Tr: Myth on the other hand, forsook the lower realm of reality, rose with the rhythm of poetry, and became, on the tragic stage, the medium of ideal creations. Though the practical aims of direct instruction and improvement were foreign to it, it had already in the Epic, implied deep secrets of nature, even under frivolous imagery, as in the story about Ares [Mars] and Aphrodite [Venus]. We must not be surprised, therefore, that even Plato loved to set forth the highest results of his philosophizing in myths…“Here mythological poetry touched the highest truth”136. “Plato spoke many a serious word in myth”137.

¹³⁶ Plutarch’s words in de genio Socratis p. 589. F.

¹³⁷ The emperor Julian: see the beginning of his Caesares.

the Mythe of Mars and Venus: Cited by Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 114 as Ares and Aphrodite; Odyssey VIII 266ff. Cf CN III 3708.

f61^v Journey of Jove…River Oceanos: See 4794 f34^v and n. Creuzer Symbolik (1810– 12) I 115 cites the passage in the Iliad I 422–4 as an example of myth abandoning the instantaneous wholeness of symbols and flowing out into allegory, for Coleridge mixt Symbols. Cf Iliad XXIII 205 and Odyssey I 23.

eighth Incarnation of Krishna…Bhogovotgita as translated by Fr.

Schlegel: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 117–18:

Tr: The great significance of the idea of a World Soul running through all things and connecting them in Ionian philosophy is well-known and that the ancient Orient exerted itself to realise this in physical symbols may be inferred from its whole way of thinking. A fortunate example of a characteristically Oriental expression of this may be seen in a passage from an Indian poem which is as beautiful as it is significant.

Krishna, or Vishnu in his eighth incarnation, under the name Bhagavan, reassures a hero with the doctrine of the unchanging eternal One, saying…

Creuzer quotes from the poem in German, giving as his source Friedrich Schlegel Über die Sprache und Weisheit der Indier (Heidelberg 1808) 303. Coleridge’s translation into English transposes lines 4 and 5 and omits the first half of line 6, replacing it with his own I, the God-Man, am Center and Circle Too! He uses the German spelling of the title Bhogovotgita (Creuzer Symbolik—1810–12–1 118) rather than the usual English transliteration Bhagavad-Gita. For an earlier discussion of the poem from Charles Wilkins’s translation see Lect 3 P Lects (CC) ff85–88.

“In Adam we all die”: 1 Cor 15:22.

The Caterpillar & Butterfly…: See f62 below.

“Hast thou seen me, Philip…: John 14:9 var.

Tautegory: See above 4711 and n.

golden chain…Speech of Homer’s Jupiter: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 116–18 8 cites this passage from Homer (Iliad VIII 17–26) as an example of a philosopheme conveyed by a series of symbols together constituting a myth or allegory; this is contrasted with the use of multiple independent symbols, each representing the same thing, as in the passage from the Bhagavad-Gita.

what had been an Allegory will become a Symbol: See 4711 and n.

Florentine Gem…picture-language: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 133–4:

Tr: Gems offer the best examples of the connection between symbol and allegory. On them appear symbolic beings, long hallowed by the faith of antiquity and recognized by public opinion, set forth with such attributes or accomplishing such deeds or placed in such situations as relate to some other deep or significant truth. Amor appears with the spoils of Hercules or he carries the globe.¹⁶⁵

¹⁶⁵ Or Eros and Anteros hold it, as in the Florentine Museum….

the Fish (the Free-mason Symbol (of the early Christians): Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 241–2:

Tr: It [the fish of the Christians] is generally recognized as a mere acronym from the initial letters of the words

[“Jesus Christ Son of God Saviour”] out of which was fashioned IXΘYΣ [FISH]…

Abraxas gems & medals of the Gnostics & Basilidians: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 242n:

Tr: Here the so-called Abraxes must be considered briefly. They were long held to be ancient Egyptian works, but a thorough examination proved that they were devices of the Gnostics and Basilidians by which members of these sects recognized other members of the group.

The Cross at first: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 243.

Mnemosynon historicum: “historical memento”.

as the Tau in far elder times: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 332–5 points out that the Tau was a very ancient Egyptian symbol about which there has been a wide divergence of opinion, ranging from the theory that it represented a phallus to the Patristic theory that it was a symbol of the true cross. Creuzer adds that it was thought to be a symbol of the four seasons and might have come from India.

f62 Psyche,=anima & papilio: “Psyche=soul and butterfly”; cf CN III 3264 and n. Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 130–31 summarized the reasons that the Greeks symbolized the soul by the butterfly, as suggesting the free imaginative flight of the mind and the breaking forth from the cocoon a resurrection from death. See PW I 412.

a dusky female…known…to be Africa: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 148:

Tr: Among these we may consider the coins, especially under Hadrian, which so frequently depict a female figure with a scorpion in her hand or with a head-dress of elephant hide, known to the Romans as an image of Africa.

the Lily between Joseph & Mary…garment than Blue: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 155–6:

Tr: Modern painting has often madethe choice of colours very meaningful…. The white lily growing out of the earth between Mary and Joseph represents by its colour the purity of this union, if indeed this poetic idea has really been used by any artist. But it appears to be an invariable convention of painting that conveys a message that the garment of Mary, as queen of heaven, be blue.

Lorenzo’s White, Green, Crimson: Among the numerous Lorenzos in the history of Italian painting, a likely candidate for Coleridge’s reference is Don Lorenzo Monaco, or Don Lorenzo degli Angeli (c 1370–1425), a monk of the Militant Order of the Virgin Mother of Christ living in the Monastery of the Angeli in Florence. He was noted for his many frescoes of the life of Mary painted in brilliant colours; some of them, like the one in the Bartolini Chapel in the Church of S.Trinità in Florence, were famous. “Lorenzo the Monk” is commonly referred to as “Don Lorenzo” without any of the various additional designations of family or city given to other Lorenzos. Coleridge could have seen much of his work in Florence although many frescoes had been destroyed even by his time.

Osvald Sirén in his study of Don Lorenzo Monaco (Strassburg 1905) stresses Don Lorenzo’s deep religious feeling and his lyrical portrayal of the inner life in frescoes and miniatures in which colour was painstakingly applied to enhance meaning; but he does not specifically suggest allegory. Was that Coleridge’s interpretation? In some undated notes on “Beauty and the Beautiful” in Egerton MS 2800 f69 he touched on the “subtle and difficult, yet I would fain believe not hopeless investigation …respecting the symbolical characters or Significancy of Colors. But for this I am not prepared—I can merely glimpse it from the Mount Pisgah in the distance”.

συμβολαια or pæne-Symbols: Coleridge translates the Greek word as “almost symbols”.

Symbols evince the tact of the Poet: For the reading tact, two alternatives have been suggested, i.e., fact, or †act, that is a footnote dagger before the word act; the latter presents the difficulty of uncertain reference for the dagger. The reading tact is at least equally satisfactory graphically, and more Coleridgian in nuance. Cf a note on Aeschylus Prometheus vinctus line 17, in C.J.Blomfield’s edition (CM I 27) where Coleridge said the word seems to my tact too free and easy a word …”, a clear reference to poetic tact. And see the well-known more emphatic “A great Poet must be, implicitè if not explicitè, a profound Metaphysician. He may not have it in logical coherence, in his Brain & Tongue, but he must have it by Tact/ for all sounds & forms of human nature, he must have the ear of a wild Arab listening in the silent Desert, the eye of a North American Indian tracing the footsteps of an Enemy upon the Leaves that strew the

Forest—; the Touch of a Blind Man feeling the face of a darling Child—….” To William Sotheby 13 July 1802: CL II 810.

4833 29.89 Irritability is frequently discussed in this volume as vital electricity. This entry clearly preceded the material on irritability in 5150, 5189; see also 5168 and n.

Durchbruch, Perruptio,Three words for “break-through”. See CN III 4409 § 12 for another use of the first.

Huber on Bees: Ditto on Ants: Coleridge apparently did not realize there were two Hubers, François (1750–1831) the father, whose Nouvelles observations sur les abeilles (1792) appeared in English translation in 1806, and his son, Pierre (1777–1840), whose work on ants, Recherches sur les moeurs des fourmis indigènes (1810), appeared in English translation in 1820 as The Natural History of Ants. To this latter Coleridge most frequently referred, but in AR 212–14 he described an experiment by François with bees, and quoted immediately from Pierre’s book on ants, as by one and the same author. See the same confusion of Hubers in SM:LS (CC) 19 n1.

In a note in the front fly-leaves of Tennemann II, Coleridge enlarged on the form of words here: “The Reason is Anthropomorph, partaking of the Divine: the Understanding an Anthropomorph, partaken of by inferior animals—vide Huber on Bees: and Ditto on Ants” Pierre Huber in his Preface accorded to insects “a sufficient degree of intelligence for the conduct of their domestic affairs”, and said: “Ants, living as they do in society, and entering upon labours that require some degree of unanimity—have they no means of understanding and making known their wants and their situation to their companions?” François Huber’s work described the intelligent orderliness of the community life of bees; and Huber the son suggested in his Natural History of Ants that ants carry still further the “understanding” and “mutual assistance” essential to family and civic life.

the Beaver, the Sea-cow, the Dugong, Manati: All are herbivorous water-mammals.

Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles, Governor of Sumatra, wrote a letter to Sir Everard Home which was read 18 May 1820 to the Royal Society, the account of a dissection of a dugong—a sea mammal—its food being fuci and submarine algae and vegetables found at the bottom of shallow inlets. It “browses upon these vegetables much in the same manner as a cow in a meadow”. “The affection of the mother for its young is strongly marked; and the Malays make frequent allusion to this animal as an example of maternal affection”. Phil Trans (1820) DX 174–82.

In the next volume of the Transactions another letter to Sir Everard Home described the manatee of the West Indies, a species of dugong, larger, living at mouths of big rivers, but its food also fuci. Phil Trans DXI 390–1. The dugong was said to taste like roast beef.

Some of this material was published also in QJSLA (Jan 1822) XII 370.

4834 29.90 For an early entry on John Brown, see CN I 389 and n. See CN III 4269 and n for a slur on Brown, and in this volume see below 5142 and n, and 5360n. The reference to The Doctrine of Death to which Coleridge objects appeared in The Elements of Medicine: Works of John Brown (3 vols 1804) II 49: pt I Chap III § 29:

The termination of excitement, from the exhaustion of the excitability by stimulus, may be either temporary or irreparable, and may arise either from a short continuance of a high degree of stimulus, or a long application of one, the excess of which is more moderate. Both circumstances come to the same thing; the high degree of stimulus compensating for the shortness of its application, and the shortness of its application for its greater moderation in degree. The effect of the former is sudden death; of the latter, a more gradual death, preceded by diseases. And though a most exact measure of excitement were kept up, yet death at last, however late, supervenes.

plumbëian Despotism: plumbean, “leaden”; OED says “obsolete”.

Data, non Intellecta: “Given, not Understood”.

4835 29.91 Though the entry begins as an offshoot from the argument against John Brown in 4834 it is in part (f64^v on) a digest of Schelling on the “Allgemeine Deduction des dynamischen Processes oder den Categorieen der Physik” III, esp §§ 6–20 in Zeitschrift für spekulativ Physik I i 104–19, and in the end becomes an essay on the dynamics of the imagination in the process of identifying itself in the world within and, as Kant enjoined, in the world without. Some blurred pencilled marginalia in Coleridge’s copy at this point appear to take issue with Schelling, but because of the state of the MS they add little to this entry.

f63^v two kinds of Unity, the negative and the positive: Cf C&S (CC) 118–19 n 2, on “unity” and “distinctity”. See That negative Unity, or Allness which arises from the confusion & indistinction of a Multitude of Thoughts…in 4909 f69^v.

f64 Space: Cf the end of CN I 1379, “The Hebrews called God ‘Space’”.

unimage-ableness…the first contra-distinction of the negative from the positive Unities: I.e. the familiar Fancy-Imagination distinction in terms approaching a theistical context.

nihil ad hoc: “nothing to this”.

abstraction: See 4538,4657, 4910, 5133 and nn for Coleridge’s approaches to this subject from many directions. See also The Friend (CC) I 520 n 5.

f64^v punctum Indifferentiæ…Punct[um] Identitatis: Cf on “the point of indiffer0ence” 4705. On “Polarity, or the essential dualism of Nature” see a discussion bearing closely and variously on this entry in TL 51–7.

the Line…a thing produced…: See 4513 and n.

Each line is for itself a bipolar Integral; On the dynamic principle of individuation treated in TL 42 foll.

the Electrical Evolution: Schelling ibid § 20 p 119; see TL 66–7, 87, 90–1.

f65 as Form (forma formans) to Shape (forma apparens): See e.g. CN III 4066 and n, 5217 f81^v, and Logic (CC) 231–2 fn.

4836 29.92 Miss Booth: Possibly a relative of Sir Felix Booth (1775–1850), who was later to assist Parry in his polar explorations. He occupied Crouch Hall in Highgate, according to Lloyd’s History of Highgate. In April 1819 Coleridge tried to borrow from a “Miss B” a volume of an encyclopaedia containing an article on fluxions; see 4797 above and n; but see also 4606n.

Arminian Pelagian: Arminianism opposed Calvinist determinism, i.e. “predestination”, stressing instead the freedom of the will; Pelagianism denied original sin and tended therefore to minimize the influence of divine Grace in favour of man’s own responsibility for his own salvation. See also 5056, 5378 and nn.

Miss Booth appears to have gone beyond Pelagianism to argue that external circumstances rather than the individual, temptations rather than temptibility are the source of moral evil.

The view: I.e. of God’s relation to the individual and to society? See 4708, 4794 on the Nation.

f66 mutato nomine: “by a change of name”.

483722.160 Sir William Curtis (1752–1829), a prosperous but everywhere ridiculed alderman, represented various wards in London, and was also M.P. in various seats almost continuously from 1790 to 1826.

Coleridge’s squib may have had to do with an episode in 1821 when, for reasons of pride, Curtis, as becoming the Senior Alderman of London, exchanged his representation of the Tower ward, which he had held since 1785, for that of Bridge Without. Coleridge met him in Ramsgate in 1822 (CL V 257). An unlearned, vain, and ostentatious man, he was at the centre of Tory city politics and the butt of innumerable jibes for over thirty years. There are for Coleridge broader implications; see 4707, 5278 and nn.

4838 29.213 Faults on both sides…Honest Tory—Second Edition. London. 1710: The 56-page pamphlet is generally believed to have been by Robert Harley, as W.Scott suggested in his edition of Somers Tracts (1809–15) XII 678, though he admits the possibility also of Defoe. It was a reply to Thoughts of an Honest Tory by the Whig pamphleteering latitudinarian, Benjamin Hoadly, which attacked the Tory measures and ministers of Queen Anne. The reply by Harley was intended to support the incoming government in 1710, by arguing, in the pages Coleridge cites, the stability of public credit regardless of changes of ministry. (Coleridge had in 1821 read Hoadly’s provocative Thoughts, possibly in Somers Tracts, see Inq Sp § 256 and n.) Faults, it is clear, he read in its pamphlet form. (Cf EOT (CC) III 262).

Coleridge was interested in paper money and the whole subject of credit (see CN III 4101 and n) and had written on the subject in the Courier in 1811. See a good note in LS (CC) 205n where it is pointed out that not till about the time of this entry (probably 1821) was the return to gold as the basis of currency effected. See 5265, 5330 and nn.

His remarks sufficiently and accurately indicate the contents of the pages 37–41 he cites; it seems unnecessary to quote them.

who do not themselves eat Onions: Cf Bottom’s injunction, “eat no onions nor garlic, for we are to utter sweet breath”: Midsummer Night’s Dream IV ii 43.

Coleridge transcribed excerpts from Hoadly’s pamphlet Thoughts of an Honest Tory (1710), a fragment in BM MS Egerton 2800 f136; see for the text EOT (CC) III 262.

4839 29.214 Coleridge continued to condense and abstract from Creuzer Symbolik und Mythologie der alten Völker but now in the 6-vol revised edition of 1819–23; see 4831 and 4856 and nn.

Egypt according to Herodotus…introduced into Greece: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) II 282:

Tr: Egypt, according to the conviction of Herodotus, was the fatherland of the most important religious practices; the Greeks derived most of their temple divinities from there, and learned from the Egyptians the greater part of their religious ceremonies (11 50–58).

Perizonius…Pausanias, Corinth. 38.4: Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 284:

Tr: First we note the Argive colony from Egypt. If the oldest legends about the Inachidae—about Io, Epaphus, and others—are still hidden in the obscurities of history, those about Danaus are much more certain. This man from Chemmis brought higher culture and civilisation, tillage of the soil, besides divine worship and religious practices to the then wild and desolate region of Argos. In connexion with the latter, I need cite only the Lernaea, an ancient festival connected with wine and agriculture, the founder of which, according to tradition, was Danaus (Perizonius de Origg. Aegyptt. Cap XVI p. 327); and the ’Aπóβαθμοι [Landings], where this Egyptian colonist landed with his children, remained a memorable place in the living traditions of the Argives (Pausanias Corinth. 38, § 4).

who likewise speaks…Megarenses of Lelex: Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 284 (tr): “Likewise, the tradition of the Megarenses recognises Lelex, also of Egypt, as their ancestor”.

Confirmations of Herodotus…ritualibus: Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 283:

Tr: The agreement of the Biblical records in reporting the great antiquity of Egyptian religious institutions is shown in the evidences given by Spencer de Legg. Hebr. rituall. II Diss. I. Sect. 2.

our Spencer: I.e. John Spencer (1630–93), Master of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.

Plutarch’s Objections…: Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 283:

Tr: Plutarch gives the opposite view in the main passage in de malign. Herod. p. 857, D.E.Apart from the polemical intent of this whole work, we ask whether the literary authorities here adduced are adequate to refute the Father of History and whether the grounds of objection are historically reliable. Indeed, when we note the contents of other works by Plutarch, we are left with much to ponder—But on the other hand, it should also not be forgotten in this respect that Herodotus drew much from the traditions of the priests of Dodona and that this body of priests had an interest in Egyptianising Greece as fully as possible (cf Heerens’ well-conceived suggestions in his Ideas on Politics, etc., 11 p. 462).

I knew the man: Arnold Hermann Ludwig Heeren (1760–1842) was professor of philology when Coleridge was at Göttingen, and then of history in 1801. The work referred to is Ideen über die Politik, den Verkehr, und den Handel der υornehmsten Völker der alten Welt (3 vols Göt-tingen 1793–1812).

Thrace. Samo-Thrace…: Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 284–6:

Tr: Furthermore, the Thracian and Samothracian colonies must be considered here, i.e. the legends about Orpheus and other teachers who are adduced as pupils of Egyptian priests (Diodor. Sicul. I. 92–96). See also Herodotus II 81…who speaks explicitly of the identity of what the Greeks called Orphic and Egyptian…. This viewpoint, to be sure, contradicts not only the more general poetic convention of depicting Thrace as an uncivilised, barbaric land but also the assertions of historians…that the European barbarians were uncivilised, specifically the Thracians, and that the so-called Orphic wisdom is spurious. These assertions are involved with the question of the origins of the family of the Eumolpidae, and in this respect a party arose which would claim the most ancient religious rites for the Athenians and even deny that the Eleusinian came from Thrace. But let us compare these opinions with the information from Herodotus (II 51) concerning the religious instruction which the Athenians had from the Pelasgi, who later lived on Samothrace…. Thrace and Samothrace are still one of the oldest seats of foreign religions, which were thence transplanted southward among the Greeks, despite the fact that the der-ivation of the term θρησκεία “religious rite”, from the Thracians is known to be a mere invention of the grammarians and actually has its origin in the muffled tone of the muttered prayer later connected with the idea of a superstitious formula in a religious service.³

³ See T.Hemsterhuis in Lennep. Etymolog. ling. gr. p. 258 seq…

f123 The Attic Colony…: Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 286–7.

Tr: The Attic colony…. Read the significant passage in Proclus In Platon. Tim. page 30 giving the various opinions of Theopompus, Callisthenes, and Phanodemus.4 But in Attica the name of the Saitic Cecrops appears along with many others, and in national legends and continuing poetic traditions became the representation of Egyptian-Attic culture—variously embellished, but the historical foundation of this remains unobscured.

⁴ The two latter historians derive the Saitae from the Athenians, while

Theopompus calls the Athenians settlersat Sais. Charax, however, asserts (in agreement with the Egyptians—see Diod. II 28) that the Athenians were colonists from the Saitae and that Sais was the Egyptian name for Athena, whose Egyptian origin some have tried to prove from the symbol of a crocodile which the goddess had on the Acropolis…

The Pelasgic Colony…: As in Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 287. Here Coleridge ceased in this entry to follow Creuzer, giving his own counter-theory about the relation between Egypt and Athens; cf 4507 and n.

Greeks were all Japetidae: I.e. descendants of Japheth, son of Noah; see 4548, 4668, 4866, 4984 and nn, on “Races”. See also Lect 8 P Lects (CC) ff356–359.

f122^v The Welch Triads: The “Brut Tysilio”, “Brut y Brenhinoedd”, and “Brut Gruffyd ab Arthur” are not, as was once thought, documents of Welsh history but rather adaptations from the Historia Regum Britan-niae of Geoffrey of Monmouth. Coleridge may have first encountered the Triades in the Poems (II 2) of his friend Edward Williams; see CN I 605 and n, 1596n.

f122 refined and raised the allegorical…into the proper Symbolic: See 4551 and n. “men of the race”.

ιερα γραμματα: “sacred letters”, i.e. hieroglyphics.

per simplicem Intuitum: “by the mere looking at”.

Jupiter of Phidias: See 5280 and n.

Apollo Belvidere: Like the Jupiter, a stock example of great classical sculpture, taken by many to be also a work of the 5th century, it came, however, with the increasing knowledge of the true classical style, to be recognized as a Roman copy of a Hellenistic bronze. Coleridge may have seen it in Rome.

(τo ειδωλικον): “the visual/imagistic”; cf the extract from N25 in 4831n; see also 4832 and n.

paramouncy: Also “paramountcy”. OED attributes to Coleridge in a note on Volpone the second instance of the usage, the first since 1667.

Belzoni and others…Temple of Tentyra: G.Belzoni Narrative of the Operations and Recent Discoveries within the Pyramids, Temples, Tombs, and Excavations in Egypt and Nubia (2 vols 1822) I 53, describing “the noted Temple of Tentyra”:

I should have no scruple in saying, that it is of a much later date than many others. The superiority of the workmanship gives us sufficient reason to suppose it to be of the time of the first Ptolemy; and it is not improbable, that he, who laid the foundation of the Alexandrian library, instituted the philosophical society of the Museum, and studied to render himself beloved of his people, might erect such an edifice, to convince the Egyptians of his superiority of mind over the ancient kings of Egypt, even in religious devotion.

Cf CN III 4317 and n.

my own Reading from Vossius and Bochart to Gebelin…Dupuis, Creuzer; Gerhard Johann Voss or Vossius (1577–1649). A copy of Samuel Bochart Geographia Sacra (3 vols 1681) is listed as Coleridge’s in Green SC 248; see also 4507. On Gebelin see CN III 3276 and n. Of Antoine Banier and Jacob Bryant we do not know which works Coleridge read but of the former probably The Mythology and Fables of the Ancients explain’d from History (4 vols 1739–40) and of Bryant probably A New System, or, as Analysis of Ancient Mythology (3rd ed 6 vols 1807). On Dupuis see CN I Index I and above 4794 f34 and n; also CL I 260.

f121^v προπαιδειον: “prediscipline”; see 5121.

learnt under FICHTE…emancipated by Schelling: Creuzer was a student at Jena when Fichte lectured there in 1790–91; his debt to Schelling’s philosophy was recognized even in his own day.

Fichtean pan-egoistic Idealism: See e.g. CN III 4012n.

study of the Greek and Italian Neo-platonists: Creuzer’s marked attention to the Greek Neoplatonists rather than to earlier sources was seen by many as a fault; he refers rarely to the Italian Neoplatonists, though he praises Ficino’s contribution, Symbolik (1819–23) I 236.

πρωτον ψευδος: ψευδoς: “primary error”; it is true that Creuzer’s Schellingian assumption is carried through most of Book I “Allgemeine Beschreibung des symbolischen und mythischen Kreises”, Symbolik (1819–23) I 3–239. In Chap 1 he appears to assume that Greek polytheism existed from re-motest antiquity; not until Chap V (I 150–6) does he suggest the possibility of an antecedent monotheism.

Congener…degener: congener, naturalised into English from Latin, basically means “akin to and equal with”, while degener means “akin to but inferior to/degenerated from”. Congener appears to be Coleridge’s coinage; OED gives an 1837 date for its first use, while degener is given there as a verb (obs) only.

Inachus, Cecrops: Inachus was the first of the mythical colonists from Egypt, son of Ocean and father of Io; see above f123n. For Cecrops see f123 above in text. Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) II 35 traces him also from Egyptian myth to Athenian and discusses his semi-divine and mythical attributes, identifying him with the moon.

Brotherhood of Jupiters, and Herculeses: Bryant, e.g., (op cit above) said that according to Tertullian’s Apology 14, Varro mentioned three hundred Jupiters and forty heroes named Hercules.

f121 Albert Durer’s…Scripture-history Pictures: I.e. Apocalypse (1498), Great Passion (1510), Life of the Virgin (1510), The Fall (1504), The Nativity (1504), Small Passion (1511), Engraved Passion (1513), Agony in the Garden (1515), Four Apostles (1526).

anachronism of Hector who quotes Galen & Aristotle: The reference to Aristotle is in Troilus and Cressida II ii 165–7, to Galen in Coriolanus II i 129–30.

flourishing state of the Mathematical Sciences: Prometheus υinctus line 459: “I invented number for them, chiefest of the sciences”.

Pythoness: The priestess of Apollo at Delphi; Aeschylus in Prometheus vinctus line 658 has Inachus consulting oracles at Delphi and Dodona, though according to a scholiast on that line oracles did not then exist. Hesione was the wife of Prometheus, line 560; Coleridge may have assumed that she was the same Hesione as the daughter of Laomedon, King of Troy.

προσπασσαλεvtion…Caucasus: “being nailed to” the rock. Cf Prometheus υinctus 20, where the scene of the play is set as “a desolate crag” in the “Scythian tract”; later versions of the myth name it as the Caucasus. Prometheus 707–19 foll foretells Io’s future wanderings, “east from this spot” to “the Scythian nomads”, (“until you come to Caucasus itself…).

Shem, Ham, & Japhet…: See f123 above.

πατροπαραδοτα: “patriarchal traditions”; cf 4832 f61^v and n.

f120^v Λογοι εν μυθοις: “truths in myths”; see 4832 f6o and n.

μεμυθε [υ] μενα: “ideas expressed in myths”; cf again 4832 f61 and n.

συμβολα: “symbols”.

laic, templar and mysterial: St Clement makes this distinction, as does Creuzer

Symbolik (1819–23) I 150–95.

my letters to Hartley Coleridge: Perhaps not entirely lost; see 4843n.

θεανθρωπομυeme: “god-man-myth-eme”.

Prometheus: The Prometheus of Aeschylus was the subject of Coleridge’s lecture to the Royal Society of Literature, 18 May 1825.

Cupid and Psyche: Apuleius The Golden Ass 4.28–6.24 is the earliest surviving version. (Apuleius was born c A.D. 123)

4840 29.216 The entry preceded 4841 on the page, ff120^v and 120 having been left blank; see 4839n. There appears to have been no great gap in time.

the Hollowness—how any thing at all can be!: The insight has, as frequently with Coleridge, a personal basis; see “I feel my Hollowness” in CN II 2647, and “even in boyhood there was a cold hollow spot, an aching in that heart, when I said my prayers that prevented my entire union with God” in 5275, where the whole entry is illuminating.

the Being of God…the Existence of the Supreme Being: In many places (see above 4713 and n) Coleridge makes the distinction between Being [Essence?] and Existence, seeming to support Herbert Read’s contention of Coleridge’s anticipation of existentialist thinking. Coleridge as Critic (1949) 29–30.

4841 29.215 The entry encountered 4840 on ƒ119^v and continued below it.

Coleridge was referring to and quoting from Otto von Kotzebue A Voyage of Discovery into the South Sea and Beering’s Straits, for the purpose of exploring a North- East Passage, undertaken in the years 1815–18 tr H.E.Lloyd (3 vols 1821) I 241, 246–7, 219, 280, 283–4. Quotation marks are inserted, when Coleridge omitted them, to differentiate his comments from Kotzebue’s narrative; he quoted selectively and not literatim, sometimes condensing. E.g. Coleridge’s parenthetical Xns before they are made men the cause of bloody wars (f119^v) was Kotzebue’s “the missionaries do not take pains to make men of them before they make them Christians, and thus, what should bring them happiness and tranquillity, becomes the source of bloody wars…”

f120 The green Island was Coleridge’s insertion in a paragraph full of interest for him—ice higher than “mast-high”, the mammoth bones (CN I 542) and the extreme meeting in mountains becoming valleys. Kotzebue’s paragraph was quoted by a reviewer in QR for Jan 1822 (published Mar 1822) but that Coleridge here was reading the work itself is proved by much in the entry not extracted in the review.

See also 4845, possibly written close to the same time as this entry, but after it, as that comes from Kotzebue Vol II.

Kotzebue’s Voyage was announced as “now first published” in LMLA for 10 Nov 1821, an ab hoc date for this entry. A letter of 14 Jan 1831 to Joseph Hughes refers to a later work. “I have been this day reading, ‘Otto von Kotzebue’s New Voyage Round the World’. Colburn 1830. Some two years ago I read his first voyage.” CL VI 1055–6. As there is no known surviving MS of this letter it is impossible to be certain, but “ten years ago” would be a more reasonable reading in the light of this entry. There is no evidence of any use of N 29 in 1828, and ten could easily be mistaken for two in Coleridge’s hand, dating his reading of this work in 1821–2 soon after it appeared.

4842 29.217 Mrs Agnes Ibbetson (1757–1823) was a contributor to the Philosophical Magazine and Nicholson’s Journal especially on botanical physiology. See MC 290 for other respectful but more critical remarks. A note on Tennemann VIII i 130 referring to her “beholdings” took her less seriously. By this date (c 1821) she was a respected elderly figure.

Her daughter Elizabeth had been informally adopted by Sir George and Lady Beaumont in 1794.

4843 29.218 This entry is in the hand of John Watson, identified by Coleridge’s own note on another example of his holograph in N R, “Marginalia intentionalia” ff3–16^v, dated 6 Oct 1833: (now in the Berg Collection in NYPL): “This Book, containing dear dear Watson’s transcript of a MSS Essay of mine on Faith, dear to me as being in his Hand-writing, was given to me, as a Conservatory of Thoughts and Fancies, Sunday Night, 6 Oct^r 1833.” John Watson died 7 July 1827. See 4989n.

Watson transcribed part of Coleridge’s Prometheus lecture, or materials for it, on thirteen leaves preceding this one (f118–118^v) they were torn out of the notebook before Coleridge numbered the pages; presumably this leaf and the next (f117–117^v) were left behind by accident. Attention must be called to an erroneous attribution in CN III N 29 Gen N, of the handwriting on these pages; it is not Joseph Henry Green’s. This misinformation unfortunately was carried into an account by S.W. Reid of the Prometheus MS, i.e. the torn-out leaves (now in Duke University Library, Durham, North Carolina) in Studies in Bibliography (1971) XXIV 176–83, in an article entitled “The Composition and Revision of Coleridge’s Essay on Aeschylus’s Prometheus”. The error arose in part from the fact that J.H.Green had two distinct hands, apparent from signed letters that have lately come to light and from the Opus Maximum (MS). One of these hands resembles Watson’s.

Comparison of the notebook pages with the printed Royal Society Lecture (18 May 1825) on the Prometheus of Aeschylus shows close verbal similarity. The material in this entry and on the preceding excised pages may originally have been part of that “small volume” which Coleridge told Derwent he had written for Hartley to encourage him in getting on with his (Hartley’s) Prometheus; see 4823 and 4839 f120^v and nn above. CL V 142–3, also HC Poems II 257–85, and HC Letters 29. If this is the correct understanding of the context of this Watson-transcript entry, it can be dated c May 1821 or a little earlier, and fits into the probable chronology of adjacent entries.

[The indistinction or Nature in its lowest] dignity=Nature⁽¹ was: The bracketted first words were on the previous (excised) page now at Duke University.

f118^v sleep in w^b a magnet would be: See 4984 f89^v 4929 f30.

in Hebrew the Container. Gen 1:2; the word is choshek, carrying the suggestion of “hiding” or “obscuring”.

point conceived as…power of the line: See 4513 and n.

lux lucifica: “light-creating light”; as in 4854.

light so called is a phænomenon’. See 4923, 4558and nn.

Tenebroe tenebrificantes, σκοτος σκοτοποιον: “darkness-making dark”.

Gravitation as the unific power: I.e. as a subsumptive antithesis of light springing out of the division of the original prothesis into thesis and antithesis; see CN III 4418, 4420, and nn; also 4556, 4558 and nn.

f118 luminous Bodies…: Gen 1:14–19, which records the creation of the sun, moon, and stars.

physiogonist: Not in OED; on physiogony see 5144 f24 and n.

“the becoming which eternally creates”, cf gemina natura 4854 f51^v and n.

Identity of light and Gravitation: I.e. as above, interdependent opposites. Gravitation, because it is a polar antithesis of, inheres by implication in Light.

Natura essentialis: “nature in its essence”.

light in and subordinate to Gravity is Sound: I.e. Light inhering in its opposite gives rise to a new antithesis whose interdependent opposite is colour; see 4929 f30.

f117^v lux lucifica: “light-bearing light”.

NATURA NATURANS…Natura Naturata: See CN III 4397 f50^v and n and above 4521 f89^v, 4646, 4796 f48^v.

Sal ubiquitarius: “salt in everything”, “universal salt”.

subjective pole: In the Latin sense of “casting under”; i.e. the contrasting, unifying tendency; see 4545 ff45–45^v.

υis substantifica or corporifica: “substantifying or corporealizing power”; see AR 6 and 4935, 4679 and nn.

υis inertiæ: “power of inertia”.

sensu Chemico: “in the Chemical sense”.

Natura NATURABILIS: “Nature capable of becoming or of being made Nature”.

love-struggle & interpenetrative Synthesis: See 5248 f35.

κοσμος: “the universe/the world order/the created world”.

exponents or representations: See 4530n.

4844 29.219 The quatrain is in PW I 487 var, reading “Whene’er the mist”, in the first line, and preceded by [‘Finally, what is Reason? You have often asked me: and this is my answer’ :-]; the four lines are followed by “But alas!” and the two and a half lines from Dante quoted above in 4786. EHC was basing his text either on another MS or on the “Author’s Appendix” to C&S where these lines were first published and which seems to account for his 1830 date in PW; the reading in C&S is “mist” in line I, not Self as here, and the quatrain is followed there by the lines from Dante as in PW.

4845 18.327 The pen and hand are a little less firm than in 4534–4538.

Reason…Understanding of Ma…dictates <perpetual> Peace… Nature…War: Was this the theme that introduced Kotzebue also into the conversation in TT 4 Jan 1823? “Kotzebue represents the petty Kings of the islands in the Pacific ocean exactly as so many Homeric chiefs…. all the kings are supposed to be descended from gods.”

Kotzebu’s Voyage, Vol. II–on the new-raised Coral Islands: See 4841 and n; the review referred to there, in QR for Jan 1822, quoted also the striking passage from II 36. Kotzebue, having just described “how much more recently” [than Goat Island, previously visited] a fifth coral island had “arisen”, said,

The spot on which I stood filled me with astonishment, and I adored in silent admiration the omnipotence of God, who had given even to these minute animals the power to construct such a work. My thoughts were confounded when I consider the immense series of years that must elapse before such an island can rise from the fathomless abyss of the ocean, and become visible on the surface. At a future period they will assume another shape; all the islands will join, and form a circular slip of earth, with a pond or lake in the circle; this form will again change, as these animals continue building, till they reach the surface, and then the water will one day vanish, and only one great island be visible. It is a strange feeling to walk about on a living island, where all below is actively at work. And to what corner of the earth can we penetrate where human beings are not already to be found? In the remotest regions of the north, amidst amountains of ice, under the burning sun of the equator, nay, even in the middle of the ocean, on islands which have been formed by animals, they are met with.

Although the paragraph might excite anyone, it is possible that, reading it when it appeared, Coleridge called the attention of some reviewer to this passage and the iceberg passage in 4841. He had some connexions with QR; in the Jan 1822 number (published in March) the first article was a review [by RS], An Account of the Abipones, an Equestrian People of Paraguay. Translated [by Sara Coleridge] from the Latin of Martin Dobrizhoffer, Eighteen Years a Missionary in that Country (3 vols 1822). By the end of 1824 John Taylor Coleridge was the editor of the QR.

4846 20.50 Here the notebook was reversed and Coleridge wrote from the back of it. At the foot of f45 this entry encountered (on f44^v) entries 20.51–4, i.e. CN III 3408–3411 of late 1808 or early 1809, so that it was continued on ƒ45 in lines squeezed into a space at the top of the page, above the beginning of the entry and in the gutter.

For Coleridge’s distempered Sleep and the Remorse felt in it, see Pains of Sleep: PW I 389–91. See 4689, 5360, 5375 and nn.

Co-inherent is attributed by OED to Coleridge, Chap IX BL (CC) I 143, co-inherence to AR, because the Shedd edition of AR (Works I) prints as App C to AR the (earlier) TL; co-inherence appeared in TL 57.

4847 20.55 Diderot’s Dialogue in Goethe’s Works: Coleridge appears to refer, not to the first publication of Goethe’s translation of Diderot’s Dialogue with Rameau’s Nephew in 1805, but probably to Vol XX (1819) of either the Stuttgart & Tübingen (20 vols 1815–19) edition or the 26-vol 1816–22 Vienna and Stuttgart edition (Vol XX 1820). But for which final paragraphs he offered his substitution is not clear.

In the debate between “Ich” and “Er” at the close, possibly Coleridge pounced on the verb kriechen, extending the bug metaphor on creeping and crawling from the sentence:

Ich will sterben, wenn es nicht besser wäre, als zu kriechen, sich wegzuwerfen, sich zu beschimpfen.

Tr: I’ll be hanged if that wouldn’t be better than crawling, cringing, and making a butt of myself.

Or was he thinking of the statement a few pages earlier? “Der bedürfnize Mensch geht nich wie ein andrer: er springt, er kriecht, er brünnt sich, er schleppt sich und bringt sein Leben zu, indem er Positionen erdenkt und aufführt.” (Tr) “The necessitous man does not walk as others do: he leaps, creeps, crawls, trails along, and spends his life thinking up positions and carrying them out.”

The general tenor of distaste for the intentional offensiveness is plain and related to a quick tendency to physical loathing; see e.g. CN III 4073 (Crathmocraulo etc) and CN III 4134.

4848 20.56 Argumentum a consequenti…conjuncta: “The argument from the consequence [is] contradictory to the Wordsworthian dogma that love is desire/lust (of the flesh, that is to say) with affection, that is, nothing but Friendship joined with Lust.” The pun— ογον (reasoning against/contradiction) and(Wordsworthian/ worthy reasoning)—is not conveyed by straight translation. See a letter of Mar 1811 to HCR quoting WW in similar vein: CL IV 205. Cf also CN III 3293, 3746, 3777, 3873 and 4335.

Ergo, Vir… :“Therefore the man who lusts after men, or the pederast, loves his boy-lover.”

Verbo-digno indignum!: “O abomination! unworthy of Wordsworth!”

Jacob to Rachel!: Rachel had a special meaning; see 5184, 5192 and n. In quoting Wordsworth on “Love a vehement appetite for an Object …at the same time esteemed” (see CN III 3989 and n), Coleridge waxed indignant when he thought of the application of such a definition to his feelings for Anne Gillman, but a similar disgust had been aroused earlier; CN I 448, 1822. See also CN II 2495, CN III 3729, 3746, 3873.

f43^v Alumni (Nurslings) of this truly french School of Morals: Coleridge’s hostility to the effects of French philosophy on French sexual morality was emphatic; see e.g. CN II 2598; Lect 5 P Lects (CC) ff 217–219; SM:LS (CC) 22. Possibly he here touched on an aspect of his emotional conflicts about WW, i.e. WW’s French liaison with Annette, although in March 1802 Coleridge had spent most of a night encouraging WW to free himself and to wed Mary Hutchinson; see CN III 3304 and n.

Verbis digni: Coleridge first wrote Verbo, then altered to the plural: Words worth/worthy of words.

Elongatio…Estimatæ: Elongation of the male sex organ (that is, of the man who feels the esteem), towards the vagina (that is, of her who is esteemed).

WW and Coleridge met in London in Apr 1823 after an interval since 1820; see CL V 272 and n. The material of this entry could represent argument in a personal encounter, and if so, an 1823 date would be supported.

4849 20.1 Scene I: No play, by Coleridge or any other author, has been found with this opening. Sir Luke Limp in Samuel Foote’s farce, The Lame Lover, might speak such words, but does not.

The entry is on the inside front cover, not the first leaf, possibly too casual a jotting to be taken as the beginning of a projected work.

4850 20.4 Jottings in the course of a lesson on Latin verse composition, possibly for Henry or James Gillman? Maximos is a word that cannot be fitted into dactylic pentameters or hexameters. The two metrical patterns that follow show acceptable endings for a dactylic hexameter.

Coleridge wrote a considerable guide to Latin elegiac verse composition; the MS, now in the Berg Collection NYPL, will be included in SWF.

4851 28.84 In pencil. Paradoxy: Coleridge more often inveighed against it, and once thought of “a treatise on Phrases and their Consequences”, the first of which would have been “the paradox that the greater the truth the greater the libel”. Allsop I 92.

αληθεια παρα δοξαν: δοξαν: “truth contrary to expectation/paradoxical truth”.

4852 28.85 Reformed Olio: Is it suggested that the recipe for the stew is as far-fetched as the reform schemes?

Harico spelt without the t was a common contemporary English spelling.

4853 21½.99 In AP 287 υar.

The page reference indentifies Leighton’s Works here as the edition (4 vols 1819), a copy of which, annotated by Coleridge, appeared in the Gillman SC. Its whereabouts are unknown, though transcripts of some marginalia were published in LR IV 156–83. Coleridge used at least two other editions, one of earlier date (1748), referred to in a letter of April 1814 to Cottle (CL III 478, 481 and LR IV 156); the other of 1820 he had from Murray in late Jan 1822 and annotated in preparing AR (CL V 205). This last copy is in the BM. For the annotations on all three see CM III under Leighton.

In this entry Coleridge was reading Leighton’s Lecture VII, “Of the Being of God”.

f51 Vol. IV. The beautiful passage extracted from Seneca, in page 82 is in a footnote and translated in the lecture by Leighton:

Whithersoever you turn yourself, you see God meeting you, nothing excludes his presence, he fills all his works: therefore it is in vain for thee, most ungrateful of all men, to say, thou are not indebted to God, but to nature, because they are, in fact, the same. If thou hadst received any thing from Seneca, and should say, thou owedst it to Annaeus or Lucius, thou wouldest not thereby change thy creditor, but only his name; because whether thou mentionest his name or sirname, his person is still the same.

Lecture (XI) p. 113: “Of the Creation of the World” (beginning on 112):

If we duly consider the matter, and acknowledge the course of the stars, not only to be owing to a first mover, but also that the whole fabric, with all the creatures therein, derive their existence from some Supreme Mind, who is the only fountain of being; we must certainly conclude, that that self-existent principle, or source of all Beings is by all means eternal; but there is no necessity at all, that we should suppose all other things to be coeval with it; nay, if it is not absolutely necessary, it is at least highly reasonable and consistent to believe the contrary.

For, that this world, compounded of so many, and such heterogeneous parts, should proceed, by way of natural and necessary emanation, from that one first, purest, and most simple nature, nobody, I imagine, could believe, or in the least suspect: can it possibly be thought, that mortality should proceed from the immortal, corruption from the incorruptible, and, what ought never to be so much as mentioned, even worms, the vilest animalcules, and most abject insects, from the best, most exalted, and most blessed Majesty? But, if he produced all these things freely, merely out of his good pleasure, and with the facility that constantly attends almighty power; how much more consistent is it to believe, that this was done in time, than to imagine it was from eternity?

Coleridge added in the margin: “It is inconceivable how any thing can be created in time; and production is incompatible with interspace”.

fundamental Idea of my System, and the Conception thence deduced: For Coleridge’s distinction between Idea and the conceptions and deductions of the understanding, see CN III 4047, 4058, 4443, and in this volume, 4940, 5271f6 and nn. On his system see 4449, 4450, also 5122.

contingent wills (the αποσταται) formed Time: See 5233, 5248 and nn. The following § (113, 114):

It is a very difficult matter to argue at all about that, the nature whereof our most enlarged thoughts can never comprehend. And though, among philosophers and divines, it is disputed, whether such a production from eternity is possible or not; there is probably something concealed in the nature of the thing, though unknown to us, that might suggest a demonstration of the impossibility of this conceit; for what is finite, in bulk, power, and every other respect, seems scarcely capable of this infinity of duration; and divines generally place eternity among the incommunicable attributes of God, as they are called: it seems, to be sure, most agreeable to reason, and, for ought we know, it is absolutely necessary, that, in all external productions, a free agent, the cause should be, even in time, prior to the effect, that is, that there must have been some point of time wherein the being producing did, but the thing produced did not exist. As to the eternal generation, which we believe, it is within God himself, nor does it constitute any thing without him, or different from his nature and essence. Moreover, the external production of a created being of a nature vastly different from the agent, that is supposed to produce it, and to act freely in that production, implies, in its formal conception, as the schools express it, a translation from non-entity into being; whence it seems necessary to follow, that there must have been some point of time, wherein that created being did not exist.

f51^v taking Eternity as a sort of Time: A logical confusion which Coleridge noted elsewhere, e.g. CN III 3973 and n; very early he said that Eternity and Time are heterogeneous, and to consider Eternity a kind of Time is a metaphysical absurdity. See Lects 1795 (CC) 343; also 4644 and n.

as simul et totum to pars and successive: as “simultaneously and whole” is to “part and successively”.

4854 21½.100 The entry is apparently triggered by Coleridge’s reading of Leighton Genuine Works (1819) I, “A Practical Commentary on the First Epistle General of Peter”. See the preceding n, also 4909 and n.

…: “Verily the blood of Christ, according to Luke (Acts of the Apostles) is the blood of God.” Acts 20:28, referred to by Leighton I 10; see also 4626 and n. On Luke’s authorship of Acts see e.g. below 5426 f49n and n.

agens=Jehovah Memra: “Christ acting=Jehovah Word”. George Bull Defensio Fidei Nicaenae (see CN III 3968n) Bk I Chap I §§ 18–20 cites the Targums as using the Chaldee word mimor, mimora (Word) to indicate a divine person speaking among men.

Sol intelligibilis, Lux lucifica: “the intelligible Sun, the Light creating light”; cf Mal 4:2, John 9:5.

Cosmos (Sol) sensibilis, Lux elucens: “the sensible Universe (Sun), the Light that merely lights”.

Sermo realis, Verbum phaenomenon: “The Word (or speech) as thing, the Word (or verb) as phenomenon”.

the Fit of the Facient: “the it-is-done of the doer”.

fit et facit, creat et creatur—gemina natura: “It is made and it makes, creates and is created—twin nature”. See CN I 1382, where Coleridge referred the phrase “et fit et facit et creat et creatur” to John Scotus Erigena De divisione naturae (Oxford 1681) Bk I, p 7; see CN I 1382n. Cf also The Friend (CC) I 115–17, 146, 471, II 80 and nn, from which it is clear that the phrase gemina natura (“twin nature”) is from Giordano Bruno. Erigena was writing not of “twin nature” but of “divine nature”, and attributes “et fit et facit” etc. to “the books of the Holy Fathers”. Cf also 4521.

f52 Xριστος agens is=Anima Animans, Calor fovens: “Christ acting =the life-giving soul, the cherishing heat.”

Xριστoς patiens…Vis assimilans assimilationem patiens: “Christ suffering=the principle of reproduction into life in the passive form—the element, as aliment, of life— The assimilating force suffering assimilation”. (“Christus patiens” is a common theological term for the Incarnation, as well as the Crucifixion.)

Vis υitæ superioris…ad actum assimilandi: “The superior life-force suffering assimilation but at the same time exciting to the act of assimilation.”

The Blood: See Coleridge’s physiological interest in 4825, 4646, and theological in 4909 f70.

the Absorbents: See 4825 and n.

aura υitalis per pulmones: “the vital air through the lungs”.

Spiritus Confortans: “Comforting Spirit”, John 14:16, 26; 15:26 and 16:7.

Allen & Pepys versus Priestley & Lavoisier: The reference is to experiments described in Phil Trans (for 1808) XCVIII 249–81: “On the Changes produced in Atmospheric Air, and Oxygen Gas, by Respiration”, by W.Allen, Esq. F.R.S. and W.H.Pepys, Esq. F.R.S.Some eighteen experiments are described, and general deductions made on the relation of oxygen, carbon dioxide, hydrogen, nitrogen, etc., to life and breath, concluding that “oxygene does not permeate the blood”; also “that as the oxygen decreases in quantity, perception gradually ceases, and we may suppose that life would be completely extinguished on the total abstraction of oxygen” (280). In a marginal note on G.A.Goldfuss Handbuch der Zoologie I 26–7 (see 5171n), Coleridge referred to these experiments of Allen and Pepys “proving that in Breathing the Blood decarbonates itself by an exudation of Carbon on the surfaces of the Airvessels, without any O. [xygen] entering the Vessels or combining with the Blood.” See 4646 f7 and n.

de Oxygene non in sanguinem permaente [permeante]: “of the Oxygen’s not permeating into the blood”.

The Divine Apis: By one of his Rhodian leaps Coleridge finds examples in the Ruminants and the sacred bull of Egyptian mythology.

f52^v Blind Man…Saliva: John 9:6. Cf 4611, 4612, 4719 and nn.

Quarles, Withers…Fuller: On Quarles see below 4975–4981 and nn and Ashe Miscellanies 249–50; on George Wither C&S (CC) 101 and TT for 25 June 1831 fn. On this view of Fuller see CN III 3596n and 4857 and n.

not—but… “not only a lack but the contrary of… this love of decorum”; for Coleridge’s symbols see App A.

an Edipus Ægyptiacus: Coleridge seems to enjoy an example of the opposite of “love of decorum” in his elaborate punning—i.e. Fuller in the style of Athanasius Kircher’s farfetched attempt to decipher Egyptian hieroglyphics (i.e. Edipus Ægypticus 3 vols Rome 1652–4) would have given a riddle-solving Egyptian identification of Hermes (Mercury Trismegistus) with the Logos, of Mercury, the chrism, ointment, or anointment (Xρίσμα) with Christ, the anointed Mercury as ointment producing Salivation. Salυeation. and Salυation—as remedy for syphilis, Goutor defective taste;see again 4611, 4612, 4719and nn.

Indifference of the Vis Vitæ and the Principium Vitoe: the meeting point of the “Life Force and the Principle of Life”.

Vis υitam ciens: “the Force which gives rise to life”.

Principium υitæ…Principium statûs; “the excitable Principle of life (the capacity to live, given the conditions?) The principle of origination [of life] is also the Principle of the state [of being alive].”

It is clear that for Coleridge respiration raised dynamic vs mechanist interest. He saw oxygen in combination as interactive, and did not believe in the independence of any single chemical element in vital processes; he believed that Oxygen was negative in potence, Carbon positive. Another note on Goldfuss Handbuch der Zoologie (2 vols 1820), not in the margins but on a detached leaf (BM Add MS 34,225 f148^v), discussed contemporary argument about oxygen, blood, and respiration:

Goldfuss Handbuch der Zoologie P. 25 § 2 welchem ein grösserer Antheil an Sauerstoff zukommt? In proportion to the Quantity of Carbon?—; For the venous Blood becomes arterial by losing a portion of its Carbon—But if so, the sentence is superfluous & it was enough to have said, that the venous blood “ist kohlenstoff haltiger als der Arterien Blut—I make this remark from Jealousy that the PriestleioLavoisierian Chemistry which owed its success to its in every sense of the word imposing Simplicity, in fact the Leanness and Poverty of Abstraction, not the Si mplicity of Nature, still exercises an influence even on the professed Converts to this Zöo-dynamic Philosophy. Thus in the present instance Foot-of-Gold attributes a positive potence to Oxygen, which I am convinced, is the Coefficient of the Negative (material) Factor of Life—i.e. of Carbon.

Material Factors of Organization

Positive—Azote or Nitrogen

Negative—Carbon

Co-efficients

Co-efft of P.F—Hydrogen

Co-efft of N F—Zote or Oxygen

The not yet thoroughly ascertained part which Oxygen plays in Respiration, and the mode of its operation on the surface of the Lungs in removing the exuded—whether Carbon simply according to Allen and Pepys—or Carbonic Acid according [to] the more recent experiments & inferences of D^r to be carefully distinguished from its operation in the System, as a constituent part of the Body. Even according to Edwards’s theory it is not the Oxygen, but the removal of the Oxygen with the Carbon, that acts indirectly as a positive Agent.

State it as CapitalDebt—& that there is 7 Cap. and 5 Debt—by subtracting 2 from 5, I in effect make the Capital=9. For 7−3=9−5. Acids generally weaken and lower the power of are the anti-pole to Spirits— /Yet as the representative of the Contractive Power they may act as Tonics, Bracers: and by the very lowering of Life increase the excitability.

4855 21½.101 f53 The difference between Refraction and Disper-sion…: the difference between the refracting or bending of a light ray on passing from one medium to another and the dispersal arising from the varying refrangibility of different colours.

LIGHT & WARMTH. The relations between light and warmth were of great interest to contemporary natural philosophers, e.g. Thomas Thomson System of Chemistry (3rd ed 1807) III 401–2; Thomson has a discussion of “Inflection, Reflection, and Refraction” at III 390–92. See 4873 below.

Coleridge may have been started on the train of thought here by two articles in QJSLA V (1818): “Observations on the Rays which compose the Solar Spectrum” 77–81, and G.W.Jordan “On the Colours of Waters” 81–99. The latter raised points about “dispersion”, “reflection”, “refraction” of light, the blue of the sky becoming black, shadows at sunset in decreasing light, the intense blue of the sky on a bright cloudless day changing to white at the horizon, “blackness or absence of colour”; there are other similarities of thought and phrasing. On pp 77–81 there is also an abstract of a paper by J.E.Bérard discussing relations between heating rays, rays of light, and chemical rays. For evidence that Coleridge read this volume see above 4634 and n.

Coleridge had tried in CN III 3606, 4418, 4420, 4456 to work out a chemicotranscendental theory of light. But his work on colour was as inconclusive as that of most of his contemporaries, for the reasons he gives in his last paragraph here. CN II 3116, reading Newton on light in Phil Trans—he owned the 3rd ed (1721) of the Optics—he was uncertain what produces colour. Perhaps for this reason he turned from physics to practical technical aspects in CN III 3606 when he seems to have used in English translation Berthollet’s Elements of the Art of Dyeing; see CN in 3606n. He borrowed a copy of Goethe’s Farbenlehre for his philosophical lectures in 1819, but he had been inquisitive about light and colours, and attacked Newton’s theories in 1801, before Goethe or his reading of Goethe. See CL II 709–10. See also Phil Lects (1949) 53–5, 62– 3, P Lects (CC) Lect 5 n 33, Lect 7 n 41; see also below 4873 and n. His interest in the chemistry of colours appears also in 4570, which draws some of its vocabulary from the polarity principle of the Compass of Nature, as also 4722.

Then in the early 1820’s Coleridge found the principle of polarities applied to colour by the Naturphilosophen and developed further than by the Greeks, or by Goethe; see 5290, 5446, 5447 and nn. But in this entry it appears that Oken raised more questions for him than he answered.

Oken’s Doctrine: See especially Über Licht und Warme als das nicht irdische, aber kosmische materiale Element. Erste Ideen zur Theorie des Lichts, der Finsterniss, der Farben und der Warme (Jena 1808). Coleridge’s annotated copy is in the BM.

Oken’s essential position was stated on p 14:

Tr:…light does not consist in a merely mechanical refraction, diffraction [deflection] and dispersion of the rays (in einern bloss mechanischen Brechen, Ablenken, Zerstreuen der Strahlen), but in a chemical act, that operates in the inmost [reaches] of matter, and changes it not simply by heating and thus expanding it; but by a spiritual (geistige) action, by polarisation, whence chemical changes proceed. Here I speak strongly and severely but not unjustly against Newton, just to make scholars seriously aware of the hitherto accepted theory of light. In what follows I shall quite quietly refute Newton’s teaching.

Although Coleridge’s views were closer to Oken’s and Goethe’s dynamic theories than to Newton’s, he reacted sharply against Oken’s tone here. For a marginal note on Oken’s Erste Ideen zur Theorie des Lichts (Jena 1808) to this effect see Inq Sp § 194.

“As Red to White and Black…” Oken’s Doctrine: Perhaps Coleridge did not have the work in front of him; either he misremembered or misread. Oken said (39) that black and white are the extremes of the spectrum and all real colours lie between, leaning to white or to black, and that the basic colour between (Grundfarbe) is red (40).

Tr: Yellow is the tension (Spannung) of red inclining to white; blue is the tension of red inclining to black; or yellow is a whitish and blue a blackish red. These are the three colours, the three sole colours in nature; all others are transitions or mixtures of them.

Green is the mixture of yellow and blue, the culmination of these two colours, while red is its base, hence the correspondence and opposition between red and green.

f54 In both Yellow…Violet: Coleridge was condensing and articulating more precisely Oken’s 39–40; he commented in the margin of 40:

These, even these are the passages that annoy me in the Naturphilosophen! Yellow a white, and Blue a black, Red!! It is true, I know which Oken means by the words—but why Oken chose such words to convey such meanings, I do not know—tho’ Vanity is so common a foible, and Quackery so ordinary a symptom & effect of that so common Foible, that I can pretty well guess. Goethe, & then Schelling & Steffens, had opposed to the Newtonian Optics the ancient doctrine of Light and Shadow on the grand principle of Polarity—Yellow being the positive, Blue the negative, Pole, [[and]] Red the Culmination <and Green the indifference:> Oken follows them—but stop!—He waits, till they are out of sight. Hangs out a new Banner (i.e. metaphor) and becomes a Leader himself.

Oken’s description of the spectrum being far from clear, it seems necessary to quote the German. Possibly Coleridge was thinking of 42: “Das der licht Schatten wesentlich die rothe Farbe ist, so verhält sich das Roth zur Gelb und Blau wie die Sonne zu den Planeten, wie das Centrum zur Peripherie, also wie der positive Pol zum negativen.” (Tr) “Since the light shadow is essentially the red colour, red relates to yellow and blue as the sun does to the planets, as the centre to the periphery, hence as the positive pole to the negative.”

Black and white are polar opposites for Oken (45) and they are colours: (tr) “White and black are universal colours—white is total tension of aether with matter; black is total rest of aether with matter.”

ff53–53^v gives us White= +the minimum of Anti= the least quantity necessary to…Light: Coleridge pencilled a note on Oken 43 opposite the sentence, “Das Durchleuchtige ist aber entweder in Action, Spannung oder in Ruhe; im ersten Falle ist das Durchleuchtige das Lichte, im zweiten das Finstere” (“However, the transparent is either in action, tension or rest; in the first case the transparent is the light, in the second the dark”). He said: “Aristotle’s “The transparent in energy/activity=light”.

At this point of Coeridge’s thoughts have gone back to Aristotle’s De anima (CN I 973A) II vii 418b. After an explanation of what light is, and transparency, Aristole said:“Now light is the activity of this transparency qua transparent. Potentially, wherever it is present, darkness is also present…Light is consider to be opposite of darkness; but darkness is a removal of an active conditon from the transparency, so that obvious light is the presence of such an active transparency…” Tr W.S.Hett Aristotle On the Soul etc (LCL 1935)

It is possible that the De anima at this point lies behind some of Coleridge’s speculations in 5290 below also. Coleridge’s N.B., encircled in ink, suggets that, having written the entry to a conclusion which casts doubt on the validity, in the present state of our knowlege, of many of Oken's specific theories and of his own, he left that what remained of value in his exercise was essentially a linguistic distinction of more farreaching significance than any ephermal concepts of colour.

f54 An Ellipse of Color—From white to BLack: Cf Oken ibid 38–40:

Tr: No more than two extreme colours can exist, just as there are only two extremes to the existence of aether. Aether in its tension is light absolutely, pure, clear, clourless light. Earthly tension of light in its perfection is colour absolutely,blackness. Thus white amd black have the same relationship as light and dark, are to each other in the earthly sphere what the latter are in the cosmic. Both are the earhts(?) of earthly conditons of light and hence, because they are not intermediate things scarcely to be called colours: they are the primordial colours.

Spannung: Oken (ibid) passim; see esp 38–39 above and 20:

“Die Spannung des Aethers, (verursacht durch die Sonne, deren Fortleitung aber bedingt durch den Planeten,) erscheint als Licht” (Tr) “The tension of the aether, (caused by the sun, although its propagation is determined by the planets,) appears as light.”

f54^v The distinction, however, between Black and Dark: See Oken, as quoted ibid, 39 above. In the Newtonian scheme, both black and dark signify the absence of all colour and light. Oken’s discussion 41, of dark in relation to the prism, is confusing:

Tr: The prism is a dark body, which is held against the light and which bends, breaks and scatters light both absolutely and within it, that is, it darkens the tension of light; for light does not pass mechanically through a prism as water does through a sponge—although even this is not entirely mechanical—but by means of a process in which it is transformed in its innermost being. The light and the dark blend with each other so closely in the prism, become solely one substance, that its shadow falls on the wall as a hybrid between darkness and light, and hence is necessarily coloured—the colour-image is a coloured shadow.

This prompted Coleridge’s marginal comment, “—that its shadow is not a shadow?” The point was a major one for Coleridge, involving as it did the concept of light and darkness in active, dynamic polar opposition. Hence this last paragraph and, because of his sense of the scope of the problem of the Prismatic Spectrum, his tentativeness.

4856 21½.102 The entry is a condensation and conflation of various passages in G.F.Creuzer Symbolik und Mythologie der alten Völker (2nd ed 6 vols Darmstadt 1819– 23). Coleridge knew and used the earlier edition of 1810 (see 4831 and n) but references cited below indicate that here he was using the later edition throughout.

The Plough Ox…forbidden to be slaughtered by Triptolemus: Creuzer Symbolik IV 440–79 gives an account of the Thesmophoria, a festival celebrated at Athens and throughout Greece, in honour of Ceres as Thesmophoros (“law-bringer”); the legal division of land was an important aspect of agriculture. Creuzer Symbolik IV 125 connects Triptolemus with the Plough Ox and the Thesmophoria:

Tr: In connexion with the significance of that remarkable ceremony in Athens [i.e. the slaughtering of the ox, referred to below], we may first notice that it followed on the Eleusinian Mysteries…; it was indeed Triptolemus, the darling of Ceres, who laid down the law to spare the plough-ox. This injunction was also a law of the Thesmophoria….

σνζνyια: “of the yoke”, a common symbol of marriage in ancient Greece, the yoke being the epithet of Hera as goddess of marriage. Creuzer Symbolik(1819–23) I 132–3.

the slaughtering Priest…as the Culprit: Creuzer described the rite celebrating the first slaying of an ox. An ox had eaten the offering on the Altar of Zeus Polieus and had been killed by the indignant priest Thaulon. He had fled, for the penalty for killing the helpful draught animal was death.

Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) IV 123–4:

Tr: Thereupon Attica was plagued with drought and famine. The oracle at Delphi was consulted….the fugitive himself had to remove the evil. He was brought back and undertook to slaughter an ox in the name of the state for the first time. And from then onwards the following rite was observed at the annual Diipolia: female water bearers brought the water for the axe and the knife to be sharpened. Then someone handed the axe to the slaughterer, who felled the ox and fled; a third butchered it. Thereafter all ate of its flesh. After the meal the ox’s hide was stuffed, and the ostensibly restored animal was hitched to a plough. There followed the “court of the ox”…. All participants were accused. Each blamed the guilt on another: the female water bearers blamed the sharpener of the axe and knife; the sharpener blamed the deliverer of the slaughter knife; the deliverer blamed the butcher; the butcher finally blamed the knife. The knife, as it could not speak, was condemned and thrown into the sea.

Had Coleridge a special feeling towards this rite as symbolizing the breaking up of an unhappy marriage? See CN III 3648.

Deodand?: Coleridge asks himself whether the word from English law applies here. By an English law, repealed in 1846, a personal chattel, when found to have caused the death of a person, was declared “to be given to God”—i.e. forfeit to the Crown to be applied to pious purposes.

Hereditary Priesthoods & Dign[ities]. Eumolpides, Butades (Buddha), Kyniden, κηρυικες: Creuzer Symbolik (IV 355–62) discussed these “Altattische Priestergeschlechter—Eumolpiden, Ceryces, Eteobutaden”. Coleridge seems to have been using Creuzer, not working directly from Greek sources. Creuzer (Symbolik IV 349) wrote that the Eumolpidae were said to be descendants of Eumolpus (“singer”), hereditary priests who presided as singers at the Eleusinian Mysteries. The Butadae, in Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) IV 361, were hereditary priests and priestesses of Poseidon and Athena, descendants of and successors to Butes, king of Athens. The Butadae were the mere successors, the Eteobutadae the actual descendants, or “true Butadae”. Creuzer does not mention the Kynnidae (Coleridge’s Kyniden), an hereditary priesthood of Apollo, but Coleridge’s attention may have been called to them by Creuzer’s discussion (Symbolik IV 357–60) of the Kerykes (Coleridge’s κηρυικες), a priestly family said to be descended from Keryx, “herald” or “messenger”. Creuzer connects the Kerykes with Hermes and his Egyptian equivalent, the dog-headed Anubis. This may have reminded Coleridge of the Kynidae, who, so misspelled, might etymologically be “descendants of the dog (kynos)”. Creuzer elsewhere in Symbolik (1819–23) I 375, 579 identifies Hermes (Anubis/Thoth) with Buddha.

Buddha: Pandu:: Butes: Pandion: “Buddha is to Pandu as Butes is to Pandion”. In Symbolik(1819–23) IV 361–2 and II 648–9 (not in the 1810 edition), Creuzer suggested that Buddha was the ancestor of the Butades and that the war between the Kurus and Pandus of ancient India was connected with the descendants of Pandion carrying sunshades in the service of the Sun—Athena.

the High Priest originally the King: Creuzer Symbolik (1819–23) IV 362–94 discussed the identity of kingship and priesthood in ancient Greece; former kings retained their priestly functions.

different struggles of the Gods, different religions: E.g. the war between Eleusis and Athens was a war of Poseidon against Athena. (Creuzer Symbolik IV 342–54).

Confusion of the Lip, Babel: Gen 11:1–9.

All of Ham. and Canaan: I.e. all the Hamites and the land of Canaan. According to Gen 9:18–27, Ham (Canaan) was cursed for gazing on the nakedness of his father, Noah. The meaning of the story has been much disputed in biblical and literary criticism.

faithless Shemites given up to the superstition of those, with whom they had intermarried: For Coleridge’s view of the “degeneration” of the races by the intermarriage of the Shemites and Canaanites see e.g. 4548 and n.

Physiotheism: Not as in OED, “physitheism”, “making a god of the natural world”.

4857 21½.103 One of the very strongest arguments against the Unitarians…their main bulwark: I.e. that they reduce the transcendent in Christianity to the mechanical, imaginative Faith to Evidence and consistency. Their lack of abstraction and imagination reminds Coleridge of the Oriental idolatry. Cf 1000 arms and retinacula (f55^v) with 5200 and 4750; also Lect 3 P Lects (CC) ff85–88.

radical truths…leaf…Tree of Life…Feuille mort…milky bosom of the Tree: A sustained biological metaphor even for Coleridge. Possibly he was thinking of the South American tree with the milky resin from which India rubber Caoutchouck is made (see below f56), for he was reading Humboldt’s Travels; see 4864 and n. The phrase milky bosom sis associated subliminally perhaps with that warmth and sense of vital nourishment which he missed in Unitarianism.

f55^v retinacula: Retinaculum is first cited in this sense by OED as a new word in 1825 (T.Say); it was used by K&S (see 4879n) III (1826) 391.

f56 a fullerism: I.e. a good earthy metaphor; see 4854 f52^v above, and cf CN III 3596 and n.

the divine Caoutchouck: Charles Hatchett (see 4580, 4646 and nn) wrote scientifically on the then new resinous substance that became known as India rubber.

Book of the Accusing Spirit: In Rabbinic lore there are two records in Heaven, the Book of Life and the Book of Death, e.g. in Jubilees 30:20–22; I Enoch 81:4; and Ascension of Isaiah 9:22. The Talmud (Rosh Hashanah 1:49) mentions three, adding one for those whose cases are undecided. On having one’s name blotted out of the Book of Life, see Ps 69:28 and Rev 13:8.

infra-Mohammedan race…: The disjointed prose of this last paragraph seems to repeat the theme that Unitarianism denies the essence of all higher religions.

Theanthropism: See CN III 4005, 4255; OED attributes to Coleridge in Chap XXIV BL (CC) II 246 the earliest use.

Asa-man Odin…into Odin Alfader: Asa-man is “God-man”, the prefix being Old Norse, as the Al-fader is “All father”. See 5256 f63 and CN I 170.

4858 21½.104 Reginald Scot appended “A new excellent Discourse of the Nature and Substance of Devils and Spirits in Two Books”, to the third edition of his The Discovery of Witchcraft (1665). Coleridge here summarized selectively. The full title is the best description of the nature of the work: The Discovery of Witchcraft: Proving, That the Compacts and Contracts of Witches with Devils and all Infernal Spirits or Familiars, are but Erroneous Novelties and Imaginary Conceptions. Also discovering, How far their Power extendeth in Killing, Tormenting, Consuming, or Curing the bodies of Men, Women, Children, or Animals, by Charm, Philtres, Periapts, Pentacles, Curses, and

Conjurations. Wherein Likewise The Unchristian Practices and Inhumane Dealings of Searchers and Witch-tryers upon Aged, Melancholly, and Superstitious people, in extorting Confessions by Terrors and Tortures, and in devising false Marks and Symptoms, are notably Detected. And the Knavery of Juglers, Conjurers, Charmers, Soothsayers, Figure-Casters, Dreamers, Alchymists and Philtrers; with many other things that have long lain hidden, fully Opened and Deciphered, All Which are very necessary to be known for the undeceiving of Judges, Justices, and Jurors, before they pass Sentence upon Poor, Miserable and Ignorant People: who are frequenly [sic] Arraigned, Condemned, and Executed for Witches and Wizards.

Astral Spirits: Scot wrote that except for “the Sadducees and Peripateticks, who deny that there are any Devils and Spirits at all”, such ancient writers as Plato, Proclus, Plotinus, Porphyrie, believed in Astral Spirits, as did also the Romans, Church Fathers, Rabbins, Schoolmen, Papists, etc. In fact he lists most of the peoples of the world.

Paul’s Words: Probably Col 2:18. Scot wrote:

…wherein they [the Christians] meet and agree jump with the Papists; as if you read the notes upon the second chapter to the Colossians, in the Seminaries Testament printed at Rhemes, you shall manifestly see, though as contrary to the Word of God as black to white, as appeareth in the Apocalypse, where the Angel expressly forbad John to worship him.

water-blood at the Cross: See 4854 and 5172 and nn.

undoubted belief of all the Fathers of the Church for the first 5 centuries: Scot passim

pointed out that the worship of saints amounted to belief in astral spirits.

Exquisite passage…only these Astral Spirits—?—: Cf Scot 50 Bk II Chap IV:

4. Innumerable are the Spirits that inhabit the Aiery Region, germinating amongst themselves as Magicians affirm, and begetting one another after a Mystical manner. It is their property to be instant in storms and boistrous weather…Besides they march in mighty Troops through the Aiery Region, waging warr amongst themselves, and destroying one another beings or Existences, after which they are reduced to the primary source or nature of the Starrs….

5. And doubtless from hence arise the various deceptions that men are incident unto in their judgments of Apparitions, perswading themselves that they are portents and foretokens of Warr and Famine, when such numerous Spirits are beheld Fighting or Marching either in the Air, Earth, or Water: whereas it is nothing else but the bare effect of the Natures and Tempers of such Aerial beings to fight and randevouse immediately after sun-set or else later in the Summer evenings, which is their principal time of such Conventions.

4859 21½.105 The Cephalopodes want the Optic nerve (Sehneru): The optic nerves of the cephalopods were disputed, and described generally as a fibrous knot behind the brain, rather a part of the brain than of the optic nerve. Apparently Coleridge was reading some pre-1817 German zoologist, for Cuvier in providing the first precise classification

of the molluscs in La Reigne animal (Paris 1817) described the cephalopods II 361 as having “innumerable optic nerves”. Oken’s curious nomenclature does not include cephalopods; nor does Blumenbach discuss them in his Handbuch der Naturgeschichte (1817). Goldfuss (see 4854n) refers to them, but as having “Sehnerven” (I 671). Treviranus in his Biologie v (see 5341) uses the term throughout.

Coleridge’s source for his statement has not been found.

4860 21½.106 In AP 287–8. As Coleridge’s interest in Spanish literature was clearly indebted to RS’s wide knowledge of it, it is possible that this entry was set in motion— little more than that—by a review by RS in QR April 1821 of a collection of Spanish plays El Teatro Espanol (Nos I–XX; 1819, 1820, 1821).

The information in the first paragraph on Spanish history appears variously in too many places to justify any specific attribution; however, Coleridge’s reference to the meteoric existence of their Literary Age chimes with RS’s description of Calderon as “an extravagant meteor, most lofty indeed in his course, but entirely eccentric in his motions; most brilliant, but airy and unsubstantial” (QR XXV 15). RS was controverting A.W. Schlegel’s admiration (in his lectures of 1818) for Calderon. In this review RS did not refer to the general link between Christianity and literature, which concerned, in different ways, both Schlegel and Coleridge. Neither Sismondi in his De la littérature du Midi de l’Europe (4 vols Paris 1813), nor Bouterwek Geschichte der schönen Wissenschaft (Göttingen 1801–10) dealt in any depth with the patronage of learning under such Caliphs in Spain as Hakem II, though both refer to the brilliance and brevity of the twocentury period of Arabian cultural domination in some cities of Spain, e.g., the Cordova Caliphate (758–1031).

Halim II: Hakem II was Caliph of Cordova 961–76, its zenith. In addition to the claims to industry Coleridge attributes to him, he is said to have annotated 400,000 volumes—a point that might have caught Coleridge’s attention.

The Persian (Europeans in Asia): See 4548 and n. With this entry cf CN III 3869.

4861 21½.107 Stereotypes: Coleridge is coining the application of the word here. It is derived from the method of printing from moulds of fixed forms of type, invented in 1798, and frequently referred to up to the 1820’s as a new method. Of Coleridge’s use, the earliest example in OED is 1850.

4862 21½.108 Phytic, Entomic and Zoic: Pertaining to plant, insect, and animal life; see 4553, 4617 and nn.

Protonomy, Deuteronomy, Hypsonomy: The first, the second, the highest law or division.

Of Coleridge’s suggestions, only entomic (1862), zoic (1863), and Deuteronomy are in OED (The OT book of Deuteronomy was given that name as containing a second formulation of the Law.)

See on the three levels or dimensions, 4865, 4868 and nn.

4863 21½.110 The information appeared in Humboldt Personal Narrative (see 4864n) V 187–91, but like that of the following entry, it may have come from the review:

The Rio Negro is referred to as “a class of rivers” that are “aguas negras, that is, their waters seen in a large body, appear brown like coffee, or of a greenish black; but when the least breath of wind agitates their surface, they become of a fine grassgreen….” He is unable to trace the cause of these coloured waters, but suggests that it maybe owing to a mixture of carbon and hydrogen; and he quotes the opinion of Sir Humphry Davy that the tints of different seas may probably be owing to different proportions of iodin. The extreme purity of the black waters of these American rivers may be inferred from their limpidity.

QR (July 1821) XXV 377–8.

4864 21½.109 Alexander von Humboldt published his Voyage aux Régions equinoxiales du Nouveau Continent, fait en 1799–1804, par A. de Humboldt et A. Bonpland in 3 vols in 1814. It appeared in an English translation by Helen Maria Williams as Personal Narrative of Travels to the Equinoctial Regions…(7 vols 1814–29), where the Cavern of Ataruipe, the cemetery of the extinct Indian tribe of the Atures, on the east bank of the Orinoco, and the mountain with the great balls of granite are described in Vol V (1821) 615–17. This volume was reviewed in No 49 QR XXV (July 1821)—published in Oct—where the facts that Coleridge seized upon appear in long quotations from Humboldt who, however, made different inferences about granite.

A narrow ridge led us to a neighbouring mountain, the rounded summit of which supported immense blocks of granite. These masses are more than forty or fifty feet in diameter; and their form is so perfectly spherical, that, appearing to touch the soil only by a small number of points, it might be supposed, at the least shock of an earth-quake, they would roll into the abyss. I do not remember to have seen any where else a similar phenomenon, amid the decompositions of granitic soils. If the balls rested on a rock of a different nature, as it happens in the blocks of Jura, we might suppose, that they had been rounded by the action of water, or thrown out by the force of an elastic fluid; but their position on the summit of a hill alike granitic makes it more probable, that they owe their origin to the progressive decomposition of the rock.

QR XXV 388. See also 4863n.

The granite balls reported by Humboldt are not wholly unknown to current geology; see e.g. A.Rondeau “Les boules du granite”: Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie (Berlin) II (1958) 211–29 and C.D.Ollier “Causes of Spheroidal Weathering”: Earth-Science Reviews (Amsterdam NY) VII (1971) 127–41. In neither article were the granite balls perfectly round, nor can near-perfect spheres of granite be accounted for by any known geological process. There are such balls but of basalt or crystallised glassy volcanic ash. Granite spheres, e.g. in Costa Rica and Veracruz State, Mexico, prove to be man-made. Either Humboldt mistook basalt for granite or he stumbled on artifacts of a pre- Columbian civilization.

Sir H.Davy’s Stones from Jupiter. Did Coleridge have from Davy in conversation some such theory of meteorites? There appears to be nothing in printed or MS records. Davy had, however, prepared an abstract, “Experiments on the stones said to have fallen from above. By M.Vauquelin”, for the Journal of the Royal Institution II (1803) 27, but the moon was there mentioned as a possible source, not Jupiter. W.T.Brande, in his Manual 292–3, favoured extraterrestrial origins; Coleridge discussed the passage; see 4646 f6^v. In fact the subject of meteorites was a lively one in scientific and quasiscientific journals in the first decades of the century, sometimes being linked with Davy’s work on the oxides, leading to speculation whether the “aerolites” could come from a

planet devoid of oxygen and explode on entering the earth’s atmosphere at a high velocity. One such theory was advanced e.g. in an article “On the Origin of Meteoric Stones” in Phil Mag (July-Dec 1815) XLVI 245–6. Davy’s work describing magnesia as a metallic oxide was referred to there.

4865 21½.111 The entry, along with 4859, 4862, and 4868, appears to participate in anatomical discussions or reading relative to nerves, veins, brain, etc; interest in the physiology of the brain greatly accelerated for Coleridge after 1820; see 4541, 5217 f81^v, and 5240 ff27^v–28.

Cf J.C.Prichard, M.D. A Treatise on Diseases of the Nervous System (1822) 2–3: “…the natural and vital functions”, he said were common to all organized beings, but “when a nervous system begins to appear, a new series of properties is displayed…the properties of mind; for BY THIS TERM WE DISTINGUISH ALL THOSE PHAENOMENA WITH WHICH WE BECOME ACQUAINTED THROUGH THE MEDIUM OF CONSCIOUSNESS”.

Tic Doloreux: See 5189 f92 and n.

a resistance of Life by Life: Cf 5189 f92^von Resistance.On Coleridge’s notion of Life as an entity, see e.g. 4645 and 4646.

ne plus ultra: “Let there be no going further!” Late Latin, alluding originally to the Pillars of Hercules.

Topical bleeding: See Hoopers Medical Dictionary (1838) for an account of the contemporary practice of local blood-letting “by the application of leeches, cuppingglasses and scarification”, as distinct from a more general treatment through veins and arteries.

4866 21½.112 In AP 289–90, except the last paragraph.

Race was a subject on which Coleridge read Kant, Blumenbach, Steffens, and the prevailing theories generally, sharing the anthropological ignorance of his time. It is possible he intended to write an essay on racial differences and groupings, for some folios exist in BM Add MS 34,225 on the subject (ff131–143^v) or perhaps these were directed towards the Opus Maximum. See also such entries as 4548, 4668, 4984 and nn.

f58 the Turks…the Porte and its Seraglio: Coleridge seems to have been fascinated by the despotic court of the Ottoman empire. At the “Sublime Porte” the Sultan gave audience at Constantinople; thus it was identified with royal power. There is a splendid illustration of it and its Seraglio in a work Coleridge had enjoyed c 1802–3, George Sandys A Relation of a Journey begun An. Dom. 1610 (1621) opposite 30; see CN I 1245 and n.

the Spring: Cf CN III 3320, 3556 and nn.

f58^v Colonists…degenerate, by excision: Cf TT 14 Aug 1831, 4 May 1833; see also Coleridge’s remedy in Inq Sp § 267.

Root (Radix, Race): See some related discussion in 4839.

Diastole and Systole of Humanity. See 4541 f38^v for the more usual use. Entry 4984 has some bearing here.

4867 21½.113 In “Omniana 1809–16”: LRI 346. For an almost identical statement see the letter to John Murray of 18 Jan 1822. CL V 198.

Leighton’s Commentary on the I Ep. of Peter: Leighton’s Works (1819) I, II 1–354; (1820) I, II 1–381. See above 4853n.

4868 21½.114 the doctrine of the 3 Dimensions: The context appears to be physical, even physiological. On Productivity, Irritability, Sensibility see 4541, 4862, 4865 and nn; the triple 3 refers to each of these seen in muscular, nervous, and glandular contexts. See also 4929 where the doctrine of the 3 Dimensions is elaborated schematically.

Such a natural historian as Tiedemann Zoologie (3 vols 1808–14) 128 stresses the three basic characteristics of animal life, “Reproduction, Irritabilität, und Sensibilität”. Cf 4541 f41, 4862 and nn. Coleridge insisted on the detailed application of the principle of polarity to his doctrine of the 3 Dimensions.

the firmamental and the fluid: OED cites Coleridge for a second use of the word firmamental, referring to his lecture On the Prometheus of Aeschylus (LR II 357 fn): “Rhea (from that is, the earth as the transitory, the ever-flowing nature, the flux and sum of phenomena, or objects of the outward sense, in contradistinction from the earth as Vesta, as the firmamental law that sustains and disposes the apparent world! …”

See below 4910 f72 and n. On firmamental see also, above 4555 f50^v, 4558 f53^v and nn.

4869 21½.115 Coleridge returned here to a reading of Eichhorn; see 4603 f53^v above.

wretchedness of the Septuagint Version…Theodotion’s Transl. of Daniel: Cf Eichhorn ATI 324:

Tr:…and Daniel, of them all, was the most wretchedly treated: for that reason the early church gave the same sanction to Theodotion’s translation of this prophet that the seventy translators were given for all the other books.

Daniel was among the latest. See 4615 and n.

Council of 70 in Alexandria. The True meaning of Septuagint: Again Eichhorn AT I 315.

Tr: After the death of Alexander there remained an unusually large colony of Jews in Egypt, and especially in Alexandria. With their change in location they suffered no change in their love for the religion of their forebears; they were all the more zealous to maintain the exercise of it exactly as did their brother believers in Palestine …and set up here, as there were there, synagogues and a Sanhedrim of seventy or seventy-two members, exactly like the Sanhedrim of Jerusalem…. Even less knowledge of the Hebrew language [than with those in Palestine who had returned from the Babylonian Captivity] was to be expected among the Egyptian Jews, who in their everyday life used not even the Chaldean, but the Greek…. In short, they wanted a written Greek translation of the books of Moses.

If this was to be done officially, undoubtedly the Sanhedrin would superintend… since it was probably composed of seventy or seventy-two members, like the one in Jerusalem, the translation was named that of the seventy or seventy-two translators.

Pentateuch as the eldest…delivered to Ptol. Philadelphus and Lagi: Cf Eichhorn AT I 316:

Tr: Finally, since the first consideration of their compilation concerned the synagogues, it seems apparent from the unanimous witness of ancient times, that at first only the five books of Moses were translated, and at that time only these were read in the synagogues.

Eichhorn AT I 317 suggests that the Greek Pentateuch was delivered to the library at Alexandria when Ptolemy I Lagi and his son, Ptolemy II Philadelphus were reigning jointly; that is, 285–283 B.C.

On the translations of the OT Eichhorn wrote (AT I 323–4):

Tr: The translator of the five books of Moses deserves the prize over all others, for his knowledge of both lore and language is distinctive. The next place after him is due the translator of Proverbs; his work does not have the stiffness of a dictionary, for he had both languages very much at his command; often he stays with only the sense of the original, and when he does err, the genius is recognizable even in the errors. Job is translated by a man possessed of a poetic soul and versed in the Greek poets, as is clear from, e.g., his use of the form[to perish] for(Job 9:16 and 33:18 etc.) and similar poetic forms: but he was too weak in a knowledge of the Hebrew language and learning, which should be lacking least of all in an expositor and translator of Job. The Psalms and the Prophets are ruined by men without feeling for the beautiful and without poetic spirit; and among them all, Daniel is the most wretchedly done….

Reading of the Prophets in the Synagogue: Cf Eichhorn AT I 319.

Tr: For only after this time [Ptolemy VI Philometor] did the Egyptian Jews introduce the prophets into their synagogues, following their fellowbelievers in Palestine who had read them aloud in their synagogues from 170 B.C. And this public use of the prophets probably first made their translation into Greek necessary.

oracles: I.e. the Hebrew prophets.

oracles: I.e. the Hebrew prophets.

4870 21½.116 f6o Esdras with exception of the 3 & 4 Chapters …and the Chronicles: Based on Eichhorn “Über den apokryphischen Esdras”: Apok 306.

Tr: Indeed, a more precise comparison of this with the Hebrew Ezra has convinced me that the latter obviously stands as a foundation for the former, and that the apocryphal book, in the places where it is parallel to the canonical, can be described as nothing other than a free translation of the Hebrew Ezra we have…. The first chapter, which describes the Passover Feast of Josiah, corresponds generally to II Chron 35 and 36, and the last 19 verses of the last chapter correspond to Neh 7:73 to 8:13.

Eichhorn (341–63) quotes examples of parallel wordings.

3^rd & 4^th unknown: Eichhorn Apok 337.

used largely by Josephus: Eichhorn Apok 347–51 pointed out the use of Esdras in the Antiquities IX–XL.

Aλη Θεια: See above, 4536 and n. Coleridge is discussing the passage about truth in 1 Esdras 4:34–40. Eichhorn did not discuss it. In this entry it becomes clear that Coleridge

equated with the Latin halitus, “breath”, so that ’Aλήθεια (Truth) is here synonymous with the OT Ruach Elohim, “Breath of God”. Eichhorn NT II 169–71 enumerated OT and Apocrypha passages which speak of the “Breath of God” as creating man, inspiring the prophets, and being the spirit of creative wisdom in the world. Eichhorn Apok 189 pointed out that the Jews later used λογος to mean “wisdom personified”; see Coleridge’s objection below f60^v.

a Christian Interpreter would have rendered LOGOS: John 1:1–14. Coleridge adopted the usual Christian distinction between the Logos (Christ) as the actualizing Alterity of God and the Pneuma Hagion (Holy Spirit), operative on earth, a distinction not so sharply defined in Judaic thought, or in early Christian thought, Eichhorn NT II 170–71; see also 5249 f34 and n.

Outerance: OED outrance, outtrance, utterance; cf “outering” in 4954 f109 and n.

Sophia: “Wisdom”; Coleridge often pointed out that this was a patristic term for the Holy Ghost, e.g. in CN II 2445 and in a MS note on SM:LS (CC) 67n. In 5339 below and a marginal note on Eichhorn Apok 87–9, he identified the Santa Sophia of the Greek church with the Holy Ghost; see 5339 f36^v. Cf the Böhme ref in CN III 3263 and n.

κτισιν η πανγενεσον: “creation or genesis of all things” alluding to I Es 4:35; the Greek is Coleridge’s and πανγενεσιν appears to be his coinage. In Judaic thought, especially in the Apocrypha, the attribution of the Creation to Wisdom is common, as illustrated by Eichhorn NT II 170.

Spirit=7 Spirits of God rest in plenitude on the Messiah: Rev 1:4 and 5:6; Eichhorn ABbL III 216–25 traced the Judaic and Cabalistic identification of the Seven Spirits with the Messiah. For Coleridge’s reading of this work see 4625, above and n. Coleridge may also have had in mind Eichhorn NT II 171n where this Cabalistic tradition was placed earlier than the time of Christ, as Coleridge in Lect 10 P Lects (CC) f448 placed the Cabala. Cf Eichhorn ABbL III 218:

Tr: And according to the teaching of John in his gospel have not father and son a πνευμα (spirit) in common with one another (John 16:13)? If therefore the Evangelist is the Apostle John and also the author of the Apocalypse, he must include the seven spirits of God in the Son, or else he does not agree here with his gospel.

f60v “I am the truth”; John 14:6.

Koran…declares Christ to have been Ruach Jehovah: e.g. Surah IV: 171, “Verily, Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, is the apostle of God, and his word, which he conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit proceeding from him….” quoted in Gibbon Decline and Fall (1802) IX 265; see CN III 3814n. A copy of the Koran tr George Sale (2 vols 1812) appeared in Green SC. See 5299 and n.

not a personification: I.e. “truth” in I Es 4:34–40; Coleridge is arguing with Eichhorn (Apok 189); see above.

Amoibaian Eclogue: “alternately answering dialogue”; see The Friend (CC) I 417 n2.

υ.35…37.40: I.e. I Es 4:35–37, 40. Coleridge compares this with John’s Epistle because in the Johanine literature is often identified with the Christ or the Holy Spirit.

the only philosophy adopted, or rather adapted by the Jews: I.e. the Platonic philosophy in which the Good and the True are not mere personifications but“pure reality”. Eichhorn Apok 22 held that the Jews adopted Chaldaic and Greek philosophy in the five centuries before Christ, and developed a higher religion from a lower; in a marginal note on this page Coleridge objected that the Jews were then a degenerating race. He held that in the poetry of their former periods they saw the Ruach Hakodesh as the Jehovah-man 4854 f51^v and n).

Prudentius Psychomachia: See CN II 3203 and n.

4871 21½.117 Eichhorn Apok 296 commented on the story of Judith: (tr) “From beginning to end this account lacks probability and historical accuracy. In it the conditions of the Jews before and after the Exile, the rule of the Assyrians and the Persians, separated by centuries, history and chronology are all jumbled together, and the assumptions about the world are completely incredible”. He then pointed out the discrepancies in the dating of the relief of Bethulia from Holofernes. He cited other historical errors, such as the attribution of rulership to a High Priest when Israel was ruled by kings, concluding (303): (tr) “Finally, as a memorial of the relief of Bethulia, the Jews were annually supposed to celebrate a feast (Judith 16:31), and no ancient writer knows a thing about this religious institution”.

received even as canonical by only not all the fathers: Eichhorn Apok 331–3 said that the first use of Judith as canonical came in Clement of Rome, and from then on it was so cited by Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Ambrose, Jerome, and others.

trans-personed: A nonce-word.

4872 21½.118 The Mosaic thronghout a Stete-dispensation: On the Mosaic code as dictated largely by political considerations, see e.g. 4562, 5269 and nn.

schism of the 10 tribes: I.e. the splitting of Israel into the northern ten tribes and the southern two (Judah and Benjamin) in 938 B.C., after the death of Solomon. 1 Kings 12:20–4.

represented by the Prophets as individual Persons: E.g. Isa 44:1–2; 48:12; 49:17–22; 51:20; Jer 2:14; 49:1; Ezek 16:1–63.

Jonas…an Instance: Cf Eichhorn AT III 259–60, “Jonas”:

Tr: Israel, as teacher of the heathen, could not be more conveniently represented than in the person of a prophet. The writer chose the name of an ancient prophet, Jonah, the son of Amitai, for the simple reason, perhaps, that aside from the name, nothing was known of him, and he could therefore be given any character deemed appropriate.

Paul, a Hebrew. Acts 22:1–3.

Christ as the Head and Church as his Members—his Body: E.g. Rom 12:4–5.

Miracles as contra-distinguished from Pr[ovidence]: See CN III 3278n; and below 4985 and n.

my view of the Plagues of Egypt: I.e. that the account in Ex 7 and 8 was a later misunderstanding which turned hieroglyphic predictions and talismans into historical events. In a note on Webster The Displaying of Supposed Witchcraft (see 4611n) 84–5 Coleridge wrote:

…I should extend a similar interpretation to the Egyptian Magi—I am at least strongly inclined to believe that the account in the first documents, was written or insculpt in hieroglyphic symbols, and referred to Predictions chiefly—so that we may throughout render the words—& this the Priests had likewise predicted in their Almanachs, or meteoro- and astro-logical Reports to the Government.

See also a marginal note on Hillhouse Hadad in CM (CC) II.

4873 21½.119 The entry appears to be undatable; beginning at the top of a page, it could have been written in the notebook at any time.

On the Schmen is graphically clear but of uncertain meaning, which might be elucidated if we had Coleridge’s Marginal Note; unfortunately his copy of Thomas Thomson A System of Chemistry (3rd ed 5 vols Edinburgh 1807) has disappeared. Possibly Coleridge’s note referred to the Sch[ool]men and Thomson’s description, in his historical introduction, of the early alchemical chemists, such as Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon, Raymond Lull, and others. See Lect 9 P Lects (CC) ff412–414 and n 43. Thomson’s 3rd edition contained the first account of Dalton’s atomic theory. (Gillman SC shows only a copy of the 2nd ed 4 vols Edinburgh 1804.)

p. 388. Third Edition is the first page of Thomson’s chapter “Of Light”.

Coleridge was here objecting to Thomson’s assumption of the materiality of light (1807) I 389:

It was first demonstrated by Roemer, a Danish philosopher, that light takes about eight minutes in moving across one half of the earth’s orbit; consequently it moves at the rate of nearly 200,000 miles in a second. The discovery of Roemer has been still farther confirmed and elucidated by Dr Bradley’s very ingenious theory of the aberration of the light of the fixed stars….

2. From this astonishing velocity we are enabled to form such notion of the size of the particles of light.

On the previous page Thomson discussed an early form of the undulatory theory, developed or revived by Thomas Young who, presenting himself as a Newtonian, argued for an undulatory theory and the rectilinear propagation of light to which Coleridge refers.

a just contemplation of Color: Thomson (401–2) discussed briefly the colourific and calorific aspects of light; see also 5290, and 5446.

Rings & c from pressure of Glass Plates: Thomson referred to glass plates and to Newton on the phenomena of light passing through a medium, but not in terms close to Newton’s Opticks which Coleridge annotated in the edition (among others?) of 1721 (Green SC). See Lect 3 P Lects (CC) f58 and n 4. See also 4855 and n.

4874 29.93 importation of Pictures…: Coleridge and Green clearly thought that expenditure on works of art was investment of the national wealth, as against those who decried it at a time of a very large National Debt. See 5056 below and n. Coleridge seems to have considered this a sufficiently novel view to make a note of it.

4875 29.94 In “Omniana 1809–16”: LR 1 343 var, reading “In Roman Catholic states”. The plus and minus signs, i.e. more Roman, less Catholic, distinct in the MS, were omitted in LR. Coleridge often attacked Roman Catholicism for being more Roman than Catholic. Cf 4821 and n and 5126.

4876 29.95 Misattributing: Apparently C’s coinage.

4877 29.96 In 1820 Coleridge read an article in a German Encyclopaedia Vol I where he read also the article on the Abendmahl (see 5172n), on the “Abiponenses” (CL V 96) almost certainly J.J.Ersch’s Allgemeine Encyclopädie. Probably he had learned that Derwent and Sara were translating from the Latin An Account of the Abipones of Martin Dobrizhoffer. Derwent dropped out, but Sara completed the three volumes for publication 9 Mar 1822. The relevant passages appear to be in Vol II Chap 21 on the belief in immortality and Vol II Chap 8, not in the 2 first Chapters of Vol. II. as Coleridge says. Chap 21 “Of the Diseases, Physicians and Medicines of the Abipones”:

In a word, [the] greatest part of the Abipones die when they are satiated with life, when, weary of the burden of fears, they long for death as the rest and solace of their miserable existence. Thus circumstance occasions the common error that they should never die at all were the Spaniards and the jugglers banished from America; for, to the arms of the former, and to the arts of the latter, they attribute the deaths of all their countrymen. A wound inflicted with a spear often gapes so wide that it affords ample room for life to go out and death to come in; yet if the man dies of the wound, they madly believe him killed, not by a weapon, but by the deadly arts of the jugglers…. The jugglers are commonly thought to be the authors of dis-eases, as well as of death, and the sick Abipones imagine that they shall recover as soon as ever those persons are removed…. The sick man immediately devotes the accused to death, for the preservation, as he thought, of his own life…. [One who was baptized and dying] caused us to entertain great hopes of his obtaining a happy immortality on many accounts. For, indifferent at the lamentations of his weeping domestics, he said they should remember he was going to visit the great house of the Creator of all things, the high father, the greatest captain. II 222–31.

There is no reference in the chapter to the absence of the Idea of God.

That appears in Chap 8 “Of the Religion of the Abipones”:

…what was my astonishment, when on removing…to a colony of Abipones, I found that the whole language of these savages does not contain a single word which expresses God or a divinity. To instruct them in religion, it was necessary to borrow the Spanish word for God…. Lo! this is the proof of their insanity! They are unacquainted with God, and with the very name of God, yet affectionately salute the evil spirit…with the title of grandfather… II 57–64.

This in relation to the Mosaic Mission: See 4562, 4708, 4794 f35 and nn.

4878 29.250 This entry of 23 Mar 1822 was on the page when with 5130 (f102) Coleridge encountered it. In fact the flower was held in place with a strip of paper glued close to the gutter, so that he did not notice it in counting the blanks. See 5110 f113. He drew a shaky pencil line around the piece of paper holding the flower, and c Feb 1824, wrote outside it.

The Milne family: When Coleridge first went to the Gillmans, Mr & Mrs James Milne (Margaret Bullock) and her sister Elizabeth (called Betsy) Bullock, in Southwood near the top of the road now called Highgate West Hill, were close neighbours to the Gillmans, who then lived in Moreton House in South Grove. In 1822 the Milnes went down West Hill to 9 Holly Terrace, and in Dec 1823 the Gillmans and Coleridge removed to 3 The Grove; the families remained within a few minutes’ walk from each other, though with the steep hill between them. Entry 4606 records a birthday bouquet from Miss Bullock to Coleridge.

4879 23.35 Here begins a series of running comments on data from the first two volumes of William Kirby and William Spence An Introduction to Entomology (4 vols 1815, 1817, 1826), with Coleridge’s usual condensations and alterations, as he halfcopied, half-remembered, what he had been reading, often improving upon this delightful work full of the sense of the beauty of insects. He recommended it in AR 210; see, however, a reservation in 4888 below. In Op Max (MS) he referred to the last chapter in Vol II saying, “tho I differ widely from the amiable and intelligent Authors’ conclusions, I strongly recommend [the work] to the Reader’s careful perusal”. MS Vol II f186. He mentioned it also in the Logic (CC) 74–5.

Coleridge’s notes appear to have been made only on the first two volumes, before Vols III and IV were published (1826).

A glance at the page numbers of his references in this group of entries (4879–4896), all of which seem to belong to early April 1822, throws interesting light on Coleridge’s process of reading, the pages in sequence being constantly interrupted by his return to elements from earlier pages; e.g. 4882 refers to K&S I 417 and then to I 328.

This entry is based on I 288–91. In Coleridge’s par 2, K&S (I 288), e.g., read “beautiful tribe of Iris” for Coleridge’s shewy Iris tribe, and for their “style-flag…often improperly regarded…” he wrote often but erroneously regarded….

arcus eminens of Haller: “a transverse membrane…which is sketched across the middle of the under surface of the petal-like expansion or style flag…” referred to by K&S I 288.

Sprengel conjectures: Ibid I 289, referring to Christian Conrad Sprengel (Berlin 1793). Coleridge pluralizes the “Saftmaal” of K&S.

f33^v With this and f34, except for the sweet simile in parenthesis from K&S (I 288–9), cf on the movements of bees, 5220.

In par 3 the substance, including the mouse-trap, is condensed sharply from K&S I (189–90), but for Coleridge’s last clause (and little Penit gets his jail-delivery), K&S has “these little go-betweens of Flora at length leave their prison”.

Par 4 down to the parenthesis is slightly condensed from K&S (1 290).

4880 23.36 Taken largely from K&S I 329–3, including the reference to Franciscus Redi De Insectis (Amsterdam 1685, 1686). The word υegetiυorous anticipating the first use cited in OED (1859) is Coleridge’s, also the suggestion Destruction simply and the three last sentences, from Remotion of the Destructed, Remotion and destruct (verb) are said to be rare and obsolete (OED), though remotion (for “removal”) is referred by OED to Chap VII BL (CC) I 117, also to Thomas Browne; destruct has one reference dated 1638.

Zoic: See 4553, 4617, 4862 above and 4886 below and nn; disanimate (as an adjective) is described as “obs. rare” in OED, though inter alios Thomas Browne used it as a verb.

The difficulty of word-formation from is that it means “life” in general, animal life in particular, and also the Light that was the Life of man (John 1:4). Coleridge was trying to distinguish fine gradations of life.

The footnote giving an example of disanimate Zöic was written as an afterthought after 4881 and 4882 had been written on the same page.

ammoniacal Gases or malaria: Malaria was early associated with swampy regions and “bad air”; its parasitic nature was not discovered until the late nineteenth century.

Of azöic the first OED example is dated 1854. A Coleridge coinage.

4881 23.37 K&S I 400 condensed.

4882 23.38 In AP 271. The first sentence is υar from K&S I 417.

The Arindy or Palma Christi Silkworm: K&S 1 328 describes “the Arindy silk-worm (Phal. Cynthia, Drury), which feeds solely on the leaves of the Palma Christi…and the thread…is woven into a coarse kind of white cloth of a loose texture, but of still more incredible durability than the last [the Tusseh silk-worms], the life of one person being seldom sufficient to wear out a garment made of it. It is used not only for clothing, but for packing fine cloths, &c”.

4883 23.39 K&S I 420 condensed, with the addition of the “hole or hold? at the end. K&S reads: “The booty thus seized it devours at leisure upon its raft, under which it retires when alarmed by any danger.” Coleridge is quick to add and invent the pun on hold.

4884 23.40 f35^v My Scheme of the Insect=Instinctive=Irritability…: See below 4894. Is this scheme the raison d’être for the reading of K&S in this group of entries? See above 4879n. Also 4719. N.b. not to forget Huber. K&S tells the story (I 374–5); Coleridge is terser, and substitutes pedæuυre for “manoeuvre”. He reported this experiment in AR 212.

f36 pedæuυre: From AR 212 assigned by OED to Coleridge as a nonceword. See also CM I Butler, C.Vindication I n I.

Understanding only means to an end: This paragraph is provoked by the argument that Huber’s experiment proves that the bees have more than “blind instinct”. “If in this instance these little animals were not guided by a process of reasoning, what is the distinction between reason and instinct? How could the most profound architect have better adapted the means to the end…?” I 375.

As Sense to Reason: Cf 4947.

Storgè: See CN III 3765, and above, 4770 and nn. Here Coleridge was thinking of it as love without lust?

Interpenetrancy: Not in OED, where “interpenetratively”, the adverb, is attributed to Coleridge. His alteration from synthesis is of interest, and the word opake, both implying as they seem to do, a degree of impenetrability, of something less than conscious; see below 4888.

Self-finding=Empfindung: See esp CN in 3605 and n and cross-reference there, CL VI 598–9 (a letter of 27 July 1826) and C&S (CC) 180. The German and Latin phrases mean “the feeling of longing”. The distinction between love and lust is basic Coleridge; see e.g. CN III 3293 f17, 3746 and nn.

Virgo Mater in Metaphysics…: The “Virgin Mother” in Metaphysics. “Mother of the divine-made-human Word”.

4885 23.41 pothos or desiderium: See the previous entry and n; also CN III 4335 and n.

4886 23.42 Coleridge quoted François Huber’s work on bees (see above 4833 and n), yet here he was probably basing his remarks about the cause of the anger of worker Bees against the Drones in K&S II 173–5 (which for this subject relied on Huber); he was also taking a glance backward (f36^v) at the Spinner-teats of the spider described in K&S 1 399 as “four little teat-like protuberances or spinners” in the “hinder part of the abdomen”.

The suggestion that the anger against the drones is aroused by a stoppage of the Actions (i.e. coition?) should be read in the light of CN I 1833: “Interruption of itself is painful.” As this entry continues one sees that the interest in Anger & Lust is not merely entomological; it extends to higher animals. See on anger and lust CN I 979 and n; and “Restraint” 241. Without exaggerating the subjective elements here, it is indubitable that Coleridge had long been analytical of frustration in human beings.

Animus Substans: For this play on the primary meaning of substance see 4679 and n.

the vague terms Reproduction, Irritability and Sensibility: See 4541, 5168 and nn. For these he substituted (see 4929 f29^v) τo εντομειδες: “insect-like”; “plant-like”; “pertaining to life in the proper sense”. These all appear to be Coleridge’s coinages. See 4862, 5168 and nn. On words compounded with ειδες see 4929 f30^v n.

The words idiozoic and zoic are very nearly synonymous, but from f22 it is evident that by life Coleridge meant Animal Life (Life proper: for the term is misapplied i.e. misappropriated to Vegetables. Yet in 4880 he used zoic for minimal or marginal animal life (chemi-zoic or disanimate zoic) and hence needed the new idiozoic for “life” in the stricter sense of animal life. See its use in 4929 f20^v and 5168.

a first Thought in its semi-fluid or matter-of-light state: Like genesis out of chaos; cf CN III 4418 ff12–14^v.

4887 23.43 Reflexions set in motion by K&S (II Letter XVII) on “Perfect Societies of Insects”, esp II 34–6 where the extraordinary pregnancy of the Mother termite is vividly described, her huge abdomen “enlarged to 1500 or 2000 times the size of the rest of her body” is “a vast matrix of eggs…remarkable for its peristaltic motion, (in this resembling the female ant), which, like the undulations of water, produces a perpetual and successive rise and fall over the whole surface of the abdomen, and occasions a constant extrusion of the eggs, amounting sometimes in old females to sixty a minute, or eighty thousand and upwards in twenty-four hours. As these females live two years in their perfect state, how astonishing must be the number produced in that time!” The whole account is written with a fascinated excitement which Coleridge reads analogically, transferring the process to metaphysics. See on metaphysical thinking 4692 and n.

f37^v the predominance of the Zoo-electrical over the Zoo-magnetic: See 4896 below.

incessancy is Coleridge’s swift condensacion of a long story. Ibid II 35–7.

Passion, Appetite, Affection: Cf the concern about Appetite in 4848; cf 4862.

auseinandersetzung: For Coleridge a favourite German compression for “a setting forth distinguishing one from the other”; see also 4577, 5086. In 5115 f112 he found a translation in unfold.

Unicuique-suum-appertiency. “To-each-its-own-allocation”. The phrase, and the word appertiency, are impeccably coined, the latter from appertio, which also is coined, from ad-partio, “I share”, “I distribute”. Appertiency is not in OED.

4888 23.44 Kirby and Spence, Vol. II. p. 187: Continuing the chapter on “Perfect Societies of Insects”.

my conjecture of the nature of Bee-Anger: Above in 4886.

f38 Kirby Vol. II. p. 198–199–et passim: In these pages, K&S criticised Huber for arguing that in the social activity of bees “the sole determining motive is the enjoyment of an agreeable sensation attached to these operations” (as at II 215). Although K&S used the language of sensation applied to bees, suggesting responses to shade and sun, odours, temperatures, and using such phrases as “Bees are extremely neat” (II 199), “bees can remember agreeable sensations” (II 202), bees are “irritable”, “eager”, etc., it seems to qualify the assumption by adding,

Surely it would be better to resolve all their proceedings at once into a direct impulse from the Creator, than to maintain a theory so contrary to fact; and which militates against the whole history which M.Huber, who adopts this theory from Bonnet, has so ably given of these creatures. That they may experience agreeable sensations from their various employments, nobody will deny; but that such sensations instruct them how to perform their several operations, without any plan previously impressed upon their sensorium, is contrary both to reason and experience. They have a plan, it is evident; and that plan, which proves that it is not mere sensation, they vary according to circumstances. As to affection—that bees are irritable, and feel the passion of anger, no one will deny; that they are also susceptible of fear, is equally evident; and if they feel anger and fear, why may they not also feel love? Further, if they have recourse to precautions for the prevention of any evil that seems to threaten them, how can we refuse them a degree of foresight? Must we also resolve all their patriotism, and the singular regard for the welfare of their community, which seems constantly to actuate them, and the sacrifices, even sometimes of themselves, that they make to promote and ensure it, into individual self-love? We would not set them up as rivals to man in intelligence, foresight, and the affections; but they have that degree of each that is necessary for their purposes. On account of the difficulties attending all theories that give them some degree of these qualities, to resolve all into mere sensation, is removing one difficulty by a greater.

II 215–16.

It is of some interest that Coleridge did not accept the teleological argument, at least in this form. See also 4890 below and Chap VII BL.

passion and sensibility: Cf 4862.

4889 23.45 AP 273 var. Cf Robert Leighton Meditations Critical and Practical on Psalm IV: Works (1819) IV 354, (1820) II 400; (1748) II 405: “As Bernard excellently speaks, ‘Nothing, Lord, that is Thine can suffice me without Thyself, nor can any thing that is mine without myself be pleasing to Thee.’ “The Latin as Coleridge has it is given (without specific reference) in a footnote. On Coleridge’s use of various editions of Leighton’s Works see 4853n.

4890 23.46 See 4888 above.

f38^v Durham: For Coleridge’s reading of William Derham see CN I and II index I under Derham, a name he habitually mis-spelled. K&S refers to his Physico-Theology.

Neuwentiet: I.e. Bernard Nieuwentijt (1654–1718), whose massive work in defence of teleological proofs of the existence of God was translated by John Chamberlayne: The Religious Philosopher, or the Right use of contemplating the Works of the Creator. (I) In the Wonderful Structure of their Animal Bodies; (II) In the Formation of the Elements; (III) In the Structure of the Heavens, Designed for the Conviction of Atheists (3 vols 1718). K&S does not refer to him.

Lyonnet: F.C.Lesser Théologie des Insectes tr P.Lyonnet; see CN II 2330, III 4448 and nn. This and other works of Lyonnet are quoted frequently by K&S.Lyonnet’s speciality was the anatomy of insects.

f39 Kirby & Spence II. 223…:

Another tribe of these little animals, before alluded to, is secured from harm by a different kind of imitation, and affords a beautiful instance of the wisdom of Providence in adapting means to their end. Some singular larvae, with a radiated anus, live in the nests of humble-bees, and are the offspring of a particular genus of flies, (Volucella, Geoffr., Pterocera, Meigen), many of the species of which strikingly resemble those bees in shape, clothing, and colour. Thus has the Author of nature provided that they may enter these nests and deposit their eggs undiscovered. Did these intruders venture themselves amongst the humble-bees in a less kindred form, their lives would probably pay the forefeit of their presumption. Mr. Sheppard once found one of these larvae in the nest of Aphis Raiella, K., but we could not ascertain what the fly was. Perhaps it might be Pterocera bombylans, Meig., which resembles those humble-bees that have a red anus.

The brilliant colours in which many insects are arrayed, may decorate them with some other view than that of mere ornament. They may dazzle their enemies.

II 223–4.

<So too the terrific ugly [Jaws] of Kirby's Stag-beetles, II^nd 224-5>

The frightful aspect of certain insects is another passive mean of defence by which they sometimes strike beholders, especially children, often great insect tormentors, with alarm, and so escape. The terrific and protended jaws of the stag-beetle (Lucanus Ceruus, L.) in Europe, and of the staghorn capricorn-beetle (Prionus cervicornis, F.) in America, may save them from the cruel fate of the poor cockchafer, whose gyrations and motions, when transfixed by a pin, too often form the amusement of ill-disciplined children…. What is the precise use of all the varieties of armour with which these little creatures are furnished it is not easy to say, but they may probably defend them from the attack of some enemies.

II 224–5.

One instance…in Paley’s Nat. Th.: In Chap XIII of Natural Theology, or the Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity, collected from the Appearances of Nature (1802) “Peculiar Organizations”, Paley used “the fang of a viper”, “a clear and curious example of mechanical con-trivance” (264) as part of his general argument from design. Paley did not (in the edition used) give Coleridge’s figures for the proportion of venomous to harmless serpents.

f39^v conspicuity: “now rare”. OED.

Demonstrations of the Supreme Being a posteriori: See 4786, 5110, 5114, 5128, 5129 and nn.

the higher Physiology…: See 4784 f128-f127^v and n.

The Bones of the Human Ear furnish a remarkable Instance: Coleridge did not write enough on the anatomy of the ear to make clear what he meant here.

4891 23.47 Coleridge’s exclamatory entry arises from the use of “prolegs (propedes)” by K&S (II 288–9) for the temporary legs of some larvae, which disappear on maturity. They are attached behind the six true legs. Coleridge’s blunder in calling them Forelegs as he saw at once, arose from the ambiguity of the prefix pro; in a Greek compound it would mean “fore”, in a Latin one, “instead of” i.e. Vice or Lieutenant de.

The hybrid word reminded Coleridge of a Graeco-Latin parallel, “hyper-acute” perpetrated by Robert Gooch in his Treatise on the Hydrocephalus Acutus (1821), a work Gooch translated from the German of L.A. Golis. Golis/Gooch described “dropsy of the head” as of three sorts, “hyper-acute”, “acute”, and “chronic” (p 4 and passim). Either Coleridge had seen the book or he was raising an objection to Gooch’s phrase in conversation with him or with medical friends. He knew Gooch, and in Aug 1812 had called him in to see “the alarming symptom of a swoln Leg, Ancle, and Foot” (CL III 414) and discussed with him his problem of addiction to opium.

Cf Coleridge’s joke about hysteron proteron and pre-posterous in CN III 3421 and n.

4892 23.48 In AP 271. K&S (II 355–6) on the flight of dragon flies, much condensed.

4893 23.49 K&S II 334–46, in discussing gossamer webs, refers to R[obert] Hooke’s conjecture:

…“Much resembling a cobweb,” says he, “or a confused lock of these cylinders, is a certain white substance which, after a fogg, may be observed to fly up and down the air: catching several of these, and examining them with my microscope, I found them to be much of the same form, looking most like to a flake of worsted prepared to be spun; though by what means they should be generated or produced is not easily imagined: they were of the same weight, or very little heavier than the air; and ’tis not unlikely, but that those great white clouds, that appear all the summertime, may be of the same substance.” So liable are even the wisest men to error when, leaving fact and experiment, they follow the guidance of fancy.

II 334–5.

mement[o] those brilliant Purissimoe: “remember” those brilliant “most pure”.

every summer afternoon…at Rome: Coleridge did not spend a summer in Rome; perhaps he returned after he left it in May 1806 some time before he left Italy 18 June, and perhaps May in Rome felt like summer to an Englishman. Or Leghorn in June? Or was he thinking of Catania late in the summer of 1805?

Gossamer…The amiable Historian of Selborne: See Inq Sp §189 for a marginal note by Coleridge on God’s Dame’s Hair in Gilbert White’s Natural History of Selborne Letter XXII (1802) I 326, where Coleridge offers a facetious etymology, “in monkish Latin (where I found it) called Fila Mariae Capillo Matris Dei—/Thus Gossip i.e. God’s Sib.” Here he spins more gossamer of his own making, with a reference to a cymar, or simar/symar, a light, loose robe or undergarment for Women, but sometimes part of ecclesiastical wear. K&S does not denounce, nor does Gilbert White confirm, this playful fancy.

der fligende Sommer: “In Germany these flights of gossamer appear so constantly in autumn, that they are there metaphorically called ‘Der fliegender [sic] Sommer’ (the flying or departing summer)” K&S II 340–1.

Bellerophon: The name of the son of Glaucus, who rode Pegasus and conquered the Amazons, was given to “H.M.S.Bellerophon”, which became affectionately known to English sailors as “Billy Ruffian”. It carried Napoleon to England after his surrender in 1815, a link that may well have added to Coleridge’s earlier enjoyment of the vulgar corruption; see CN II 2889.

4894 23.50 Coleridge was differing here somewhat from K&S in discussing the motion of insects (II 362–3). Cf:

It seems to me, that it is not by muscular strength alone that many insects are enabled to keep so long upon the wing. Every one who attends to them must have noticed that the velocity and duration of their flights depend much upon the heat or coolness of the atmosphere; especially the appearance of the sun…. As these animals have no circulating fluid except the air in their tracheae and bronchiae, their locomotive powers, with few exceptions, must depend altogether upon the state of that element. When the thermometer descends below a certain point they become torpid, and when it reaches a certain height they revive; so that the air must be regarded, in some sense, as their blood, or rather the caloric that it contains; which when conveyed by the air, it circulates quickly in them, invigorates all their motions, enters into the muscles and nervures of their wings, maintaining their tension, and by the greater or less rapidity of its pulsations accelerating or diminishing their action.

Instinctivity/Insectivity: emphasizing his point in 4884 above; see also 5168 on the word instinctivity.

As Coleridge himself translated it, “Insectivity”.

f41 Vis Irritabilitatis: “Power of Irritability”.

On all this, cf 4541, 5171, 5168, to select but a few references to the subject.

naturiency: Not in OED. Meaning possibly, “the unique nature”, or “the specific character”?

Respiration: Many entries deal with this subject; see e.g. 4854 f52^v, 5145.

With the categories here, cf 4884, 4886.

4895 23.51 f41 AP 271 has the first sentence, Coleridge’s own observation called to mind by reading K&S on the Tipulidae (II 360–74), where they are referred to as “dancing”, and steering between drops bigger than themselves.

f4I^v Ephemeræ…θεωρουντες θεωρηματα πραττονσι: “observers give shape to their observations”. The phrase (var) is from Plotinus Ennead III viii 4; Coleridge quoted it and applied it to Nature in Chap XII BL (CC) I 251–2: “with me the act of contemplation makes the thing contemplated”. This and a quotation from Réaumur (see below) were also used in the Logic (CC) 74, where the Plotinus passage is clearer: “Her [Nature’s] contemplative act is creative, and is one with the product of the contemplation.”

Intuitus (Anschauung reine) “Intuition (pure insight)”.

γεννημα: “product”.

Kirby & Spence Vol. II. p. 370: Almost verbatim to the end of this paragraph. Coleridge’s insertions indicate that in this instance, transcribing carefully, he re-read and corrected. The parenthetical an optical deception is his own.

of the Angles of the Angles: The repetition appears to be a slip.

Reaumur: R.A.F.Réaumur (1683–1757) is frequently mentioned in K&S; the account of the “gyrations of the Ephemerae” is quoted from him.

f42 his Mother a Semele or M^rs Amphyctyon: I.e. his mother was either an unmarried girl, like Semele when she became pregnant by Zeus, or a married woman, like Alcmene when Zeus took the place of her husband, Amphitryon. In either case the father was not a Frenchman (Réaumur) but a god. Coleridge’s odd Amphyctyon may be a slip associated with his interest in another case of mixed ancestry, Plato’s, whose mother was Amphictione. See 5240 f29, 5075 f29^v and nn.

Insects garrulous Mutes: The reconciliation of opposites at this point in K&S pleased Coleridge; a contradiction in the sentence clearly did not, and he amended it. K&S reads (II 375): “in this respect they [insects] are all perfectly mute; and though incessantly noisy, are everlastingly silent.”

It will be noted also that garrulous is Coleridge’s addition, in the interests of precision.

4896 23.52 See above 4884, 4894. Letter xxv in K&S is “On Luminous Insects”, but the speculative classifications here are Coleridge’s. See also 4894, 4910, 5168 and nn; various statements about these classifications appear in numerous entries.

luminous Marigolds: See PW I 99; Coleridge’s fn to Lines written at Shurton Bars appeared in Poems (1796) 186–8; (1797) 93–5. It was dropped by Coleridge from all later editions, having been copied from Erasmus Darwin’s lively note among his “Additional Notes” to The Botanic Garden Pt II Loves of the Plants Canto IV lines 43–54 (1794–5) 184–5; see CN I Index I under Darwin, E. The lines of the poem refer to fireflies and luminous insects, their “electric lustre”, with hints in the original note of electricity at work. The appended Additional Note records more vividly the experience of marigolds of a Mr Haggren, who saw a flash of light “repeatedly dart from a Marigold”.

Was Coleridge reminded of this by his reading G.R.Treviranus Biologie (6 vols Göttingen 1818)V 82–4, who discussed luminous plants as relatively scarce, referring to Calendula officinalis and other garden plants and also quoting the Swedish naturalist, Haggren, who saw luminosity only in flowers of a golden colour? See below 5341 and n.

4897 23.53 the first eleven Chapters of Exodus: I.e. the story of Israel in Egypt up to the instituting of the Passover.

a distinct Book…his Legislatorship: Coleridge may have had this idea from Eichhorn AT II 347–8, who referred to the story of the boyhood of Moses as a Familienchronik which, because of Moses’ later fame, found its way into the annals of the nation. Eichhorn did not identify this with the first eleven chapters, and Coleridge in a marginal note on 358–9 complained that Eichhorn “purposely slurred over the first 14 chapters …prudentiæ causa”.

analogous to the Gospels of the Infancy: In many entries and elsewhere Coleridge referred to his view of the spuriousness of the birth stories prefixed to Matthew and Luke; see 5240 f28^v and n.

Umarbeitung: “re-ordering/reworking”.

the biography of Daniel: See 5287 and n.

Rhapsodi: The reciters of Greek epics, probably by derivation meaning “stitchers together of poems”; an indication of Coleridge’s opinion on the Homeric authorship.

Homereuomenoi: See 4832 f61 and n: “singing together in company”.

the Book of Jasher: Josh 10:13 and 2 Sam 1:18. Eichhorn AT II 404 translated the Hebrew saipher jasher as Buch der Lieder, or “Book of Songs”. See below 5075 f30 and n.

rudely organized into…Judges: Eichhorn did not go so far. He maintained (II 425–41) that the book is made up of both songs and chronicles collected to celebrate heroes who saved Israel, and is a mixture of earlier and later materials.

Lycurgus: The famous Spartan lawgiver, and Pisistratus, tyrant of Athens 560–527 B.C., who, like Solon (4637n), were both credited with the collection and preservation of the Homeric texts.

Samuel & David: I.e. as possible preservers of the Hebrew poetic texts.

Pentateuch of the Two Tribes: I.e. the Pentateuch of the Southern Kingdom, later the Massoretic or Hebrew text, as distinguished from the Pentateuch of the Northern Kingdom, later called the Samaritan Pentateuch. In the transmission of the two traditions discrepancies occurred.

f43 Their Book of Joshua was different from the Joshua of Judæa: On Eichhorn AT II 408–9, Coleridge made an annotation parallel to this entry, pointed out that Joshua could not have been written before the division of Israel, as the book refers to the mountains of the two kingdoms, Judah and Israel, and that if it had been written earlier, it would have been found in the same form among the Samaritans. Eichhorn argued (II 414–6) that the Samaritans would not have had a book from their bitter enemies, the Kingdom of Judah.

“illiterate”.

Coleridge met Eichhorn’s argument by questioning whether JewishSamaritan hatred had not been dated too early. In Coleridge’s opinion the Jews owed the preservation of many of their religious writings to the Christian use of the OT; see 4769.

4898 23.54 These words, the last sentence of Arnobius Adversus gentes Bk V Chap 27, are first paraphrased and then quoted in the Cha-racteristick der alten Mysterien 131–2; see below in 4899 and n. After referring to Arnobius’s account of how by the improper behaviour of Baubo Ceres was made to laugh and forget her sorrows, the anonymous author paraphrases in German:

Tr: “How many kinds of things could we not have brought forward to laugh and to jeer at, were we not held back by two motives: first that these matters are considered to be parts of religion by the people (whom one should not mock for this but rather deplore and teach something better) and secondly by the authority, (or example) of Holy Writ (which indeed does not mock but directly and earnestly sets forth the absurdity of paganism and superstition).” This passage has not always been thus understood, and for that reason we find it necessary to set forth the words of the original…

Typically, without recording its secondary source from the same work as the next entry, Coleridge jotted down the doubtful text of the Arnobius passage in the original Latin which could be translated:

How many and what kinds of things could we have brought forward to mock and to jeer at, were it not that respect for the pagans and the dignity of literature forbade this.

Coleridge’s translation of gentis as common people and Literarum as sacred Scriptures rather than “Literature”, shows his agreement with the author of the Characteristick.

4899 23.55 See 4898 and n.

Of this scarce, anonymous The Nature of the Ancient Mysteries for the Learned and the Unlearned, Freemasons and Others from the original authors, the title-page is as Coleridge has it except for Characteristick, Freymäurer and Original-Schriftstellern.

In his preface the author declared his intention to combat those who see the Mystery religions not only as the source of the teachings of Moses but even of Christ and the pattern of the Christian community. He noted that some writers connected Freemasonry with them, but that not being a Freemason himself he could not make a judgement. He considers that the best way to counter those views is to set out the evidence, beginning with the Christian Fathers. If there had been virtue in the mysteries, the Fathers would have used them to defend Christianity instead of attacking them.

strangely misrepresents Origen in particular: Characteristick 201–3 discussed Origen Contra Celsum, inserting Origen’s word yραμματα in apposition to “myths and writings” (Fabeln und Schriften). (Coleridge supplied Origen’s μνθους “stories”, the obvious word.)

Tr: Origen himself [Bk 1 p 11] seems to judge favourably of the Mysteries. Celsus claimed that he knew everything the Christians taught. Origen replied, that there was much he did not know, and various matters he did not know correctly but had heard about them from ignorant people. To build on information from such people is as if one were to pass judgement on the wisdom of the Egyptians after listening only to the conversation of the common people without having any association with the priests or having instruction in their mysteries. “What I have said about the wise men of the Egyptians and the common people can also be said of the Persians. Both nations have mysteries which are guarded by wise men, whereas the common people get to see only the outer signs or symbols, and are left with a superficial view. The same may be said of the Syrians and Indians and of all who have both myths and writings (γραμματα).”

Sallust…describes the Kosmos: I.e. in Concerning the Gods and the Universe § 3, as quoted in CN III 3902 and n, and below in this n. f44 “Myth par excellence”—Coleridge’s addition.

and the creative Wisdom Logos as Mythologizing: Sallust did not use these words, but having said in § 2 that the gods are not separate from the First Cause any more than our thoughts are from the mind, he continued in § 3:

Tr: Consideration of those who have employed myths justifies us in saying that myths are divine; for indeed the inspired among poets, and the best of philosophers, and the founders of solemn rites, and the gods themselves in oracles have employed myths…. Again myths represent the active operations of the gods. The universe itself can be called a myth, since bodies and material objects are apparent in it, while souls and intellects are concealed.

Tr A.D.Nock (Cambridge 1926).

Origen’s belief the transgression of Adam and Eve was a Muthos: In Contra Celsum IV 40 Origen said

Tr:…the story of Adam will be interpreted philosophically by those who know that Adam means anthropos (man) in the Greek language; and that in what appears to be concerned with Adam, Moses is speaking of the nature of man. For, as the Bible says, “in Adam all die” and they were condemned in “the likeness of Adam’s transgression”. Here the divine word says this is not so much about an individual as of the whole race. Moreover in the sequence of sayings which seem to refer to one individual, the curse of Adam is shared by all men. There is also no woman to whom the curses pronounced against Eve do not apply.

Tr Henry Chadwick Origen Contra Celsum (Cambridge 1953).

Characteristick makes no mention of Origen on this subject. In what editions or commentaries Coleridge read Origen has not been discovered.

“in Hebrew letters”. Not in Characteristick. Origen Contra Celsum III 6 said that “the Hebrew letters that Moses used to write the five books thought sacred by the Jews were different from the Egyptian”.

Time, as the sole measure of Space: See 4929 f28 and f28^v.

The Author is ignorant of the true sense of the Gods: Cf 4555, 4625, 4910, and see also the next entry. Cf Coleridge’s enthusiasm for Creuz-er’s views in this respect in 4831 and 4832.

f44^v it behoves us to distinguish the…Speculative from the practical: In 5080n below a quotation from Op Max (MS) is relevant.

4900 23.56 Characteristick der alten Mysterien 134–6 (see 4899) summarised Arnobius Adversus nationes V Chap 32–45:

Tr: Lastly Arnobius passes judgment on the method of those who reduce the stories of the Gods to allegories. It is said that by Jupiter we are to understand the rain, by Ceres the earth, and by their mingling the penetration of the rain into the earth. Proserpina is supposed to be the seed of the fruits which is buried beneath the earth, and this is the significance of her rape by Pluto, just as, when it is said that Jupiter had intercourse with Proserpina, this is to show that the seed gets its growth from the rain. But these are subtleties and sophistries that make the representation even more scandalous and of which people originally had no idea. There are too many details left over in every story that cannot be explained in this way. What is the ox supposed to be, that Jupiter changed himself into when he had to do with Ceres? What is the meaning of the unwillingness with which Ceres met the violence offered her? What is the meaning of the flowers gathered by Persephone, the torches of Ceres, her wanderings, her arrival in Attica and at Eleusis? Baubo’s hut, her hospitality, the drink she offered Ceres, Ceres’ refusal of it, Baubo’s lifting her skirt, and Ceres’ pleasure at this sight? If one were to say “Only one point is allegorical, the rest is not” where is the criterion for distinguishing the one from the other? On this basis allegory and history would be forever mingled, and this ineptly. Proserpine would be the seed brought under the earth, and yet at the same time she is a girl gathering flowers. Atys would be the sun and yet be born in Phrygia and have experienced many human vicissitudes. Either it must all be allegory, or none of it is allegory. And it is easy to show this from the Mysteries, which had an origin and reasons for their establishment. Is the fir tree carried ceremonially in the temple of the Mother of the Gods not an image of that under which Atys castrated himself? Does not the setting up of the picture of a phallus refer to the scandalous behavior of Bacchus? And were not the Eleusinian Mysteries and secret practices celebrated in memory of the wanderings of Ceres, her coming to Attica, and her bringing of crops with her? If the Mysteries had their origin in real actions how can they be changed into allegories? By doing so one reproaches the Gods and expresses oneself in a shameful manner, whereas formerly one was dressing shameful actions in honourabie images. Is it not unbecoming to represent the penetration of the rain into the earth by the picture of Jupiter with his own mother? And where is the slightest necessity to cloak this so familiar and everyday event, for which we have proper and decent words, in pictures, and those such scandalous ones?

Arnobius, who knew nothing of the Mysteries but by Hear-say: Characteristick says (124) that Arnobius wrote c 297–303 A.D. (126), that he was not himself initiated into the Mysteries of the Great Mother, and that he drew from Clement of Alexandria, adding some further details of his own.

f45 the more August Mysteries: I.e. excluding principally the Bacchic and Cybelic. Cf Lect II of Phil Lects (1949) 9011, from Notebook 25 f29:

Tho’ I take as my criterion of the best Religion that which best evolves the purest morals by proposing to the People the strictest rule and loftiest Ideal, I am far from deeming this the whole of Religion—nay, I regard it no otherwise as Religion itself, than as I regard the Fruit of a Tree to be the Tree. In my sense of the term, it would not deserve the name of Religion, if it did not inculcate the beliefs of a divine Providence, a responsibility not confined to the Life present, and if not teach yet tend to excite, and predispose to, a sense of the Evil in the Heart of Man and a Hope, however dim and mythical, of a Redeemer therefrom. Thus but for the Mysteries Cabiri, Eleusinian—&c I should scarcely concede the possession of a Religion to the Greeks—and am little disposed to acquiesce in Creuzer’s assertion, that their popular mythology was a necessary or even expedient vestibule to the doctrines of the Mysteries. Highgate Decem^br. 26, 1818.

Origen, who had studied the subject, speaks very, very much more respectfully: See above 4899 f43^v, and Contra Celsum IV 10 and VI 22.

4901 23.57 Varro’s a quo=ex quo…ipsa actio: In noticing “Varro’s from which=out of which—and according to which” and adding “continuous action, or action itself”, Coleridge was commenting on the account in Characteristick der alten Mysterien (see 4899) of Varro as reported by St Augustine City of God VII xxviii:

Tr: Varro [according to Augustine] similarly explains the famous Samothracian Mysteries, of which he says that he intends to expound what the partakers themselves do not know. And he continued, that he has concluded, from many indications, that one of their statues represents the sky, which is male, the second the earth, which is female, and a third the patterns of things (exempla) which Plato calls “ideas”; and he calls the sky that by which (a quo) the earth that of which (ex quo) and the pattern that according to which (secundum quod) all things are created…

Characteristick 173

O ων of St. John: “Who is”, John 1:18; see 5256 below and n.

Pleroma Realitatis: “Fullness/Plenitude of Reality”, words often used by Coleridge. Pleroma appears in John 1:16. Cf 5233 below and n.

Idea Idearum: “Idea of Ideas”, in the Platonic sense. Cf above 4739 and n.

πνεvμα τρις αγιον: “spirit thrice holy”; see 5248 below and n.

under which last term the Hebrews…united the Logos and the Pneuma: Described in Eichhorn NT II 169–71; see above 4870 and n.

Samothracum…pollicetur: Coleridge inserted the words Fidei Ecclesiæ, into the loose quotation (in the Characteristick 173) of Varro in St Augustine regarding the Samothracian Mysteries, making the sentence read: “He [Varro] promises to expound in writing the mysteries of the Faith Church and things that are not known even to her own members”.

Varro, de seipso: “Varro, about himself’, Characteristick ibid.

On Varro see below 5232 f39 and n.

4902 23.58 The last paragraph of the entry was written on f46 before the last part of 23.33 (in CN V) was written. The entry seems to be a continuation of 4897 above, on the composition of Exodus 1–11. It was perhaps triggered by Coleridge’s reading in Eichhorn AT II 348–52:

Tr: Elsewhere series of events are summarily placed togeher which are separated by intervals of time from one another and which were hardly known to the Lawgiver all at the same time. Thus in Exodus 3:19–22 there appears the statement of something that could not possibly have been known until the last day of the exodus of the Hebrews: that only when Pharaoh was brought to the utmost extremity would he let the people go, and that they would take with them many valuables from the hands of the Egyptians. Also, the fact that just before the release of the Israelites Pharaoh’s first-born prince would lose his life could hardly have been known as early as it is reported, in Exodus 4:23.

IV. 2–9: Ex 4:2–9, actually 4:1–9, gives the account of the two signs that God gave Moses to show him that he would be able to convince Pharaoh with signs and wonders: the first, turning the rod into a serpent and back again; the second, afflicting his hand with leprosy and then restoring it.

Inventions of Harmonists: See below 5041 and n.

anticipations…III. 22: Ex 3:22 is God’s statement to Moses, cited by Eichhorn, that the Israelites would take jewels and raiment from the Egyptians as they departed.

Pars-maximist: Coleridge’s coinage for the compiler/editor of the “greatest part” of these documents.

24, 25, 26: Ex 4:24–6 is an interjected account of Zipporah’s circumcising Moses’ and her son. Coleridge used this ambiguous story as a sample of the misplaced fragments.

f46 the V^th.: Ex 5 gives an account of Moses’ difficulties in persuading Pharaoh to release the Israelites. The entry is unfinished, but appears to question Mosaic authorship of Ex 5.

4903 29.97 In Part, omitting the reference to Hartley, in AP 300.

idiocies: “Hartley’s idiocies”; cf “a chain of strange almost Idiocies, Neglects, Provocations, and Promise-breach” referred to in a letter of 15 Jan 1822 to Derwent: CL V 196.

“rational Self-love”, the same as “enlightened Self-love”: Coleridge knew by identification that the root of HC’s failures was a sense of guilt; see the close of a letter to Allsop 8 Oct 1822: CL V 252.

On “the Doctors of Self-Love”, for one example among many of his vigorous objections, see CN III 3559 and n. Coleridge’s attacks on Paley are to be found through the index to every CN volume.

Rochefacault: Francois Rochefoucauld (1613–80), whose Maxims ran to many editions and translations, and whose works had recently been collected, in 1818.

4904 29.98 Printed in Inq Sp § 248. This entry, in a hand and ink like 4903, is probably of the same 6 July 1822 date.

4905 29.99 Tuesday 15 July 1822 would have been the 23^rd Day of Derwent’s Fever— thought to have been typhus, of which there was a severe epidemic in Cambridge at the time. Typhus was sometimes called “the 21-day Fever”. The period was one of accumulated miseries for Coleridge. He and the Gillmans were in financial straits, the burden of which was embarrassingly increased for Coleridge by the domestication of Hartley with all his problems and odd manners (4903), Mrs C’s nagging, and now Derwent’s illness. Hartley hurt his father badly by leaving unceremoniously without announcement while Derwent was still considered to be in danger. See CL V 245–8.

4906 29.100 More literal and more laborious than Coleridge’s translation, “Often years are as nothing—moments how weighty”. See the previous note, and, for what Coleridge felt about Hartley’s conduct as a moment heavy with significance at this time, CL V 251.

4907 29.101 The differences in the beliefs of the Greek Church and those of the Latin, on the procession of the Holy Ghost, preoccupied many English theologians, e.g. Richard Field Of the Church (1635) 51– 3 (Bk III Chap I), which work Coleridge annotated heavily, John Pearson An Exposition of the Creed (1741) 325–6, and various others.

μη οντως οντα: “Things not really existing”.

the Nous: “Mind”; cf 4796 f49.

Logos: “the Word”. See e.g. 4554 and n above.

πνευμα: “breath or spirit”.

Se effundens+Effluens se refundens: “pouring Itself out, and as it flows out, pouring itself back”. Cf 5249.

Forms+Lux+Lumen=Sol: “Forms plus the source of Light plus created Light equal the Sun”. Cf 5290 and n.

Lux lucifica: “light-creating Light”.

Radii Luciferi: “Light-bringing Rays”.

Uranions…Pleroma Actualitatum: “heavenly ones, Ideas in divine form, eternal truths, Plenitude of Actualities”. Cf 5241 f29^v.

How art thou fallen, Lucifer, Son of the Morning: Isa 14:12.

actus absolutus sine potentialit[at]e: “absolute act without any potentiality”; see 4644, 4998.

the Luciferi: “the Light-Bearers”.

To θειον: “the Divine”.

τo πονηρον: “evil”.

τo ανθρωπινον: “humanity”.

4908 29.102 f67^v Coleridge had been reading Johann Carl Passavant, Untersuchungen über den Lebensmagnetismus und das Hellsehen (Frankfurt am Main 1821).

Magia Thelematica, Thelematomagy, or Zoo-magnetism: For Thelematic “of or pertaining to will or volition” OED quotes Bentham. Coleridge’s sceptical terms—here “will-magic”—for animal magnetism at this date indicate some decline in enthusiasm (see 4512 and n) but, as he said, no basic change in his attitude towards mesmerism.

Passavant’s approach appealed to Coleridge because it was that of a medical man interviewing patients and citing cases, interested in the historical background of his subject and seeing in it a pious argument for the power of the spiritual. There were in his work links with magnetists familiar by name to Coleridge, and he made frequent references to Moritz’s psychological magazine, Gnōthi Sauton (see CN III 3587n).

the Idea: I.e. of the possibility of the transference of influence from the magnetiser, or mesmerist, to another person, as Passavant describes it in his introduction, “Von der magischen Kraft des Menschen in All-gemeinen” (Of the magical/mysterious power of human beings in general). (Pt I Chap 1 § i).

the argument from anatogy: Passavant’s Pt I Chap 3 is entitled “Von den Wirkungen der magischen Kraft auf die verschiedenen Naturreiche” (Of the operations/processes of magical power/energy in the different realms of the natural world).

f68 Depth…Space…Length…Breadth: See for some elucidation of this point, 4515, 4929 and nn.

the Female who misled Montanus & thro’ him Tertullian: The story comes from a French report in Annales du magnetisme animal (Paris 1814—see 4512 n above) “Observations occasioned by the fall of Tertullian by means of somnambulistic revelations. By J.B.de Joannis, Mayor of Tourquant near Saumur” in Archiv für den thierischen Magnetismus 11 ii 160–61:

Tr: It is demonstrated here from the writings of Tertullian that there were somnambulists at that time and that Montan and the other founders of sects of the time were just such clairvoyant somnambulists. Tertullian relates of one: “In her transports she sees and hears the heavenly mysteries, she knows what is hidden in the hearts of divers persons, gives curative simples to those who desire them.” These phenomena are important for the history of animal magnetism, and it might easily be demonstrated physiologically and psychologically that Mohamet and other prophets were but natural somnambulists.

Böhme is referred to by Passavant (123–4); on Swedenborg in this context, see e.g. 4799 and many other entries in this volume.

On Philo and Porphyry and their fantasies see e.g. on the first, Lect 7 P Lects (CC) ff326–327, and on the second, 5079, 5081, 5207 and nn.

Bleton is described by Passavant as a “metal-feeler” of the previous century, a waterdiviner from Dauphine, a man without education whose skill was variously tested. (He was in fact a public sensation.) In the next paragraph Campetti is mentioned, a young Italian contemporary, attested by a “Physiker, von Ritter”. Coleridge may have read of him in C.A. Kluge Magnetismus (245).

In the next paragraph comes Catharina Beutler, apparently a stolid, heavy, healthy woman who early in life displayed to the learned persons around her, near Constance, great gifts of divination of water and metals, and she also had powers of healing. Passavant (128–31) writes of her in the present tense, which may or may not be Coleridge’s whole evidence.

Of Aymar (spelled Aimar) long stories are told (132–8) of his prowess in tracking down murderers by his gift of second sight and his use of a piece of wood as a sympathetic conductor of reactions.

Frau Pedegache (140 foll) is said also to have had powers of seeing things buried in the earth, and at a great depth. She could not see the human body through clothing, but she could see internal organs, abcesses, etc, if a body was bare, and whether a sevenmonth foetus was male or female. There are other stories about her, and Oken included her in his Die Curiositäten.

Zahuris of Spain: Passavant (158–9) wrote about her in the Weimar periodical. See the Zahuris also in CN II 3143. Jean Paul Richter introduced into the first part of Titan a Zahuri who comes from Spain to see his son, telling him that he has seen the dead deep in the earth and knows when they appear and speak, but he can neither see nor hear them on earth. Richter has a note to the effect that the Zahuris of Spain were wellknown and relied upon for their skill in discerning corpses, metal-work etc, underground. Titan (Berlin 1800) I 76; see CN III 4276, 4279 and nn on Coleridge’s reading of this work.

QR (Jan 1820) XXII 373–4 had an article “Popular Mythology of the Middle Ages” with a fn on water-divining by means of hazel switches, saying that “The faculty so inherent in certain persons is evidently the same with that of the Spanish Zahories, though the latter do not employ the hazel twig”.

f69 we ought to begin at the other end: I.e. not with generalizations, as Schelling does, e.g., in his “Ideen und Erfahrungen über thierischen Magnetismus”: Jahrbücher der Medicin als Wissenschaft (Tübingen 1807) II ii 158–90, and as Kluge also does in his Versuch einer Darstellung des animalischen Magnetismus als Heilmittel (Berlin 1815) of which the “Theoretischer Theil” Pt I is given 308 pages, Pt II “Praktischer Theil” 130 pages. Possibly the remark was stimulated here by Passavant’s generalisations in his Pt I 40 foll.

f68^v all Infidels…during the five first centuries of the Church: E.g. Lucian? Porphyry? Philostratus? See Lect 7 P Lects (CC) 27–9.

Italian Paganists at the restoration of literature: Referring to the Renaissance Platonists; cf Lect 10 P Lects (CC) ff444–446.

clair-voyance, Hell-sehen, Inward Vision…: The second division of Part I of Passavant’s work is “Vom Somnambulismus und Hellsehen”, which includes five subsections on clairvoyance in dreams, in illness, on the verge of death, in contemplation, in the prophets. See also above 4808.

Part II of Passavant, on Lebensmagnetismus, is historical, reviewing Hebrew, Indian, Greek and Roman, Nordic, and Christian evidences for the inspirability of man.

f69 suscipiency: Not cited by OED before 1885; subscipient was used by some of Coleridge’s favourite 17th-century divines.

f69 the Cases…do not bear out the Theory: Unlike many of his con-temporaries, Coleridge believed in the general integrity of the facts presented, but not in the logic of the theory. He advocated in this context the inductive method.

Wienholt comes nearest to this: Arnold Wienholt appears in 4622 f19 in a list of scientists with Bacon, Boyle, and Helmont. See 4622 and n.

Kluge: Coleridge’s copy of C.A.Kluge’s Versuch, heavily annotated by Coleridge, is in the BM. See P Lects (CC) Lect 10 f461 fn, Lect 2 n 64, Lect 7, n32.

4909 29.103 Haliburton’s Life: Thomas Halyburton Memoirs of the Life of the Reverend, Learned, and Pious Mr. Thomas Halyburton, Professor of Divinity in the University of St. Andrews (Edinburgh 1797). Many editions were printed, with great variations in substance, but from the page references in this entry it is obvious that Coleridge is reading the tenth edition, 1797.

Following the portrayal of his youthful struggles (Pt III Chap I 61–79) there is a description of “the dreadful Strait I was at last brought to, with my Outgate”. This “Outgate” experience is then described in Pt III Chap II 79–98, “Containing an Account of the Outgate I got about the close of January 1698, and the State of Matters thereon”. From severe and prolonged depression, he records a sudden release, which he attributes to “the Word”, not any one particular text but “the concurring Light of a great many of the promises and testimonies of the word seasonally set home, and most plainly expressing the truths above mentioned” (83) “But it was not the word alone that conveyed the discovery” (83)—i.e. not “the letter” of the Scriptures, but rather “there was a light in them”, which “burning light shone into my mind”, and was “more than a mere “spark kindled by my own endeavours…” (83). He goes on to describe the loss of his guilt, fear, and self-doubt and an exchange for a state of cheerfulness, hope, and an opening-out of himself towards the world at large.

mean by the Blood of Christ: Halyburton quotes the phrase frequently—e.g. Pt III Chap II 81 (from Rom 3:24) and Chap V 127.

Archbish. Leighton for instance: See f70 below.

f70 Lord himself mean to convey, John VI: John 6:53–6, which records Jesus’ command to his disciples to eat of his flesh and drink of his blood.

this, he explained, was a spiritual Substance: John 6:63.

S^t John as an Eye-witness…corporeal & animal Blood: See above 4626, 4854 and nn.

a marginal note in the first Vol. of Leighton’s Works: In Gillman’s copy (4 vols 1819) I 2; the note reads in CM under Leighton:

By the blood of Christ I mean, that I contemplate the Christ, first as Christus Agens, the Jehovah Christ, God the Word; and secondly, As Christus patiens, the God Incarnate. In the former (i.e. as Chr. agens) he is relative to the human intellect Lux lucifica, Sol intellectualis; relativè ad existentiam humanam, he is the Anima animans, Calor fovens. In the latter, i.e. as Christus Patiens, he is Vita vivificans, Principium Spiritualis (id est, verae ) Reproductionis in vitam veram. Now this principle, or Vis Vitae vitam communicans, considered in forma passiva, assimilationem patiens, at the same time that it excites the soul to the vital act of assimilating—this, I say, is the Blood of Christ, really (vere seu spiritualiter) present thro’ Faith and actually (actu) partaken by the Faithful.

Haliburton…doubts respecting…a Supreme Being: Halyburton Pt III Chap VI “Recounting my exercise about the Being of God, and shewing the way of my Outgate from this Temptation” 131–8.

Omnibus dependentibus præsumitur independens: “before all dependents an independent is presumed”.

Heterozetesis: On this logical falacy see BL (CC) I 142n3.

in Thy Light did I see light: This is the leading idea in Halyburton’s Pt III Chaps II, VI, VII (79–98, 131–45), and there are many such phrases there—e.g. “And now the light being come, and the Lord seen in his own Light…” (135–8 and similarly 152–3).

f70^v with regard to the written Word: Halyburton Pt III Chap VII “Containing an Account how I came to be satisfied that the Scriptures are the Word of God, and how Temptations in reference to them were repelled” (138–53). As Coleridge points out, Halyburton came to be concerned only with the effect of “a light reflected on the whole Scripture” (145).

f71 Smiles of the Soul…p. 193: This is the page number that identifies Coleridge’s edition; Halyburton Pt IV Chap V:

…March 23 1712. the Lord’s day, a day to be remembered by me, a day wholly spent in prayer and praise, an introduction to life: “O my soul! never forget what this day I felt, I reached. My soul had smiles that almost wasted Nature.” My kind colleague and I prayed alternately: “O such a sweet day!” About half an hour after Sabbath, my child, after a sharp conflict betwixt nature and the disease, slept pleasantly in Jesus, to whom pleasantly he was oft given.

Plotinus: Not quoted by Halyburton, who clearly had little Latin and no Greek; the passage is from Enneads VI. 9.9 with minor variants from Coleridge’s edition, ed Ficino, Basle 1580 (CN I 201n): “Thus we have all the vision that may be of Him and of ourselves, but it is of a self wrought to splendour, brimmed with the Intellectual Light, become that very light, pure, buoyant, unburdened, raised to Godhood or, better, knowing its Godhood, all revealed then—but crushed out once more if it should take up the discarded burden.” Tr (adapted) Stephen MacKenna (1930).

Princes=δυναμεις η δυνασται…: “powers, or powerful ones falling away from the plenitude? Rulers of the air?” The word Aεραρχοι derives from Eph 2:2.

των ορωμενων: Coleridge translates: “of the seen”.

Hence (says Pl[otinus]) it was forbidden…in the Mysteries: Enneads VI 9 10–11: “The man is changed; no longer himself or self-belonging, he is merged with the Supreme…which is to be known only as one with ourselves. This is the purpose of that rule of our Mysteries: Nothing divulged to the Uninitiate.” Tr ibid.

words represent abstractions and generalizations only: Cf 4835.

all and each of his Sins: Halyburton throughout sets forth his sins, but perhaps Coleridge is thinking of Pt IV Chap Iv where he lists “Queries to be considered as my private Case” (177–8).

f71^v image from his own book…Francesco de Sales: Halyburton Pt III Chap V 126–7:

Hereon I essayed to humbly my self distinctly for every one of them, and to make a distinct Application to the throne of grace about each; but when I began to observe them, they were so many, that if I had followed this course, my whole time would not have sufficed: Hereon the Lord led me to that course, which a worthy friend, to whom I owe much for a distinct understanding of the Lord’s work with me, told me what Franciscus Desales a Popish casuist advises to in this case; I was fain to take them all in the lump, or rather to go with them all on me at once, and plunge my self in the fountain that’s opened for sin and for uncleanness…. That Popish casuist before mentioned, as my worthy friend told me, illustrates this by a very elegant similitude, “If a Man see one or two filthy creatures on him, he shakes or washes them off: But if he look and see himself all overspread with such, then he must bethink himself of some general course, he goes to some bridge, and leaps into a deep pool, and drowns them all, and leaves them behind him.

For Coleridge’s complaint of a similar mechanical system in Jeremy Taylor see 5370.

One notes that Coleridge introduces the tactile details of the aromatic Bath, the Lice, Fleas, Bugs, and rags.

Coleridge was interested in Francesco de Sales; see CN III 3907 f56 and n, but he attributed this idea to Luther in a marginal note on A Companion to the Altar bound with his copy of BCP; see CM I BCP 31.

The Moravian Doctrine: for Coleridge on Moravianism see CN III 4169 and n, and 4671; on the limitations of Puritan attitudes on this point see CN III 3901. RS Life of Wesley I 80, 158–9 describes the Moravian doctrine of assurance of salvation at the moment of conversion and tranquility thereafter.

ƒx 79 and fx 79^v: The two paragraphs given in this peculiar foliation were once on a slip of paper pinned to f79^v; clearly it ought to have been attached to f71^v.

the 5 last lines of p. 19…3 first of p. 20: Halyburton Pt I Chap I “Narrating the state of matters with me from the time of my birth till I was about ten years of age, or thereby”:

2. I cannot at all conceive it consistent with the wisdom, goodness, or equity of God, to send me thus into the world, without any fault on my part. To say I was thus originally framed without respect to any sin chargeable to me, is a position so full of flat contrariety to all the notions I can entertain of the Deity, that I cannot think of it without horror much less can I believe and give assent to it.

The two following sentences are:

3. Penal, then, this corruption must be, as death and diseases are. And whereof can it be a punishment, if not of Adam’s sin?

not in Time…timeless: For Coleridge on the necessity of this distinction see references in CN III 3763n and above in 4853.

4910 29.104 Part of the material in this entry was used in Coleridge’s lecture “On the Prometheus of Aeschylus”; see LR II 356–7. f71^v W.Wordsworth’s incomparable Ode: For Coleridge on the Intimations of Immortality Ode elsewhere, see Chap XXII BL (CC) II 138, 147, 152–4; also The Friend (CC) I 40 n, 509–10. He is here misquoting from memory:

Earth fills her lap with pleasure of her own; Yearnings she hath in her own natural kind, And, even with something of a Mother’s mind, And no unworthy aim, The homely Nurse doth all she can To make her Foster-child, her Inmate Man, Forget the glories he hath known, And that imperial palace whence he came.

WPW IV 281.

In Coleridge’s edition of Henry More’s Philosophical Poems (Cambridge 1647) referred to in CN III 4316n, The Proeexistency of the Soul begins at p 255 (misprinted 225); his copy is now lost, but his marginalia on it were published by Ingleby, and more accessibly by T.Ashe in Miscellanies (1885) 332–6, neither of whom printed annotations on this poem. The article on More’s Song of the Soul No 212, in Omniana II 155–77, is full of RS’s antagonisms; see TT (Ashe) 392–3 for Coleridge’s comment dated 27 Dec 1819.

f72 In the quotations Coleridge transcribed here, the italics are his, also the glosses, the one on § 6 being compressed in the right hand lower corner of the page. § 7 continues after his two-line extract:

Though now, whether through our own miscariage Or secret force of fate, that all doth move We be cast low, for why? the sportful love Of our great Maker (like as mothers dear In pleasance from them do their children shove That back again they may recoyl more near) Shoves of our souls a while, the more them to endear.

Vesta: Vesta, the Greek Hestia represented Earth and the central fire, as well as hearth and home; cf 5090 and n.

, fluo: “I flow”. See above 4868 and n.

Pan: The name is identical with the neuter singular, “all”. See above 4868 and n.

f72^v= whēthr: Coleridge is explaining the scansion of line 3, §^8.

Præteritum…continuum: “past still present or past continuous”.

renitence: OED, quoting H.More for a 1676 use, says “obs”, meaning physical resistance or pressure; here used metaphorically.

perpession: Here “experience of external impact or influence.” Cf More’s § 14 lines 7–9.

All ear, all eye, with rayes round shining bright; Sphear of pure sense which nor perpessions curb Nor uncouth shapen Spectres ever can disturb.

Like “passion”, an ambiguous word. See More’s “Interpretation General” (421) in the volume being used here, justifying strange words in poetry.

pseudography: Not in OED.

foreslow: On υer…υerkochen…υerreissen and German prefixes generally see CN II 3160. Cf More § 16:

But earthly-mindednesse may eath foreslow Their flight, then near the ground in airy weeds they go;

Stanza 17 reads:

Awak’d to life more ample than before, If they their fortune good could then pursue. But sith unwillingly they were ytore From their dear carkasses their fate they rue, And terrene thoughts their troubled minds embue: So that in languishment they linger near Their wonted homes and oft themselves they shew; Sometimes on purpose, sometimes unaware That wak’d by hasty call they streightway disappear.

f73 Stanza 18: Sleep-walking interested Coleridge in the literature of animal magnetism; see above 4512, 4908 and nn.

Idiozoic Life: Not in OED; sensible life, having sensibility, life peculiar to the animal. See 4617 and n.

dead pro tempore: dead “for the time being”.

Zoë entomöides: Coleridge’s insectiform Life is an exact equivalent of the Greek phrase.

insectiform Life…Irritability or Arterio-muscular Life: On the terms for three kinds of life see 5168 and n. See also 4813 f53^v, 4884, 4886, 4894, 4896, 4929 and nn.

parenchymatous: The word parenchyma is attributed by OED to Purchas; it came much into use in the surge of progress in biology and anatomy in the early nineteenth century.

Neurolepsia: Not in OED. “nervous seizure”.

auras electricas: “electric airs” or “auras”; see e.g. 4896 and n.

what you look: A slip for what you like?

Des Cartes: For a similar objection see CN III 3605 and n, and Lect 12 P Lects (CC) ff 550–554.

Plotinus: Many of Coleridge’s comments on Plotinus would gloss this remark; see e.g. CN II 2164, 2167 and nn.

f73^v the πρωτον ψευδος…that they commence with an Abstraction: The “fundamental error” is again the one often charged by Coleridge against the German transcendentalists; see 4839 f121^v. See also CN III 3824 f112^v, 4449 and nn.

Pseudo-platonists: Like Henry More.

Epicurean-Naturalists: Like Gassendi?

Suffictions or hypopoieses: See CN III 3587.

the eight orbs…: Referring to Psychanathasia, or the Immortality of the Soul Bk I Canto 3:

This number suits well with the Universe: The number’s eight of the Orbs generall, From whence things flow or wherein they converse, The first we name Nature Monadicall, The second hight Life Intellectuall, Third Psychicall; the fourth Imaginative, Fifth Sensitive, the sixth Spermaticall, The seventh be fading forms Quantitative, The eighth Hyle or Ananke perverse, coactive.

Philosophical Poems (1647) 100.

4911 29.105 Ante-nicene Fathers…misquoted by the Artans: Cf Waterland’s arguments in his Second Vindication of Christ’s Divinity (1723), 27–8, 78–105, in which he accuses Samuel Clarke of misunderstanding such Fathers as Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian. Coleridge quoted from this work in annotating Field Of the Church (Oxford 1635) 129–33; in CM. His annotated copy of the first Vindication (1719) is in the BM.

in revising my lucubrations on the Trinity: See 5215.

quasi Creation: “seeming Creation”; the Arian view, condemned by the Council of Nicea, that the Son was created. Coleridge said that in the Trinitarian controversy, Waterland ”gave the death-blow to Arianism”; marginal note on Baxter Reliquiae Baxterianae (Copy B) CM I 358.

“in the beginning”; John 1:1–2.

“from the beginning”.

4912 29.106 Measures of Time in Daniel…& half a time: Dan 12:7 and 7:25; see 4794 f34^v. Cf Rev 12:14.

the Run of Commentators…chronological accuracy: Cf Eichhorn AT III 342–3:

Tr: Nowhere but in Daniel do we meet such an exact prophetic measure of time. It is set forth now, “A time, two times, and a half a time” (Dan 7:25; 12:7), now “two thousand three hundred days” (8:14), now “one thousand two hundred and seventy days” (12:11, 12); and the better commentators all note that in most of the passages cited the numbers are not to be taken with literal exactitude.

If the Days were in fact 1350…1270: Orthodox modes of interpreting these “time” prophecies have been to let the word time mean “year”, so that “a time and times and half a time” would stand for “a year and two years and half a year”, or “three and a half years”; the number of “days” in this period would thus be three and a half multiplied by 360 or 364, 1260 or 1270 “days”; each prophetic “day” would represent a literal year, and thus the prophecy is said to speak of 1260 to 1270 years. Precise totals vary among interpreters. See e.g. J.H.Frere A Combined View of the Prophecies of Daniel, Esdras, and St.John (1815) 197–204, and G.S.Faber A Dissertation on the Prophecies (2 vols London 1807) I ix-xxii 3–13, and passim. Both writers summarize other and similar views in the period. Coleridge was familiar with both works. See 4615 and n.

the Pythagorean Wisdom: Coleridge frequently refers with respect to Pythagorean insights especially in symbolic mathematics; see e.g. CN III 3818n and 4784, 4831, 5406, 5439 and nn. See also two notes in P Lects (CC), Lect 2 n 33 and Lect 3 n 12, referring to marginalia critical of Tennemann on Pythagoreanism.

4913 29.107 Eichhorn AT III pointed out that the Psalms, Proverbs, Song of Solomon, and even Isaiah were all anthologies (83); that many of the psalms are wrongly ascribed to David (398–415, 429–38); and that Ecclesiastes is neither by Solomon nor from the time of Solomon but by the common Hebrew practice was ascribed to a former great man by a later writer (561–70). Cf in CM Eichhorn AT III 88, 101, where Coleridge seems to take (earlier?) a different view of what he there dubs Eichhorn’s “guess” about Isaiah.

4914 29.108 f75 Stoic Paradoxes: Cf CN III 4445 and n. See also 5121 below and n.

Lord Bacon’s Christians Faith: Coleridge refers to “The Characters of a believing Christian, in Paradoxes, and seeming Contradictions. Compared with the Copy printed Lond. 1645”: Bacon’s Works (4 vols ed Mallett 1740) IV 504–7. It consists of twentyfour paradoxes, e.g. “He [the Christian] believes three to be one, and one to be three; a father not to be elder than his son: a son to be equal to his father…”. Cf Coleridge’s own Confessio Fidei in CN III 4005.

Voltaire’s sarcastic use of lampooning paradox against the Bible and Christian orthodoxy scarcely needs documentation, but probably Coleridge is thinking specifically of Voltaire’s Dictionnaire philosophique, made up of his contributions to the Encyclopédie; see 5000 and n, SM:LS (CC) 75 and n, 83.

Volney: See 4916 and n. Attacks on the paradoxical in religion occur everywhere also in Volney, but are concentrated particularly in Les Ruines Chap XXI, “Problems of Religious Contradiction”, and Chap XXII, “Origin and Genealogy of Religious Ideas”.

4915 29.109 the understanding in exclusion of the Reason: I.e. Reason in the ideal Kantian sense, (see 5170 and n) and understanding in the limited analytical sense.

Unitarian & Mahometan: Persecution is rather a strong accusation to make against Unitarianism’s tendency to intolerant rationalism. Mahometanism, at least according to the letter of its laws, from the 7th century, tended to violence against all “infidels”, e.g. Christian and Jewish infidels.

the same with the modern Jews: They were not all like Coleridge’s liberal-minded friend, Hyman Hurwitz; or was C thinking of the ostracism of Spinosa by his Jewish community after the anonymous Tractatus theologico-politicus (1670) was known to be by him? See CN II 2646n.

Priestley and Belsham: See CN I 50, III 3905 and above 4750 and nn.

Mystics: See e.g. CN III 3560 for one list, C&S (CC) 165 for another; and for visionaries contrasted with rationalists CN III 3907; for a commentary pertinent here, see, on St Teresa, CN III 3911. For a more general argument, see the Nous-Antinous dialogue 4931 and AR Conclusion 381 foll. The Appendix to C&S (CC) 165 derives the word mystic and refers to misinterpretations of it.

4916 29.110 Volney: Constantin-François, Comte de Volney (I 757–1820) Les Ruines, ou meditation sur les revolutions des empires (Paris 1791) went into twenty-two editions, exclusive of translations, in Volney’s lifetime. The edition to which Coleridge was here referring has not been identified.

I read him, when young: See Lects 1795 (CC) 183 and nn.

Wapping Bagnio: Brothel in the dock area of London.

f75^v Son of God…as old as his Father: See f76 below. Cf Bacon’s paradox quoted in 4914n above.

adequate, & therefore…substantial, Idea: See 5159, 5421.

rest of Volney’s Pseudo-Christian Creed: In Chap XXI “The Problem of Religious Contradictions” Volney sketched in sarcastic terms the dogmas and sacraments of the Roman Catholic church by setting up a debate among Moslems, Jews, Christians, Brahmins, Zoroastrians, and Lamists; see f76 below.

haud ejusdem generis: “certainly not of the same kind”.

co-incidences with the Zenda-vesta…Lamism, & the like: E.g. in the creation stories in the various sacred books; again Chap XXII. Cf 4794 ff36 and 36^v.

whimsical most arbitrary connections with Astronomy: Chap XXI links OT and Christian beliefs concerning the creation with astronomical calculations; also Chap XXII “Origin and genealogy of religious ideas” Sect XIII “Christianity, or the allegorical worship of the sun under the cabbalistical names of Chris-en or Christ and Yes-us or Jesus”.

f76 hearing <heard> An obvious slip for “having heard”.

passage commencing…: (1792) 110:

Tr: Then with the Bible in one hand, and the Four Evangelists in the other, the doctor began to relate that in the beginning God (after having passed an eternity without doing anything) conceived at length the design (without apparent motive) of forming the world out of nothing: that having in six days created the whole universe, he found himself tired on the seventh: that having placed the first pair of human beings in a delightful garden to make them completely happy, he nevertheless forbade them to taste of the fruit of one tree which he planted within their reach: that these parents having yielded to temptation, all their race (as yet unborn) were condemned to suffer the penalty of a fault which they had no share in committing: that after permitting the human species to damn themselves for four or five thousand years, this God of compassion ordered his well-beloved son, engendered without a mother and of the same age as himself, to descend upon the earth in order to be put to death, and this for the salvation of mankind, the majority of whom have nevertheless continued in the road to sin and damnation: that to remedy this new inconvenience, this God, the son of a woman who was at once a mother and a virgin, after having died and risen again, commences a new existence every day, and under the form of a morsel of dough is multiplied a thousand fold at the pleasure of the basest of mankind.

Tr Anon (1796).

4917 29.111 Tilloch’s Phil[osophical] Mag[azine]: The article is by William Spence, “On an Insect which is occasionally very injurious to Fruit-Trees” LIX 439–40:

This tree is a remarkable example of the effect of partial decortication, as recommended by Dr. Darwin (Phytologia, p. 378), in inducing the production of flower instead of leaf-buds. Not only the bark, but half the trunk, as above observed, is eaten through in many places; yet though a new twig is scarcely ever put forth, it never fails to be laden with blossom and fruit. Here I may observe that a similar result, as to the increased produce of fruit, and the paler green of the leaves, with that above referred to by Dr. Darwin, I have myself seen on a branch of a pear-tree, from which nearly a complete cylinder of bark had been gnawed by cattle. It was filled with fruit, while not a pear was to be seen on the rest of the tree.

Coleridge used Phil Mag earlier, in 4587, and possibly years before that; see CN III 4357, 4407nn. It may be noticed that he says only Consult Darwin’s Phytologia, p. 378, not stating that he has done so. Beginning on 377 Darwin reads:

…the power, which produces the lateral germination of buds, seems to require a less mature organization than that, which is employed in the sexual generation of seeds; whence a kind of puberty of the plant seems to be acquired for the production of the seminal or amatorial progeny, analogous to the transformation of caterpillars into butterflies;…

p 378:

…if scions from a bearing walnut or mulberry tree were ingrafted on a feeding one, that it would produce fruit in two or three years; which otherwise would not occur in less than twenty.

the Fly…whose eggs produce the Gooseberry Caterpillar appeared in a letter to the editor of Phil Mag, “Description of the Gooseberry Caterpillar; and practical means for preventing its ranges”.

4918 25.98 Dress, furniture [are] extensions of the appearance of the human person, the face he shows to the world? See a delightfully relevant little work by James Laver, Style in Costume (Oxford 1949).

4919 25.99 Of the English physiocrats, followers of François Quesnay (1694–1774), who believed that land was the source of all wealth and therefore ideally of all taxation, and that industry and commerce should run a free course, Coleridge may have been thinking of Cartwright (see CN III 3836, 3839, 3840) and of Malthus, Bentham, James Mill, all to some extent affected by the doctrine. See The Friend (CC) I 200–14.

See also 4921 below.

A State…subsists in its own productive Ideas: Cf C&S (CC) 37–41.

4920 25.100 Canning’s additional argument…not borrowed from The FRIEND: I.e., argument against parliamentary reform, measures being variously advocated by Francis Burdett especially, and by Cartwright and others, from c 1810 onwards. The essence of Coleridge’s objections to proposed reforms was not that reform was unnecessary, rather that it would be achieved not by quantitative changes in electoral method but by qualitative improvements in principles of government and in popular education towards that end. Cf The Friend (CC) I 262.

Canning in a speech at Liverpool 30 Aug 1822, at a farewell dinner in his honour, having made numerous speeches against proposed reforms of The House of Commons, recited arguments of the reformers and said:

If you reform the House of Commons, on the grounds of past misconduct, what will you do with the House of Lords?…If no such reform is to be applied to the House of Lords, what is the supposed effect upon that house of a reform of the House of Commons? Let us fairly speak out:—Is the unreformed House of Lords to continue in full vigour, to counteract the will of the reformed House of Commons? Where, then is the use of the reform?…

Let any man say, that his views of reform go no farther than to the removal of blots, and I am with him. But it is because the arguments for reform…tend not to remedy, but to destroy; not to correct what may be amiss in a system of representation which combines all species of property, admits all species of industry, opens the door to all species of talent;—it is because they appear to me to tend to a system to be founded exclusively on what is called the power of the people; a power which, if recognised in the sense in which they proclaim it, must act, not in concert with other powers, not by a conflict and compromise of different interests; but by its own uncontrolled authority, supreme and alone;—it is for this reason that I think it right to oppose, in limine, projects of parliamentary reform.

Gentlemen, it is said, however, that, besides the faulty composition of the House of Commons, there is an influence of the Crown which perverts and paralyzes all its functions. My first answer to this proposition is the same which I have made to the proposition for alteration in the House of Commons. How rarely does the House of Lords differ from the other house in its decisions?…Is it the influence of the Crown which predominates in the House of Lords too? If it is,—do you mean to leave the House of Lords still subject to the same influence, and still with an equal voice in the decision of every national question? If not—is not the project still, though upon another pretext, to erect an instrument which will make the operation of the House of Lords completely nugatory; to place in a new, an untried organ the whole practical energy of the constitution?

The speech was reported in full in the Courier of 2 Sept 1822, probably an approximate date for the entry.

This is the only published speech of Canning in which this “additional argument” about applying reform principles to the House of Lords was adumbrated.

Is Coleridge suggesting what would be a radical change in the House of Lords? Answer. Why not?

the King is allowed to make peers: “Since the fifteenth century a patent has been the regular means of creating a new peerage; it is now the means invariably used.” F.W.Maitland The Constitutional History of England ed H.A.L.Fisher (Cambridge 1963) 167.

the State can only declare…: “In order that an act of the Crown may be recognized as an expression of the Royal will, and have any legal effect whatever, it must in general be done with the assent of, or through some Minister or Ministers who will be held responsible for it. For the Royal will can, speaking generally, be expressed only in one of three different ways, viz…. (3) by…patents, letters, or other documents under the Great Seal…. The Great Seal is affixed to a document on the responsibility of the Chancellor…” A.V.Dicey Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (10th ed 1944) 325–6.

4921 25.101 In contending that art, science, and crafts are equally indigenous with agriculture, Coleridge was here extending his argument in 4919. See also The Friend (CC) 1178 and n 2.

Night-man: One who empties cess pools and disposes of night-soil during the night.

4922 25.102 The momentous Error of H.Steffens in his Conception of the State: Cf Chap I “Die Stadt” in H.Steffens, Carkaturen des Heiligsten (Leipzig 1819) and see Coleridge’s comments on earlier pages of this chapter, in 4940–4942. Because misunderstanding is at issue, here the German is quoted (24–5):

Creuzer noted (I 54n) that this is from the Iliad 249, Voss’s translation, and gave the German translation only. Coleridge gives the Greek. Creuzer noted that had also spread its roots to the German, perhaps, and it seems to be one word with reden and raten. Cf Logic (CC) 27 and n 4.

The possible derivation of Faba, the judicial Bean…: On the judicial Bean, so called because various coloured beans were used for voting, see 4616. Coleridge’s derivation seems fanciful. Creuzer is not the source here.

Mυθοι Aισωπικοι: “Aesopic Fables”; for Coleridge’s statement cf Seneca Consolation to Polybius VIII Moral Epistles quoted e.g. by Lessing Sämmtliche Schriften II 229.

pretended Phædrus…Perotti’s own composition…: Coleridge was referring here to the controversy surrounding a compilation of fables, some of them attributed to Phaedrus (15 B.C.–50 A.D.), but suspected of being fabrications by Nicolai Perotti, Archbishop of Siponto, in the middle of the 15^th century (1430–80). Perotti attributed some sixty of the fables to Phaedrus, thirty of which had been known before but thirty of which were new.

f60^v presumptions against the earlier existence of the Parisian Mss: The first publication of the fables of Phaedrus was by Pierre Pithou (Troyes 1596) based on a ninth-century MS he had discovered in Paris; many scholars were sceptical of its genuineness. Another was discovered in Rheims in 1608. The controversy over the authenticity of these fables went on, mainly in Germany, until well into the nineteenth century. Coleridge is evidently confusing Pithou and Perotti because Perotti’s name was more widely associated with the Phaedrus compilation. Perotti’s MS of his collection of fables, found in 1727, was lost again but eventually rediscovered and first published by Cataldo Jannelli in 1811.

and stronger those in in favor of it: Stronger than those in favor of it?

internal evidence of the Fables themselves: In the controversies Pithou and subsequently Perotti were accused of inventing the character of Phaedrus and the biographical and other allusions to the age of Tiberius and Sejanus; modern scholars accept them as genuine.

Perotti’s own conduct…: Or Pithou’s? It is not known what Coleridge had in mind, nor is the source of his knowledge of these controversies known, but a full account of them may be found in L. Hervieux Les fabulistes latins (2 vols Paris 1893) I 38–205.

Macpherson & his Ossian: For Coleridge’s early interest in Ossian see CN I 161 [g] and n; and on the disputed authenticity of Macpherson’s Ossian see below 5248 and n.

Mυθος πολιτικος η δημοσιος: “political or popular myth”; see ff59^v–60 above.

the Aινος: “fable”; see ff59–59^v above; Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 93n translated the term into German as Naturfabel or Äsopischer Fabel but held that since the German language had no exact equivalent, it was best to retain the Greek word.

ut Omnes pro Pluribus: “as All for Many”.

Demetrius…sseems to use Symbol and Allegory as Synonimes: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 690:

Tr: Demetrius de eloc. par 100ff—“allegory is like darkness and night”; here as well as in par 243 allegory and symbol are synonymous.

highest and fullest Sense of Symbol: See 4831 and n.

ειδωλον,…εικων,…ομοιωμα: “image in the mind/visible image/picture”; from “substantial image/analogy/portrait”; from “likeness/simile”; see 4831 and n.

opposition of προσβολη to διεξοδος: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 66:

Tr: It is a single glance; at one blow the intuition stands complete. In Greek, as explained above, this “pictorial word” (προσβολή) served to convey the idea of the pictorial depiction, and for the slow process of the understanding they coined the word διέξοδος, just as fortunate a one, for it suggested a long path. We have borrowed the translation of this from Latin with our term “discursive thinking”.

See 4831 f57 above.

Demetrius §. 243… “For the following reason the symbol has so much trenchancy. It is similar to brevity in speech, for from that which is spoken briefly the most must be deduced, just as from symbols.” Translated into German in Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 70n, from Demetrius De elocutione § 243. See f61^v below.

the mythological I o: See 4839n

Theomythics (θεομυθιαι): “myths of gods”; see 4831 f57; the Greek word θεομυθίας is translated by Creuzer (Symbolik (1810–12) I 23) as Theomythien. He does not discuss the Io legend.

f61 instance of βοντρωτος…: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 71–2:

Tr: Helenus” on the flight from Troy, his home city, sought another home during his long, difficult wandering, and finally, on the coast of Epiros, he offered the disembarkation sacrifice. Since the death blow did not fell the sacrificial ox, it broke loose, plunged into the sea, swam across a bay, lay down on the shore, and died. The hero saw it in this sense [as a symbol sent by the gods]…and immediately on that spot laid the foundation stone of his city, which he named, after the wounded ox, Boutrotos [“Ox wound”].

⁹⁹ Etymologicum magnum on βουτρωτóς, p. 210…

the Life of Homer…: A supposititious work written in the second century A.D. incorporating earlier material. In it Homer is said to have been given the name at Cumae because in the local dialect meant “blind”. The derivation from “not” (rather than Coleridge’s α) and ορος (connected with “I see”), “by metathesis”, comes in Eustathius, Tzetzes, Etymologicum magnum and Stephanus. Suidas has the tale of his being a hostage. ‘Oμήρενoμαι means “I am a hostage”, but it is very like the verb used by Hesiod Theogonia 39: “harmonising with their voices”. The explanation that the name is derived from ομο “together” and αρ “fit”, suggested earlier by Hesychius and Eustathius, was a popular derivation with the “higher critics” of Homer—e.g. Carl David Ilgen (ed) Hymni Homerici Halle (1796) X and Johann G.Herder “Homer und das Epos” Werke (44 vols Tübingen 1820–29) XXVI 338– 9, with the meaning of “a fitter together of songs” rather than I sing in company. This latter may be Coleridge’s own. Cf 4897, 5071 and nn, and cf the annotation on Homeric Hymns (ed Gottfried Hermann Leipzig 1806) vi—vii now in Cornell University Library and on Eichhorn AT II 250—both in CM II.

“physiomyths”, or myths of the physical world (as opposed to theomyths).

of Dyonis. Halicarn. & Strabo: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 104 n (tr):

More appropriate [than Saga] is the Greek expression πατροπαράδοτα [“things handed down from the fathers”] used by Strabo and Dionysius of Helicarnassus. Antiq. Rom. Bk. V Chap 48.

And Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 107 n: πατροπαράδοτα μεμυθευμένα “ancestral traditions made into myths”.

σνμβολαια…Etymon…συμβάλλεσθαι…Definition of Symbol already given: See 4831 and n.

Demetrius does not say…καθαπερ εκ συμβολων: Demetrius does not say “as symbols” but “as from symbols”; see f60^v above; and cf 4831 f57.

Plutarch (de genio Socratis)…Plato taught mythically…Venus: Creuzer Symbolik (1810–12) I 114: