort touching the lasting of herbs and trees Experiments in consort touching the several figures of plants Experiments in consort touching some principal differences in plants Experiments in consort touching all manner of composts and helps of the ground 277 . and made either better or worse VIII.Appendix 7: Scheme of Bacon’s borrowing from Della Porta’s Magia naturalis in Sylva sylvarum. such as are not naturally incident to their kind XV. How to produce fruits that shall be latter and backward XI. and goodly to the eye XX. centuries V and VI I. How to procure fruits to be sweeter and pleseanter for taste XVIII. Of a second means whereby fruits may be mingled and compound together V. Of a third way whereby divers fruits may be compounded together VI. How to produce fruits that shall have no stone or kernel XIII. that it mixes elements of natural history. and with Bacon’s theoretical writings. cannot be based only on description of observable phenomena. natural philosophy. in turn apply the knowledge thus obtained and modify natural bodies. which theorizes upon these histories in order to arrive at the principles behind the unity of nature. which lie behind the visible phenomena. however. physics. on the one hand. the reform of the natural sciences must start with collecting natural histories. mechanics. that is. the two operative sciences. one of his main sources.Summary This dissertation. Mechanics and magic. physics – the first science of natural philosophy – can begin to theorize upon them so as to discover the hidden processes of nature. This work has generally been taken as belonging to the genre of natural history. it is first necessary to analyse the various types of instances that it deals with and to compare them with Bacon’s other natural histories. this thesis tries to show that this work reflects Bacon’s model of how nature can and should be manipulated by the naturalist. However. with collecting facts about nature. Moreover. which contains a collection of 1000 experiments. nature must be forced with the help of experiments to disclose all her inner workings to the experimentalist. Once such a collection of empirical observations and experiments starts accumulating. As for metaphysics – the second speculative discipline – it seeks a higher degree of abstraction. It order to buttress this new understanding of Sylva. one will have to deal with sources that Bacon used and examine the way in which he adapted and transformed the experimental evidence. clearly documents how Bacon was engaged in constructing his own science of magic. This dissertation shows. “From Natural History to Natural Magic: Francis Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum. a detailed comparison of Bacon’s experiments with those found in Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. Arguing once more against the prevalent view. According to Bacon. metaphysics and natural magic. Moreover. mechanics using the knowledge of physics and magic that of metaphysics. experiments and theoretical considerations on very different topics. on the other. they do it 278 . Sylva sylvarum. because it looked like an amalgam of observations. The difference between the two pair of sciences is that while studying the same entities. Sylva sylvarum has often been regarded as an imperfect natural history. In fact.” draws attention to a posthumously published and neglected book by Francis Bacon. forms and so forth – that figure in his matter theory.” What is essential for an understanding of Bacon’s methodology is that all five disciplines just mentioned are engaged in the process of discovery. from the viewpoint of their material and efficient causes. Chapter one offers an overview of the existing scholarship on Bacon’s natural philosophy. it is argued in this chapter that too little attention has been given to the way in which these influences have impacted on Bacon’s natural histories. As for the scholarly examination of these natural histories. the epistemic role of the experiments in the natural histories themselves was not examined. in the sense that they were treated jointly.” the hidden structures of bodies. A similar fate has befallen his theories of induction and of matter. However. Bacon’s posthumous Sylva sylvarum has remained generally neglected. Bacon’s science works through a continuous interplay between theory formation and its verification in practice. The aim of this chapter is to understand the status quaestionis and to show where further research is needed. This aim can be realized through a close analysis of 279 . this dissertation aims to fill some of these gaps and to offer a more compact view of Bacon’s system of natural philosophy. This has resulted in contradictory images of his philosophy. This means that while speculative philosophy is composed by provisional rules and axioms (many of them being what Bacon calls “middle axioms”). Reacting to this situation. there has been much discussion in the scholarship about the influence of the occult sciences of the Renaissance. without rigid distinctions between them. motions. Also. functioning at different levels of knowledge. voiced in his theoretical writings. Physics investigates what Bacon calls “schematisms of matter. which are also called “forms. While Bacon’s emphasis. Let us now turn from a general description of the thesis to its component chapters. his process of induction and his matter theory. Because Bacon’s philosophy has a