Abstract
When James Ussher, the Archbishop of Armagh and a man renowned for his learning, was called upon in 1654 to deliver John Selden’s funeral oration, he insisted that Selden was “so great a Scholar that [he] himself was scarce worthy to carry his books after him”. Nor was Ussher alone in such praise for Selden. Contemporaries both in England and the entire republic of European letters regarded Selden as one of the towering intellectuals of the seventeenth century. To Hugo Grotius, he was “the Glory of England”; to Sir Edward Sherburne the “Great Dictator of Learning in this Country”; to Thomas Gataker a “Polymateotatos”; to Gilbert Burnet “one of the greatest men that any age had produced”; and to John Lightfoot “the Learnedst man upon the earth”. As for his fellow members of the Long Parliament, they viewed Selden “somewhat in the light of a valuable piece of national property, like a museum, or a great public library”.1
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
R. Parr, The Life of… James Usher, Late Lord Arch-Bishop of Armagh (London, 1686), p. 75, hereafter cited as Parr, Usher. Hugo Grotius, De Jure Belli ac Pacis libri tres, trans. F. W. Kelsey 3 Vols. (Oxford, 1925) II.189 n.3; Edward Sherburne, The Sphere of Marcus Manilius made an English Poem (London, 1675) Appendix p. 94; Gilbert Burnet, The History of the Reformation of the Church of England, Nicholas Pocock (ed.), (Oxford, 1865) I.423; The Table Talk of John Selden, S. W. Singer (ed.), 2nd edition (London, 1856), p. lxxvi; John Lightfoot, The Harmony, Chronicle and Order of the Old Testament (London, 1647), sig. B3; Some years later, Colomesius expressed a similar view: “Selden etoit prodigieusement savant… C’est le plus grand homme que l’Angleterre ait jamais eu pour les Belles-Lettres”. Pauli Colomesii… Opera (Hamburg, 1709), p. 814.
The following remarks are drawn from — and elaborate upon — my The Mathematicians’ Apprenticeship: Science, Universities and Society in England, 1560–1640 (Cambridge, 1984). See also Michael R.G. Spiller, ‘Concerning Natural Experimental Philosophy’: Meric Casaubon and the Royal Society (The Hague, 1980); Michael Hunter, Science and Society in Restoration England (Cambridge, 1981); Michael Hunter, Science and Society in Restoration England (Cambridge, 1981), “Ancients, Moderns, Philologists, and Scientists”, Annals of Science, 39 (1982), 187–92.
J. Ben David, “Scientific Growth: A Sociological View”, Minerva II (1963–64) 464.
For a discussion of the movement, see W.E. Houghton, “The English Virtuoso in the Seventeenth Century”, JHI III (1942) 51–73, 190–219; R.L.-W. Caudil, “Some Literary Evidence of the Development of English Virtuoso Interests in the Seventeenth Century”, Oxford University, D. Phil. Thesis, 1975.
There is no adequate, full-length study of Selden. For general information, see DNB; J. Aikin, The Lives of John Selden, Esq. and Archbishop Usher (London, 1832); David S. Berkowitz, John Selden’s Formative Years (Washington, 1988).
As examples of his political power and influence we may mention the following instances. In 1648, Gerard Langbaine attributed to Selden alone the ability of Oxford to resist the Parliamentary Visitors for two whole years, while five years later Oliver Cromwell wanted Selden to compose the new English constitution. Similarly, both in Parliament and the Assembly of Divines, the mere prospect of facing Selden as an opponent was sufficient to instill fear in any potential adversary. J. Leland, Collectanea, T. Hearne (ed.), 5 Vols. (Oxford, 1774), V. 283; Blair Worden, The Rump Parliament (Cambridge, 1974), p. 339.
John Selden, Opera Omnia, D. Wilkins (ed.), 3 Vols, in 6 (London, 1726) I. lv.
W. D. Macray, Annals of the Bodleian Library Oxford, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1890), pp. 110–12, Bodleian Library, Ms. Selden 111, p. 123.
Diary of John Evelyn, H. B. Wheatley (ed.), 4 Vols. (London, 1906), III. 442.
F. J. M. Korsten, Roger North (1651–1734) Virtuoso and Essayist (Amsterdam, 1981), p. 270 n. 311.
In Selden’s dedication of De successionibus, Laud is lavishly praised as a “most wise, most splendid, and most unremitting protector of the doctrine and teaching of Christianity” and as “patron, and even the highest stimulator” of Hebraic studies in England. However, I could find no evidence to suggest that it was Laud who procured for Selden the Oxford seat in the Long Parliament. See H. R. Trevor-Roper, Archbishop Laud, 1573–1645 (New York, 1965), p. 337. Laud’s intervention seems to have benefitted the other candidate, Sir Thomas Roe. M. B. Rex, University Representation in England 1604–1690 (London, 1954), pp. 143–46.