strongly operative character. by testing its provisional axioms. The same hold also for Bacon’s theory of experimentation as exemplified in his experimentbased natural histories. not together (as should have been done). and they have been placed in connection with his natural philosophy (and more exactly with his physics). there has been a general re-evaluation over the past years. on experimental collections was duly recorded. While Bacon must most certainly be placed in the context of the operative Renaissance sciences. few attempts have been made to construct a coherent picture putting together the different entities – schematisms. As this dissertation proves. Metaphysics studies the formal causes of these schematisms. Latin natural histories have started to be discussed in the secondary literature.from different perspectives. there are also different types of experiments. It also means that magic can be performed before metaphysics has been completed. Bacon’s theory of experimentation. under their proper designations. interventionist experiments. this thesis argues that there is a methodological purpose behind them: Bacon used the vernacular and his method of presentation as a way of selecting his readers. Sure enough. It also clarifies how the behind the panoply of different subjects. and instances of natural divination or spiritual magic. It proposes a classification of these experiments into six classes. An analysis of its contents shows that some of the negative judgements that have led to its general neglect are not warranted. This feature. All these instances are also found in the Latin natural histories. It becomes evident that Bacon elsewhere embraced a strong concept of “experiment. which commentators regarded as a sign of the inferiority of Sylva inferior with respect to the other histories. Chapter two introduces Sylva sylvarum into the discussion. and which address a single subject matter and display a clear structure. the remaining puzzle – the naming of all reports as “experiments” – can also be solved. Now. The first class is composed of those experiments in which Bacon illustrates his matter theory. what we find in Sylva falls only in a small part under this definition: we find descriptions of facts. they all contribute towards a natural and experimental history. While this viewpoint does not yield a possible secret order of the experiments. its lack of order. medical receipts. its use of the vernacular (as against the Latin of his other natural histories). In general.” which he defined as an intervention into the natural course of things. By means of a comparison with the Latin natural histories that Bacon had published during his lifetime. the dispersion of its subject matters over many disciplines and the inclusion of all reported instances under the category “experiment” are certainly puzzling. in the sense that he aimed to reach those who could discern the unity behind the apparent diversity of nature reflected in separate experiments. namely those used in the production of knowledge. The criteria used for this classification are the complexity of the experiments and the type of results they produce. are however the very characteristics that Bacon included in the histories he “kept for himself” and wrote for the Instauratio magna. axioms. Bacon was looking for the unity of nature. and also with the Latin natural histories. advice for further experimentation. and who could connect the instances presented in Sylva both with each other and with the theory and experiments provided in Bacon’s other works. phenomena or very simple experiments are explained 280 . the theoretical writings and Bacon’s sources. it does connect the lack of order with Bacon’s method for the transmission of knowledge. pieces of theoretical considerations.Sylva’s experimental instances. Are for the first three of these characteristics. and how he expected his readers to do the same. Although they are not experimental in the strong sense. by connecting them with one another. Chapter three focuses on a specific group of experiments. The last class of experiments. This. but rather to cleanse natural philosophy of its errors. which is generally Bacon’s most important source for experiments with plants. finally. uses simplified models and then transfers the knowledge obtained to modify more complex classes of objects.” in Bacon’s own terminology. Bacon bases this transfer upon his matter theory. where he believes exists a fundamental set of entities and of activities that are everywhere the same. They thus constitute the material for inductions. or because it is shown that the results of the experiment in question were misinterpreted. Bacon’s reliance on Della Porta has incidentally been taken as proof that the Sylva sylvarum is above all a collection of experiments copied from literary sources. They are thus not experiments designed to produce new knowledge. upon the most fundamental level of matter. The second and third class deal with the rejection of previously reported experiments and theories. how critical. these experiments not only provide the basis for further experimentation. Either. while the underlying theory is accepted. a different experiment has to be devised. original and creative Bacon 281 . Many of these experiments are taken from Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. These experiments that are analysed there treat plants as simplified models of animals and human beings. just like the famous experiments reported in the Novum organum or in the Historia densi et rari. and the only way in which they can be made observable is with the help of specially designed instruments. This use of simplified models is analysed at length in chapter four. as they can render observable even those phenomena that the senses. However. In that case. Only after the process of verification and the consequent exclusion of misleading experiments or theories can the advancement of science be started. will under no circumstance be able to observe. The last three classes of experiments are proper “experiments of light. however. Two outcomes are possible. Some of these changes cannot be observed directly by the experimenter. in turn. the experiment is rejected. very strong metaphysical assumptions are needed. Or else. however improved.through his concepts of simple motions or appetites of the matter. In order for this transfer to be done. either because the experiment illustrating it is proven wrong. the instruments are more than just simple helps for the senses. As simple as this might seem. but they can be tabulated. and they are specially designed to produce knowledge. that is to say. the theory itself is rejected. A detailed comparison of the reports on plants in the Sylva and the Magia naturalis shows. takes us to the role of the following class of experiments. This type of experiments is particularly important. as they provide insight into what is happening at the level of the hidden activity of matter. The first of them (which is number four in our general classification) studies the changes a body undergoes during a process. the experiments adopted from Della Porta are not simply copied. Bacon wished to take these experiments further in the service of the construction of a metaphysical theory and a truly magical manipulation of bodies. simple motions. it represents for Bacon a simplified model of alimentation. namely Hugh Platt’s Floraes Paradise. It also proves that Bacon favoured experimental reports coming from writers known as experimentalists and from gardeners in cases where Della Porta’s writing appeared to be too “fantastical.was in using his sources. appetites. In more than one case. which he groups together according to his matter theory and not to external characteristics. In order to explain Bacon’s form. The same matter theory is also used to explain the experimentally tested phenomena – explanations that do not appear in Della Porta’s book. The form of heat is a combination of three simple natures and their measurements. which required the knowledge and manipulation of “forms. The major changes Bacon introduces into Della Porta’s instances are the generalisation from the specific plants being discussed and the addition of explanatory causes. Some are thoroughly transformed. Bacon took Della Porta’s book to be about physics and mechanics (according to his own definition of these sciences). While Della Porta is interested in changing individual plants. Appetites cannot be the unique causes of motions. Platt’s book is in fact Bacon’s second major source for the experiments with plants. Bacon borrowed this idea from yet another source that this dissertation has managed to unearth. In fact. but made a philosophically and experimentally informed choice. others are criticised as being false. with an examination of their respective understanding of natural magic and the manipulation of nature.” Chapter five continues the comparison between Della Porta’s Magia naturalis and Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum. and several instances are borrowed from here. Platt’s experimental reports are used to reject Della Porta’s “fantastical” theories. one has to analyse his notions of schematisms. Interesting changes are also found at the level of concepts. grafting was a simplified model of the copulation of animals. While for Della Porta.” The first part of this chapter deals with the redefinition of Bacon’s form of heat as given in the second book of the Novum organum. 282 . the latter’s willingness to reject certain experiments or theories reported in the Magia naturalis on the basis of Platt’s reports demonstrates that Bacon did not blindly copy his sources. Bacon’s interest are groups of plants. As is shown in this chapter. While Della Porta remains the most important source for Bacon. and latent processes as related terms. These motions can be influenced and induced on a given body by manipulating the basic appetites of matter. because they are bound to the knowledge and the modification of individual bodies. his magic can also provoke changes that go beyond a simple imitation of natural processes. so that in collaboration with the existing schematisms naturally occurring in a given body. a superficial knowledge of the natural phenomena as well as of the artificial ones he produces. The latter possesses. a great number of experiments involve areas that for Bacon belong to metaphysics and magic. transmutation or new species. it produces one motion or another. The result of the motion will be a change in the schematisms of bodies. They contain explanations in terms of material and efficient causes or else superficial manipulations of bodies.because each appetite has more than one corresponding motion. according to his self-understanding – is more fundamental. It is important to mention here that mechanics and magic (conceived again according to Bacon’s own terminology) may sometimes produce the same changes in the bodies. When one connects the features of magic. which allows him to extrapolate from known objects to others that have not yet been investigated. Sometimes it is necessary to connect different experiments in order to discover the profound 283 . or by the transfer of knowledge to very similar subjects. terms that are analyzed in the second part of the last chapter. Many of them remain at the level of descriptions of facts or simple experiments of natural history. As mentioned earlier. then. discussed in this chapter. with the evidence produced in the other chapters. It is precisely in this understanding of the natural magician and the type of knowledge and of operations of which he is capable that the difference between Bacon and Della Porta lies. Bacon’s natural magic – again. the specific feature of Sylva becomes evident. but also in Bacon’s and Della Porta’s respective understanding of vivification. understands the relation between schematisms. but the magician will manipulate the appetites in order to produce these same changes. In one word. by manipulating appetites and the subtlety of his knowledge. depending on the schematisms existing in the body. Possessing an understanding of the fundamental appetites of nature. however. However. appetites and motions and even recognizes which changes are possible in subjects that have not yet been investigated. The mechanic will just put bodies together and thereby provoke some changes. but that the level of matter at which they operate is different. The appetites. but their combinations differ in each body. When an appetite is manifest. The magician. For he proceeds either by imitation. not all the “experiments” in Sylva are experiments of metaphysics or magic. a certain motion will be produced. at least in Bacon’s view. simple motions and schematisms are the same in all bodies. Others are experiments of physics and mechanics. what the natural magician must do is to understand which appetite must be activated to which effect and how this can be achieved. The implications of this difference show up not only in the central concept of magic itself. provided in Chapter three. An even clearer confirmation of these axioms is to be found when the rule is applied to objects not previously studied. 284 . This is precisely the reason why he made such an effort to provide working models drawn from all disciplines of natural philosophy. With respect to our classification of experiments. Sylva sylvarum can be read as an instruction booklet which provides models and instructions of how nature has to be investigated and transformed. This intelligence and labour required for this combination was – or so I claim in this dissertation – how Bacon selected the readers by which he wished to be understood. natural magic is performed. including natural magic. as happens in the transfer from simple models to the complex subjects. he believed that science could advance if his investigations were imitated by others. then.knowledge they contain when combined. Bacon saw his project as being far from complete. it is in the transit from the experiments studying changes of bodies during a process to those experiments rendering invisible processes visible that the experimenter enters the realm of natural philosophy. All in all. he can arrive at a provisional knowledge of forms. In the verification of these provisional rules – these axioms becoming rules once they are put in practice – if they turn out to work. Still. Depending on how deep he will delve in the process of his investigations. ” behandelt een onderbelicht postuum geschrift van Francis Bacon. Bovendien moet men zich richten op de bronnen die Bacon heeft gebruikt en onderzoeken hoe hij het experimentele materiaal heeft overgenomen en aangepast. Sylva sylvarum. De mechanica en de magie. zoekt een hogere graad van abstractie. Het verschil tussen deze twee paren van wetenschappen is het perspectief van waaruit ze dezelfde entiteiten bestuderen. De fysica onderzoekt wat Bacon de ‘schematische voorstellingen der materie’ (‘schematisms of matter’) noemt. een verzameling van duizend experimenten. Volgens Bacon moet de hervorming van de natuurwetenschappen beginnen met het bijeenbrengen van natuurhistoriën. is in werkelijkheid Bacons model voor hoe de natuur gemanipuleerd zou moeten worden. Echter. waarbij de mechanica gebruik maakt van de kennis van de fysica. de tweede speculatieve discipline. de natuurfilosofie die hierover theoretiseert om de beginselen te ontdekken achter de eenheid van de natuur. de verborgen structuren van 285 . en de magie van de metafysica. kan niet louter gebaseerd zijn op het beschrijven van observeerbare fenomenen. de natuur moet met behulp van experimenten gedwongen worden om haar gehele werkingen aan de wetenschapper te tonen. een amalgaam van observaties. metafysica en natuurlijke magie met elkaar vermengt. fysica. Wanneer het verzamelen van empirische observaties en experimenten eenmaal is aangevangen. mechanica. Om deze stelling te ondersteunen is het nodig om de verschillende typen van experimentele voorbeelden in Sylva te analyseren en deze te vergelijken met Bacons andere natuurhistoriën en theoretische geschriften. illustreert duidelijk hoe hij bezig was zijn eigen wetenschap der magie te construeren. de twee praktische wetenschappen. Een gedetailleerde vergelijking van Bacons experimenten met die uit Giambattista Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. Wat beschouwd werd als een onvolkomen natuurhistorie. De algemene opvatting is dat dit werk behoort tot het genre van ‘natuurhistorie’. De metafysica. een van Bacons voornaamste bronnen. oftewel met het verzamelen van feiten over de natuur. maar dit proefschrift argumenteert dat Bacon in dit werk juist elementen van natuurhistorie.Samenvatting Dit proefschrift “From Natural History to Natural Magic: Francis Bacon’s Sylva sylvarum. begint de fysica als eerste wetenschap der natuurfilosofie hierover te theoretiseren met als doel te ontdekken welke verborgen natuurprocessen achter de waarneembare fenomenen schuilen. experimenten en theoretische overwegingen over zeer verscheiden onderwerpen. passen de verworven kennis toe en modificeren natuurlijke objecten. ook wel de ‘vormen’ genoemd. schemata.a. en wel door haar provisorische axioma’s te testen. maar ook met de Latijnse natuurhistoriën. Het doel van dit proefschrift is derhalve om enkele van die leemtes te vullen en een meer samenhangend beeld van Bacons systeem van natuurfilosofie te bieden. Essentieel voor Bacons methodologie is dat er in het ontdekkingsproces geen duidelijke afbakening is tussen de vijf genoemde disciplines. Ofschoon Bacon zeker in die historische context past. 286 . en bovendien zijn er weinig pogingen ondernomen om de verschillende entiteiten van zijn materietheorie (o. er ook verschillende typen experimenten zijn. Hetzelfde geldt ook voor Bacons theorie van experimenteren zoals die voorkomt in de natuurhistoriën die op experimenten zijn gebaseerd. Dit heeft geleid tot elkaar tegensprekende beelden van Bacons filosofie. Zoals dit proefschrift aantoont. is Bacons wetenschap een continu samenspel tussen theorie en verificatie in de praktijk. Er is wel besproken hoe Bacon het belang van experimenten benadrukte in zijn theoretische geschriften. Doel van dit hoofdstuk is om de status quaestionis uiteen te zetten en te laten zien welk verder onderzoek nog nodig is. Omdat Bacons filosofie een sterk praktisch karakter heeft. met de theoretische geschriften. functionerend op verschillende niveaus van kennis. Metafysica bestudeert de formele oorzaken van de schematismen. laat dit hoofdstuk zien dat de invloed van de Renaissance occulte wetenschappen op Bacons natuurhistoriën onvoldoende is belicht. Een gelijksoortig lot ondergingen zijn theorie van inductie en zijn materietheorie in de zin dat ze niet samen gelezen werden. Hoofdstuk één geeft een overzicht van de bestaande kennis over Bacons natuurfilosofie. het proces van inductie en Bacons theorie van materie de afgelopen jaren een herwaardering heeft ondergaan. Het betekent ook dat magie ten uitvoer gebracht kan worden voordat er een complete metafysica is. maar dat is niet waar hij hun epistemische functie illustreert. De Sylva sylvarum is echter grotendeels genegeerd. Dit kan gedaan worden middels een grondige analyse van de experimentele voorbeelden in Sylva en door deze te verbinden met elkaar. en met zijn bronnen. geesten) in een coherent beeld samen te voegen. De Latijnse natuurhistoriën hebben aandacht gekregen in de secundaire literatuur en zijn in verband gebracht met zijn natuurfilosofie (in het bijzonder zijn fysica). Dit betekent dat terwijl de speculatieve filosofie samengesteld is uit voorlopige regels en axioma’s (waarvan velen door Bacon tussen-axioma’s worden genoemd). is er in de literatuur veel aandacht besteed aan de invloed van de occulte wetenschappen uit de Renaissance. Ten aanzien van Bacons natuurhistoriën wordt gesignaleerd dat het onderzoek naar de theorie van het experimenteren. atomen.lichamen vanuit het oogpunt van hun materiële oorzaken en werkoorzaken. Zeker heeft Sylva een aantal eigenschappen die het moeilijk te doorgronden maakt. Al deze voorbeelden treft men ook aan in de Latijnse natuurhistoriën. Door een vergelijking met de Latijnse natuurhistoriën. door hem gedefinieerd als interventies in de natuurlijke orde der dingen. theoretische overwegingen. Hoofdstuk drie concentreert zich op een bepaalde groep experimenten – namelijk die gebruikt worden in het voortbrengen van kennis. De eerste klasse is samengesteld uit die experimenten waarmee Bacon zijn 287 . interventionistische experimenten. de inhoud die verschillende disciplines omspant.In hoofdstuk twee wordt Sylva bij de discussie betrokken en worden enkele argumenten geanalyseerd én verworpen waarom dit werk tot nog toe is veronachtzaamd. namelijk de omstandigheid dat alle voorbeelden in de categorie ‘experimenten’ worden gepresenteerd. en die de voorbeelden uit Sylva met Bacons andere werkenin verband kunnen brengen. De criteria voor deze classificatie zijn de complexiteit van de experimenten en het type resultaten dat ze produceren. medische recepten en gevallen van waarzeggerij of spiritualistische magie. kunnen al deze gevallen gebruikt worden in een natuurlijke en experimentele historie. die Bacon tijdens zijn leven heeft gepubliceerd en die één enkel onderwerp betroffen en helder geordend waren. axiomas. en het scharen van alle voorbeelden onder de titel “experiment”. adviezen voor verdere experimenten. Op deze manier zijn die elementen die ervoor zorgden dat Sylva werd beschouwd als inferieur aan de andere historiën. zoals zijn Engelse taal (in tegenstelling tot het Latijn van de andere natuurhistoriën). Wat betreft de eerste drie genoemde eigenschappen beweert dit proefschrift dat zij het gevolg zijn van een welbewuste methodologie: Bacon bedient zich van het Engels en van deze specifieke presentatie om zijn lezers te selecteren. Hoewel niet experimenteel in de strenge zin. juist de eigenschappen die Bacon betrok in de historiën die hij “voor zichzelf hield” en schreef vóór de Instauratio magna. Het materiaal in Sylva valt slechts voor een klein deel daaronder: wat we aantreffen zijn beschrijvingen van feiten. Dit argument verduidelijkt natuurlijk niet een verborgen ordening van experimenten. maar plaatst juist het gebrek hieraan in samenhang met Bacons methode voor de overdracht van kennis en verklaart hoe Bacon op zoek was naar eenheid achter zulke verschillende onderwerpen en van zijn lezers hetzelfde verwachtte. aldaar onder de juiste noemers. en classificeert deze in zes groepen. in de zin dat hij zich vooral richt tot diegenen die de eenheid kunnen zien achter de schijnbare verscheidenheid van de natuur zoals die naar voren komt in afzonderlijke experimenten. het gebrek aan ordening. is het mogelijk om ook het laatste probleem op te lossen. Duidelijk wordt dat Bacon in zijn andere werken een strikter begrip van experimenten hanteerde. Zij zijn derhalve niet experimenten bedoeld voor de ontdekking van nieuwe kennis. fout is. Overigens is Bacons afhankelijkheid van Della Porta in het verleden als bewijs gezien dat het Sylva sylvarum vooral een verzameling van experimenten zou zijn die zijn ontleend aan schriftelijke bronnen. Hoofdstuk vier van de dissertatie verschaft een uitvoerige analyse van deze versimplificeerde modellen. omdat het experiment dat was bedoeld om de theorie te bewijzen. terwijl de achterliggende theorie wel wordt aangehangen. Deze overdracht van kennis is gebaseerd op metafysische veronderstellingen. Twee uitkomsten zijn mogelijk. Daarmee zijn we aanbeland bij de tweede klasse van lichtexperimenten. zelfs van fenomenen die nooit observeerbaar zijn door de zintuigen.materietheorie illustreert. ‘lichtexperimenten’ (‘experiments of light’). Zij bieden het material voor inducties. De voorbeelden zijn experimenten die planten gebruiken als vereenvoudigde modellen van dieren en mensen. Alleen na de toetsing en vervolgens uitsluiting van misleidende experimenten of theorieën kan de voortgang van de wetenschap op gang komen. Bacon baseert deze overdracht op zijn theorie van materie.w. Ofschoon dit eenvoudige experimenten lijken. verschaffen ze de basis voor verder experimenteren en fungeren zij ook in tabellen op dezelfde manier als de beroemde experimenten uit het Novum organum. Sommige van de veranderingen zijn niet waarneembaar en kan men enkel zichtbaar maken met behulp van speciale instrumenten. wat Bacon noemt.z. De eerste categorie van lichtexperimenten (d. In dat geval moet men een nieuw experiment opstellen. Ofwel het experiment wordt verworpen. De drie laatste klassen van experimenten zijn. Dit type experimenten is van belang om inzicht te bieden in wat gebeurt op het niveau van de activiteit van materie. Vele van deze experimenten zijn ontleend aan Della Porta’s Magia naturalis. Maar zoals de vergelijking tussen het Sylva en de 288 . maar om de natuurfilosofie van haar onjuistheden te ontdoen. volgens welke er een fundamentele verzameling van entiteiten en activiteiten bestaat die voor alle materie hetzelfde is. In het algemeen verklaart Bacon fenomenen of zeer eenvoudige experimenten door zijn concepten van ‘simple motions’ en ‘appetites of matter’. de vierde categorie in onze algemene indeling) bestudeert de veranderingen die een lichaam tijdens een process ondergaat. of de resultaten van het experiment verkeerd zijn geïnterpreteerd. Het laatste type van lichtexperimenten maakt gebruik van vereenvoudigde modellen en past vervolgens de verworven kennis toe op meer complexe objecten. De tweede en derde klassen betreffen de verwerping van experimenten en theorieën die hij eerder had opgevoerd. Zij hebben tot doel om nieuwe kennis voort te brengen. Ofwel de theorie zelf wordt verworpen. die in het algemeen Bacons belangrijkste bron is voor plantexperimenten. Terwijl Della Porte is geïnteresseerd in individuele planten. Bacon’s bedoeling was om deze experimenten een stap verder te brengen ten dienste van het ontwerpen van een metafysische theorie en een waarlijk magische manipulatie van lichamen die was gebaseerd op kennis en manipulatie van ‘vormen’. en een aantal van Bacons voorbeelden zijn hieruit ontleend. terwijl het voor Bacon een versimpeld model van voeding is. Deze bewegingen kan men beïnvloeden en bewerkstelligen op een gegeven lichaam door de basale ‘strevingen’ van materie te manipuleren. maar nu door een onderzoek van hun begrip van natuurlijke magie en de manipulatie van de natuur. Zo is enten voor Della Porte een versimpeld model voor de copulatie van dieren. De belangrijkste wijzigingen die Bacon invoert in Della Porte’s voorbeelden zijn de generaliseringen op basis van de specifieke planten die worden besproken en de toevoeging van verklarende oorzaken. omdat ze betrekking hebben op de kennis en verandering van individuele lichamen. Dit hoofdstuk betoogt dat Bacon het boek van Della Porta opvatte als een boek over fysica en mechanica (zoals Bacon zelf die disciplines definieerde). De materie theorie gebruikt hij ook om de experimentele resultaten te verklaren. is er geen sprake van kritiekloos kopiëren. Platt’s boek is feitelijk Bacons tweede belangrijke bron voor de plantexperimenten. maakt eens te meer duidelijk dat hij geen slaafse navolger was van Della Porte. namelijk Hugh Platt’s Floraes Paradise. Het eerste deel van hoofdstuk vijf gaat over Bacons herdefiniëring van de vorm van warmte. maar van origineel en creatief gebruik van een bron. Bacon heft sommige experimenten ingrijpend veranderd en andere bekritiseert hij als onjuist. Het laat ook zien dat Bacon de voorkeur gaf aan experimentele verslagen van schrijvers die bekend stonden als experimentators en van tuinlieden in die gevallen waarin hij Della Porte te fantasierijk vond. ‘appetite’. die is gegeven in het tweede boek van het Novum organum. die hij categoriseert op basis van zijn materie theorie en niet op grond van uiterlijke kenmerken. latente processen en gerelateerde termen te analyseren. De vorm van warmte is een combinatie van drie enkelvoudige naturen en hun afmetingen. verklaringen die ontbreken in Della Porta’s boek. Om Bacons vorm te begrijpen. richt Bacon zich op groepen van planten. Hoofdstuk vijf zet de vergelijking voort tussen Della Porta’s Magia naturalis en Bacon’s Sylva Sylvarum. dient men zijn noties van ‘schematism’. Deze dissertatie heeft de bron van Bacons model boven water gehaald. maar weloverwogen filosofische en experimentele keuzes maakte. Elke ‘streving’ heeft meer dan één ermee corresponderende beweging en om 289 . Meer dan eens gebruikt Bacon de bevindingen van Platt om de ‘fantasieën’ van Della Porte te verwerpen. ‘simple motion’.Magia naturalis laat zien. Het gebruik dat Bacon maakt van Platt’ Flores om experimenten en theorieën in de Magia naturalis te verwerpen. ligt het verschil tussen Bacon en Della Porte. Dit onderscheid tussen Bacon en Della Porte treedt aan de oppervlakte in hun notie van magie én in hun begrip van ‘vivification’. zodat hij. Wanneer men de eiegenschappen van magie die in dit hoofdstuk zijn besproken. afhankelijk van de ‘schemata’ die in dat lichaam bestaan. brengt het de ene of de andere beweging voort. kan de magiër ook veranderingen ontlokken die de simple imitatie van natuurlijke processen overstijgen. Het is van belang om hier te vermelden dat mechanica en magie (wederom opgevat volgens Bacons eigen terminologie) soms dezelfde verandering in lichamen tot stand kunnen brengen. Kortom. maar de magiër zal de ‘strevingen’ manipuleren teneinde diezelfde veranderingen tot stand te brengen. diegene die zich wil bedienen van natuurlijke magie moet doorgronden welke ‘streving’ geactiveerd moet worden om welk effect te bereiken en op welke manier dit moet gebeuren. In het tweede deel van hoofdstuk vijf worden deze termen nader geananlyseerd. De mechanicus plaatst slechts lichamen bijeen en lokt op die manier een veranderingen uit. enkelvoudige bewegingen en schemata zijn hetzelfde in alle lichamen. dan wordt duidelijk hoe men de Sylva op waarde moet schatten. Andere zijn 290 . maar dat het niveau waarop ze werkzaam zijn in de materie. in verband brengt met het material dat in de eerdere hoofdstukken naar voren is gebracht. met gebruikmaking van de bestaande schemata die van nature in een lichaam besloten liggen. Immers. Door zijn begrip van de fundamentele ‘strevingen’ van de natuur.die reden zijn ‘strevingen’ niet de unieke oorzaak van een beweging. verschillend is. Ten gevolge van de beweging zal er een verandering plaatsvinden in de ‘schemata’ van de lichamen. een bepaalde beweging kan voortbrengen. ‘strevingen’ en bewegingen en onderkent zelfs welke veranderingen mogelijk zijn in dingen die nog niet nader zijn onderzocht. ‘transmutation’ en nieuwe species. Zoals eerder opgemerkt. zijn niet alle ‘experiments’ in Sylva experimenten van metafysica of magie. Juist in het soort kennis en begrip dat de natuurlijke magiër heeft en de toepassingen waartoe hij in staat is. De ‘strevingen’. Bacons natuurlijke magie—wederom vanuit zijn zelf-begrip—is meer fundamenteel vanwege het feit dat hij ‘strevingen’ manipuleert en vanwege de subtiliteit van zijn kennis die hem in staat stelt te extrapoleren van gekende objecten naar objecten die hij nog niet heeft onderzocht. Zodra een ‘streving’ zich manifesteert. hij opereert slechts vanuit nabootsing of vanuit de overdracht van kennis naar gelijkende dingen. maar hun combinatie verschilt in elk lichaam. Vele van de experimenten blijven hangen op het niveau van feitelijke beschrijvingen of simple observaties. In de ogen van Bacon bezit de laatste slechts een oppervlakkige kennis van de natuurlijke verschijnselen en de kunstmatige die hij zelf voortbrengt. De magiër begrijpt echter het verband tussen schemata. met inbegrip van de natuurlijke magie.fysische of mechanische experimenten. In het kader van de klassificering van experimenten in hoofdstuk drie. Gedurende de verificatie van deze provisorische regels—de axioma’s worden immers regels zodra ze in de praktijk worden gebracht—wordt natuurlijke magie beoefend. Bacon beschouwde zijn project bij lange na niet voltooid. De intelligentie en werklust die nodig zijn om deze verbanden in te zien zijn de criteria waarop Bacon zijn lezers heeft geselecteerd en door wie hij begrepen wil worden. Een verdere bevestiging van de axioma’s vindt plaats zodra de regel ook wordt toegepast op objecten die nog niet eerder zijn bestudeerd. een groot aantal experimenten bewegen zich op het gebied dat volgens Bacon behoort tot de metafysica of magie. Dit is precies de reden waarom hij zich zo inspande om werkende modellen aan te leveren van alle disciplines. Zij bevatten verklaringen in termen van materiële oorzaken of werkoorzaken. Desalniettemin was hij ervan overtuigd dat de wetenschap vooruitgang kon boeken indien zijn onderzoekingen navolging zouden vinden. of althans dat is de stelling van deze dissertatie. of anders oppervlakkige manipulaties van lichamen. vooropgesteld natuurlijk dat de regels werken. Soms is het nodig om de verschillende experimenten met elkaar in verband te brengen om zodoende de diepgaande kennis te onderkennen die ze bevatten. zoals gebeurt in de overdracht van enkelvoudige modellen naar complexe dingen. Afhankelijk van hoe diep de natuurfilosoof graaft. kan hij provisorische kennis verwerven van vormen. Echter. 291 . naar die experimenten die onzichtbare processen zichtbaar maken. bevindt de natuurfilosofie zich in de overgang van experimenten die de veranderingen van lichamen gedurende een proces bestuderen. Samenvattend kan men de Sylva sylvarum derhalve lezen als een insructieboekje dat modellen en richtlijnen geeft over hoe de natuur bestudeerd en veranderd moet worden. Sanne and Hans.5/S/56668. who has been always available for yet another chapter. Maren. I owe special gratitude to the members of the Manuscript Committee.. above all. Erin. The actual form of this thesis is due to Christoph Lüthy’s ceaseless efforts in making me improve structure. Vivi. Dorina. Mihaela 292 . for their valuable comments on the first version of the dissertation. Simona. the PCE grant awarded by the CNCS. Cristi. and Oana. would not have been so nice without having around so many friends. both in Bucharest and Nijmegen. where I presented my papers and I received comments that influenced my thoughts and the character of this dissertation. Andrei. for the Dutch translation of the summary and Lucia for the lovely cover. Barnaby. Irina R. Grigore. The Foundation of Modern Thought (Bucharest) and the CELFIS (Bucharest). My short trips to Romania over the last years were made more beautiful by my friends Irina O. the Project ID 1600 awarded by the CNCS. Allison. Clare and. Becci. This dissertation was financially supported by the grants I received both in Bucharest and Nijmegen: the PhD project POSDRU/188/1. Christoph Lüthy. Very valuable were the conferences organized by the FME and CELFIS (in Romania or elsewhere). over and over again. Of course.. Their guidance and their availability to discuss and offer me advice whenever I had difficulties was indispensable for the completion of my thesis. 2012-2015 (PN-II-ID-PCE2011-3-0719). This long enterprise. under joined supervision together with Radboud University Nijmegen. with whom I discussed many of the ideas developed in this thesis. I would like to thank my supervisors. Iustina. argument and prose.Acknowledgements This dissertation started at the University of Bucharest and continued. 2009-2011. Ilie Pârvu and Dana Jalobeanu. Iulia. I furthermorewish to mention my colleagues from the Center for the History of Philosophy and Science (Nijmegen). and the PICNIC scholarship from Radboud University Nijmegen. I must also mention those friends who helped me with the English drafts: James. Thank you. Sorana. for their support throughout these years and for their patience in reading and correcting my drafts. Also my long sojourners in Nijmegen were warmed up by Marleen. from its second year onwards. First of all. Clare and Hiro. who. Davide. Lucian and Mădălina (in alphabetical order). The list would not be complete without naming my very dear friends Sanne. Finally. and. I wish to dedicate this dissertation to my sister. Michael. Sandra. I would like to thank my parents for their unconditioned support and continuous encouragement.and Ferdinand. in endless Skype conversations with Laura or Mădălina (or both) and on messenger with Lucian. my free time was spent in long lunches at the Refer with Andreea. I would like to mention here again Dana. who had done their best to cheer me up and make me spend a nice time. with whom I shared the office for better or worse. Olja. for believing in this dissertation even when I was not. 293 . with their encouragements. There remain friends. brightened up my days with emails and messages: Fabrizio. being far away wherever I was. Without you this long enterprise would have been more painful. I had close to me precious people who. Thus. Laura. Wim and Antonio. Barnaby and Juan. made everything less complicated than it seemed to me and who endured my frequent complaints: Andreea. Eugenia. In my difficult periods. Arjen. Gabriela. of course. As a consequence.Curriculum vitae Doina-Cristina Rusu was born in Bucharest on 12 March 1985. She studied Philosophy at the University of Bucharest. Spain. spending one year as an Erasmus student at the University of Salamanca. organizing. In 2007 she joined The Research Center on the Foundation of Modern Thoughts (University of Bucharest). During her studies. she became interested in early modern philosophy. where she got her BA and MA diplomas. with a dissertation about Francis Bacon. having as results her contribution to volumes of articles and translations of seventeenth-century texts. funded by the Romanian Research Council. She has been a member of two research projects. In her second year. her PhD dissertation became a co-tutelle between the two universities. 294 . participating and presenting papers in several colloquia and symposia. and in 2009 she started a PhD at the University of Bucharest. Doina-Cristina Rusujoined the Center for History of Philosophy and Science at Radboud University Nijmegen.