Table Talk of John Selden, F. Pollock (ed.), (London, 1927), p. 10.
Selden, Opera, III. 1073.
Selden, Table Talk, p. 71.
John Aubrey, Brief Lives, A. Clark (ed.), 2 Vols. (Oxford, 1898), II. 221. I hope to deal with “Selden’s reputation as an Atheist” elsewhere.
Selden, Table Talk, p. 131.
John Milton, Complete Prose Works, 8 Vols. (New Haven 1953–84), I. 513.
Michael Drayton, Poly-Olbion (Oxford, 1961), p. viii*; Selden, Opera, III.1729.
Selden, Opera, III. 88.
Selden, Opera, III. 1072.
For the original Latin, see Selden, Opera, I. xlvii, The translation is by Aikin, Lives, p. 154. Also revealing is Selden’s “Galileo-like” rejoinder to Tillesley’s attack on History of Tythes: “Is there a syllable in it of less truth because I was sorry for the publishing of it?” Selden, Opera, III. 1371.
Table Talk, p. 88.
Selden H, Opera, III. 1073. Significantly, Milton, who also shared the conviction that heresies were the work of ignorant clerics, was unwilling to follow the argument to the logical conclusion drawn by Selden, i.e., “the very idea of heresy and blasphemy as punishable offence” is to be abolished. C. Hill, Milton and the English Revolution (London, 1977), p. 102.
See P. Christianson, “Young John Selden and the Ancient Constitution, ca. 1610–18”, Proc. American Phil. Soc. cxxviii (1984), 271–315.
Selden, Opera, III. 1450.
Selden’s obscure style and manner of presentation was commented on by many. Bolingbroke called him an “over-learned writer”, The Works of Lord Bolingbroke, 4 Vols. (London, 1844), iv. 206; Less charitable authors included LeClerc, who at times could be quite vicious, Aikin, Lives, pp. 193–95; and Colomesius who “civilly’ wrote: “il ecrivoit d’une maniere un pue degoutante”, Opera, op. cit. p. 814.
Table Talk, p. 131.
Table Talk, p. 88.
Baconiana, or Certaine Genuine Remains of Sr. Francis Bacon (London, 1679), pp. 203–4; D. R. Woolf, “John Selden, John Borough and Francis Bacon’s History of Henry VII, 1621”, HLQ, XLVII (1984), 47–53.
Cal. State Pap. Dom. Charles I, 1635–36, p. 445.
Remarks and Collections of Thomas Hearne, C. E. Doble, D. W. Rannie, H. E. Salter (eds.), 11 Vols. (Oxford, 1885–1921), I. 81.
For Selden’s library catalogue, see Bodl. Ms Selden 111.
Selden, Opera, II. 888, 867.
Drayton, Poly-Olbion, pp. 300–301; Selden, Opera, III. 1850.
Selden, Opera, III. 104. Selden used the term as early as 1612 in his notes to the Poly-Olbion, the second recorded usage in the OED.
Selden, Opera, I. 77–78, 221–25.
Selden, Opera, I. 974, 979, 1076–78.
For Bedwell, see A. Hamilton, William Bedwell, the Arabist (Leyden, 1984); The quotation from Golius is in J. Brugman, “Arabic Scholarship”, in Leyden University in the Seventeenth Century (Leyden, 1975), p. 208.
Bodl. Ms. Tanner 72 f. 211.
Parr, Usher, p. 370.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 108, f. 230; Trinity College Dublin, Ms. 382, f. 92. Bainbridge cooperated on matters mathematical with Selden as early as 1617, for Selden acknowledged his gratitude to Bainbridge for his transcription of manuscripts in the possession of Sir Henry Savile. Selden. Opera, III. 1415.
The Miscellaneous Works of John Greaves, T. Birch (ed.), 2 Vols. (London, 1737), I. xxxiii, lxvii, 179; II. 365. Various manuscripts of Selden contain notes and comments by Greaves. See, for example, Mss. Arch. A. 1 f. 83; A.8 f.iii
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109, fols. 278a, 278c; Ms. Seld. Supra 79 contains Twyne’s transcripts of Dee and Allen manuscripts.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109, fols. 52, 74, 243.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109, fols. 397–99v; “The Life of… Dr. Edward Pocock”, in The Theological Works of the Learned Dr. Pocock, L. Twells (ed.), 2 Vols. (London, 1740), I. 7–55, passim.
A. Kippis ed. Biographia Britannica 6 Vols. (London, 1747–66) V. 3621–22.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 151.
Selden, Table Talk, p. 146.
Bodl. Ms. Arch. Seld. B.3; Ms. Seld. Supra 111, p. 123.
F. Manuel, Isaac Newton, Historian (Cambridge, Mass., 1963), p. 13.
Parr, Usher, passim; Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109, fols. 93, 174–75v, 184, for Ussher; Ms. Supra 108 fols. 107a–107av, Bodl. Ms. Smith 74 fols. 165–66; W. Camden, Epistolae (London, 1691), pp. 385–87; Selden, Opera, III. 1696–1706, for Peiresc, whom Selden elsewhere styled as “my worthy and learned friend”, III. 93.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109 fols. 258–270; Many of Cudworth’s notes are kept in Selden’s copy of Kepler’s Astronomia nova, Bodl. shelf mark A. 1. 2 Med. Seld.
Sherburne, Manilius, App. p. 94.
Aikin, Lives, p. 14; Selden, Opera I. 1707.
Sheffield University Library, Hartlib Papers, “Ephemerides”, 1654 RR-RR7, quoted by the kind permission of their owner, Lord Delamere.
Selden’s high esteem for Bacon can be found in virtually all his works.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 108, f. 78.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109, fols. 376, 380, 434–36, 444; In 1653 Ussher also sent Selden an optical manuscript by Bacon he had purchased for the large sum of £8 out of Sir John Heydon’ library, Hartlib, “Ephemerides” 1653, EE-EE6. See also David S. Berkowitz, “rojects for a Biography and Edition of John Selden’s Works, 1654–1766”, Quaerendo, 4 (1974), 256.
Selden, Opera, III. 1080; M. A. Ziskind, “John Selden: Humanist Jurist”, Univ. of Chicago Ph.D. dissertation, 1972, pp. 226–27.
Selden, Table Talk, p. 84.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109, fols. 407, 456; C. H. Josten, Elias Ashmole (1617–1692), 5 Vols. (Oxford, 1966), II. 641, 653. Ashmole had such a high opinion of Selden that he commissioned his portrait and later bequeathed it to Oxford, R. L. Poole, Catalogue of Portraits in the possession of the University, City and Colleges of Oxford, 3 Vols. (Oxford, 1912), I. 179.
Selden, Opera, III. 87.
Robert Fludd and his Philosophicall Key, A. G. Debus (ed.), (New York, 1979), p. 73; The presentation volume is in the Bodleian, shelf mark S.1.20 Jur. Seld.
Selden, Opera, III. 1718–19.
Hearne, Collections, II. 277; VIII. 187.
H. Schneider, Joachim Morsius und sien kreis (Lubeck, 1929), p. 103.I Jan 1619.
Selden, Opera, III. 960
Selden, Opera, III. 1430–31
Selden, Table Talk, p. 34.
E. J. Aiton, “Johannes Kepler in the light of recent research”, Hist. Sci. XIV (1976), 78.
The manuscript was delivered via the English Ambassador at the Hague (and Selden’s friend) William Boswell, but by the time it arrived Salmasius’s book had already been published. See Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 108, fols. 41, 35. The manuscript originally belonged to John Dee and was given c. 1617 to Selden by John Pontoys. It is now Bodl. Ms. Arch. Seld. B.19.
The Last of the Astrologers, K. M. Briggs (ed.), (London, 1974), p. 45.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 108, fols. 228, 180. The transcripts are Ms. Seld. Supra 121.
Bodl. Ms. Seld. Supra 109, fols. 384, 325, 291, 283. Feingold, The Mathematicians’ Apprenticeship, p. 156 n. 190.
A. R. Hall, The Revolution in Science, new edition (London & New York, 1983), p. 180.
Witness the following praise of the Rambam: “Moses Maimonides tam Physices ac Mathematices quam Theologiae ac Jurisprudentiae Judicae magister quidem eximius”, Selden, Opera, I. 437.
Of the few general studies on laws of nature, mention should be made of E. Zilsel, “The Genesis of the Concept of Physical Law”, Phil. Rev. LI (1942), 245–79; J. Needham, Science and Civilisation in China, Vol. 2 (Cambridge, 1962), 518–83; John R. Milton, “The Origin and Development of the Concept of the ‘Laws of Nature’,” Arch. Europ. Sociol., XXII (1981), 173–95; Jane E. Ruby, “The Origins of Scientific ‘Law’”, JHI, XL VII (1986), 341–59. For divergent versions concerning Selden’s views on laws of nature in the political and legal spheres, see Richard Tuck, Natural Right Theories: Their Origin and Development (Cambridge, 1979); J. P. Sommerville, “John Selden, the Law of Nature, and the Origins of Government”, The Historical Journal, XXVII (1984), 437–47.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1991 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Feingold, M. (1991). John Selden and the Nature of Seventeenth-Century Science. In: Bienvenu, R.T., Feingold, M. (eds) In the Presence of the Past. Archives Internationales d’Histoire des Idées / International Archives of the History of Ideas, vol 118. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3764-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3764-5_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-5675-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-3764-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive