Club of Jews: Coleridge discussed this “toast” in 4925.

goodiness: Coleridge’s coinage in the Courier 20 Jan 1810: EOT (CC) II 91; see there n 6 for additional uses. When HCR objected to HNC’s presentation of Coleridge in TT as a “goody” man rather than a good man, he was making a defence STC would have appreciated.

(see Friend): Possibly a reference to No 5 The Friend (CC) II 64–78, or (CC) I 100– 106, on the moral responsibility of writers in the communication of truth and the firm hope of goodness.

Blackwood’s Magazine for the last year or 10 months: Coleridge earlier had published articles 1819–22 in Blackwood’s; see 4509 and 4930 and nn.

5154 3½.118 Summarized, with some quotation, from an item “On the Application of Muriate of Lime as a Manure” in the “Miscellaneous Intelligence” in QJSLA (July 1824) XVII 362–3. (See also 5156.) This was commonly called Brande’s Journal, the editor being Thomas Brande, successor to Davy as chief chemist to the Royal Institution. Coleridge was reading QJSLA in July 1824 (CL V 372); see also 5155 and n.

See CN II 3112 and n for Coleridge’s interest in 1807 in the cultivation of sunflower seed.

Two leaves were cut out before f138.

5155 3½.119 The first paragraph (except for Coleridge’s Lucifer) is again from QJSLA (July 1824), a condensed version of “Dobereiner’s Instantaneous Light Apparatus”, like the other items of this entry among “Miscellaneous Intelligence”, XVII 378–9. Johann Wolfgang Döbereiner (1780–1849), eminent chemist, was best known for discoveries with oxygen and platinum.

The second paragraph is from the same number of QJSLA, “Odour of Hydrogen Gas extraneous. Inodorous Hydrogen Gas”, signed “Berzelius” (380).

Paragraph three appears to be Coleridge’s own deduction supported by “MM. Liebig and Gay Lussac on Fulminic Acid and Fulminates” (386–90) in the same volume as the two foregoing.

suspicions respecting Cyanogen: Probably that cyanogen was potentially unstable and also that it had some metallic character, because its constituents were at opposite poles of the Compass of Nature.

Fulminates are compounds of metals with carbon, nitrogen and oxygen. Cyanogen was the only compound of carbon and nitrogen, while cyanides contained metal and the cyanogen radical.

f139 Steffens’s hypothesis that Carbon & Nitrogen are the constituent elements of the Metals: This is a clear reference to Beyträge 262–3 where Steffens says: “If metals could be analysed chemically, one would undoubtedly find them to be composed of carbon and nitrogen” tr. Coleridge’s marginal notes on Steffens at this point (Beyträge Chap VI) provide a commentary on this entry and vice versa, esp the annotation on 262–3:

Steffens should have stayed by I. 4. & 5. of this page—or should have said, if any metal should ever be decomposed, and if this be possible— then it would doubtless be found composed of the same stuffs as Carbon, and as Nitrogen, is composed of—only in some different proportions. A simple Body is an absurdity: and if Carbon in its utmost purity and if Nitrogen in like manner be Bodies, they must each be composite no less than Gold or Arsenic—and according to Steffens a synthesis of the same Factors or Antithets, tho’ in diff! proportions. It is an error therefore and an inconsistency in Steffens to speak of the Metals as composed of Carbon and Nitrogen—unless these are taken as the names of the Power predominant in each. And even so, yet not as composed of them, but as constituted by them. S.T.C.

Annotations on 11–14 appearing in CM under Steffens are also relevant.

In regard to Steffens’s too great and almost exclusive attention to the two points of fixity & volatility (corresponding to carbon and nitrogen in the Compass of Nature), Coleridge clearly had many passages in mind, such as e.g. Beyträge…Chap IV 136 foll.

In Sept 1826 Coleridge wrote a P.S. to this entry; see below 5438.

5156 3½.120 Although the entry is in “Omniana 1809–16”: LR I 340–41, the date attributed there is ruled out by the date of 5155, which must have preceded it on the page. In appearance of hand and ink, 5155 and 5156 are much alike; but see 5155 n. Moreover with this entry also there is probably a link with the July 1824 number of QJSLA (see above 5154, 5155 and nn). A summary appears there (XVII 250–53) of a paper by J.F.W.Herschel and James South delivered to the Royal Society in Jan 1824, titled “Observations on the apparent distances and positions of 380 double and triple stars, made in the years 1821, 1822, and 1823, and compared with these of other astronomers; together with an account of such changes as appear to have taken place in them since their first discovery”. The account would be attractive to Coleridge as presenting new information, a challenge to received opinions, and as revealing Herschel in the act of revising and correcting his own earlier observations.

Meleager: The mythical Greek hero at whose birth to Althaea it was prophesied that when a stick then on the fire burned away he would die. His mother retrieved the brand, put it out and into a chest. Later hearing that he had killed her brothers she threw it onto the fire in revenge and thus brought about his death.

Sir T.Brown’s remark appears (reading “bodies” for Coleridge’s things) in Bk II Chap 4 of Coleridge’s edition of Pseudodoxia Epidemica &c (1659) 64–

5157 3½.122 The entries here towards the back of N 3½ (5157–5159) are later than 5154, 5155, 5156, and belong probably to the summer or autumn of 1824 when, with many delays and difficulties, AR was still being written. They seem to fall between July and Aug 1824 and the P.S. of Sept 1826 attached to 3½.119, now 5438; see also 5438n.

the υiewless Air: Viewless was used by Coleridge, as by Shakespeare, and WW, to mean “invisible”.

we know each others presence; Cf CN II 3165, CN III 4166 f2 and nn.

The generation of an I by a Thou: Cf 5076–5079 and 5377. Cf also “There could be no He without a previous Thou and I scarcely need add that without Thou there could be no opposite, and of course no distinct or conscious sense of the term I, as far as the consciousness is concerned [,] without a Thou” Op Max (MS) III f142; also “(no I without a Thou as proved in Chapter [Coleridge’s blank])” ibid II f180.

Genesis C[hap] I: See CN III 4418 and n.

how many years ago: The earliest entries in N 3½ were made in 1798—9, others in 1809–11, 1815, 1816, possibly in 1817–18, and others again in 1823–6; the precise date of the original memorandum and of Coleridge’s now are therefore equally obscure.

latet: “It is obscure”.

The problems of understanding human consciousness and communication, human and other, were of unending concern and complex attention, especially throughout the notebooks, where Coleridge felt free to speculate.

5158 3½.23 Demonstrationers and Defencers of Christianity: Coleridge frequently criticized the contemporary defenders and the attackers of Christianity as using pseudofactual, literal arguments, often based on prejudice, superficiality, and narrowness incompatible with religious faith as he conceived it. See 4546, 4964, 5264 and nn. See also a letter to Allsop c Jan 1820. CL V 16.

For the Infidels and Assailants see 4916 f75^v, 5159, and nn.

5159 3½.124 Hume, Gibbon…Encyclopædists: Examples of sceptics who described human history in naturalistic terms, but nevertheless for their own purposes made use of such words as “Grace” and “Providence”.

Dark-lanthorn: Lantern with a slide, by which the light could be hidden; used by footpads and robbers.

Tertullian & Origen…influence of the Holy Ghost: Examples of thinkers attractive to Coleridge because they rested their conviction of the truth of Christianity on the inward assurance and spirit rather than on the literal interpretations of evidence—e.g. Tertullian in Adversus Marcionem 4 xviii (Migne PL 431–4), Origen in De principiis I iii, and Leibnitz throughout the Théodicée (2 vols Amsterdam 1710).

Bacon and Leibnitz: The Bacon reference may be to his A Confession of Faith: Works (1740) 453–7. On patristic criteria of inspiration see 5118, 5126 and nn.

I believe thro faith…: Cf CN III 3888 and n, and Chap XXIV BL (CC) II 244. It was in some measure Coleridge’s influence in this respect that led James Martineau to write in 1840: “there is far less belief, [in external evidences] yet more faith than there was twenty years ago”. Quoted by B.M.G.Reardon in From Coleridge to Gore (1971) 315.

Lessing’s Bruchstücke Vol. 5 & 6. P. 20: I.e. Bruchstücke über einige Fragmente des Wolfenbüttelsche Ungenannte. The reference is to Coleridge’s 30-vol edition of Lessing (1784–96) where these volumes (1791) are bound as one. The passage beginning on V 19 is marked with a line in the margin and a finger pointing to it.

Tr:…here was a period in which it [Christianity] was already so widespread, in which it had already gathered very many souls to itself, and in which at the same time not a letter had yet been set down of that which has come down to us, so must it likewise be possible that if everything the evangelists and apostles wrote were completely lost again, still the religion taught by them would survive. The religion is true not because evangelists and apostles taught it, but rather they taught it because it is true. The written delivery must be explained from its inner truth, and no amount of written delivery can give it an inner truth if it has none.

The passage gave rise to attacks on Lessing as allegedly sceptical of revealed religion and biblical authority. Coleridge in CIS Letter IV, agreed critically with Lessing, borrowing from him and going beyond him. Cf CIS 63, and Green’s Introduction to the 1849 edition xi—xxxiii. See also ibid Letter VI 73–78, esp 78 “it is the spirit of the Bible, and not the detached words and sentences, that is infallible and absolute”. For a good statement on Inspiration see 5337 below.

5160 3½.125 In reading Strype’s “Appendix to the Memorials of Archbishop Cranmer” (see below 5161), Coleridge found sufficient reminders of his objection to the servility of prelates, and to kingly rule by “divine right”.

Here (against Number XXVIII of the Appendix) Coleridge wrote: “Not wholly without cause did the Pontificial Divines charge our first English Reformers with flattering Kings by an unwarrantable extension of the kingly power.”

Prelatical Priests & Crown Divines under the Stuarts: See 5013, 5055, 5057. To Laud Coleridge was consistently hostile, as the many references to him in this volume show.

5161 3½.126 The first paragraph is close to a position taken in AR 380 on the sacraments in general and the Eucharist in particular; cf also 5126, 5172, 5348 [Apr 1826] and nn.

Arnold’s great work: Antoine Arnauld La perpétuité de la foy de l’Église Catholique, touchant l’eucharistie first appeared in 1664 in one volume, known as “La petite Perpétuité” and subsequently in multi-volume editions with citations from the Fathers on the doctrine of the “real presence”. We do not know what edition Coleridge used.

Arnauld’s defence of Transubstantiation rests on pointing out that the church Fathers must have held the doctrine, for they nowhere denounce it as heresy and idolatry, that historians are in error when they maintain that the Eucharist was to the Fathers merely commemorative and symbolic, and that if the doctrine of the “real presence” had not arisen, as Protestants suggested, until the 6th century, the innovators would have been denounced for their ignorance of the Fathers. Coleridge refers in a note in AR 380 to “Arnauld’s great work on Transubstantiation (not without reason the boast of the Romish Church)”.

Bucer’s Exposition…Life of Cranmer: Coleridge’s copy of John Strype’s Memorials of…Thomas Cranmer (1694) is in the BM. A long Appendix, separately paginated, setting forth over a hundred theological and political documents, is annotated by Coleridge on points dealing with the sacraments. The reference here is to “Num. XLVI. The sentencious sayings of Master Bucer upon the Lordes Supper”. Bucer says that the communicant receives Christ as a spiritual essence, although not in the bread. Thus it is neither metaphor nor carnal experience, but a spiritual mystery understood not “by the trade of our own reason” but by faith. See also CM I under Gilbert Burnet History II ii 386–7.

Bishop Hoadly and the modern Sacramentaries: Benjamin Hoadly (1676–1761) successively bp of Bangor, Hereford, Salisbury, and Winchester, started a theological furor with A Plain Account of the Nature and End of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper (1735). His contention was that the Eucharist is simply a memorial act; cf AR 380. Cf CN III 3847, 4044 and nn; also a note on Sacramentaries in BCP 29 in CM I.

I take the earliest Fathers: For Coleridge’s reading of the Fathers see 5228 and n; it is possible that Coleridge took the long passages quoted in Part I of the Perpétuité, e.g. Ignatius in Ad Smyranaeos VIII, and Chrysostom in “Homilia 24” of In epistolam primam ad Corinthos and in De sacerdotio III 4. See Arnauld Perpétuité (6 vols Paris 1702–4) I 5–31. For Irenaeus on the subject see below 5172 and n. References to the Eucharist in the patristic writings of the first five centuries make no fine distinctions concerning the “real presence”, but most seem to assume that the sacrament is more than a mere commemoration or metaphor. It is possible also that Coleridge read similar adductions and quotations in Jeremy Taylor Polemical Discourses 249–67, “A Discourse of the Real Presence”, in which Taylor used the lack of graduation in the terms to argue that the Fathers did not hold the doctrine of transubstantiation.

“the tremendous mystery”; the term is used by Chrysostom on I Cor 10:16, in “Homilia 24” In epistolam primam ad Corinthos (Migne PG LXI 199): μυστηρίων μεμνημένoς ; “remembering tremendous mysteries”.

5162 3½.127 The entry is almost a summary of numerous entries throughout this whole volume; e.g. on the First Creation=Incorporation of the Logos see CN III 4418 and above 4554, 5076 and nn.

polarization of the potentialized Actual: In the original Fall, as the evil became actualized out of its potential, the good fell back into potential from its actual; the first step of the creation, therefore, the polarization of this disactualized (5248 f34) good by the Logos, produced the Prothesis Light-Darkness.

The polarization of Light into Life: For Coleridge’s view that Light was a principle of Life see 4639, 4677 and nn.

divine Noumenon or Lux Intelligibilis: The idea of the Logos, or the “Intelligible Light” repeated in the mind of man, elucidated in the Essay on Prometheus as a Polarization of Idea and Law with Reason as the midpoint of the synthesis. LR II 342–9.

“natural laws”.

Reason as the Indifference: See 4784 f127^v and n.

New Creation: 2 Cor 5:17.

Faith as the Indifference: I.e. the meeting point between the incarnate Logos and fallen man. See “Essay on Faith”: LR IV 433–8.

5163 3½.128 Nehemiah II 12–15:

12. And I arose in the night, I and some few men with me; neither told I any man what my God had put in my heart to do at Jerusalem: neither was there any beast with me, save the beast that I rode upon.

13. And I went out by night by the gate of the valley, even before the dragon well, and to the dung port, and viewed the walls of Jerusalem, which were broken down, and the gates thereof were consumed with fire.

14. Then I went to the gate of the fountain, and to the king’s pool: but there was no place for the beast that was under me to pass.

15. Then went I up in the night by the brook, and viewed the wall, and turned back, and entered by the gate of the valley, and so returned.

For the figures of men and beasts Coleridge wanted a Rembrandt. (The Remblant reading is clearly a slip. In C&S he referred to “the wild lights, the portentous shades, and saturated colours of a Rembrandt, Caravaggio, and Spagnoletti”. C&S (CC) 151.

Raphael’s Bible Gallery: Coleridge may have been thinking of the fiftytwo frescoes on OT subjects, on Genesis I from the creation of Light onwards, called “Raphael’s Bible” in the Loggie of St.Peter’s; he would be remembering it from his stay in Rome in 1805–6. Or he may have had in mind the seven Cartoons Raphael drew for tapestries for the Sistine Chapel, which arrived in England in 1623, and for which, when they arrived in England, Sir Christopher Wren built a Gallery in Hampton Court known as “the Raphael Gallery”; in 1816, 1817, 1818 these cartoons were on loan to the British Institution and exhibited there, a likely place for Coleridge to have seen them.

Rembrandt and Piranesi: Cf an earlier wishful coupling of souls, Wordsworth and Simonides and/or Empedocles, and his own with Wordsworth, in CN II 2712. Here again, the mode of duality came easily, not only from admiration but because Coleridge probably knew, especially if he first looked at Piranesi’s work with Washington Allston in Rome, that Piranesi at one stage took Rembrandt for his exemplar; Piranesi’s obituarist, Bianconi, described him as “the Rembrandt of the ancient ruins”. Jonathan Scott Piranesi (1975) 320.

In a letter of 3 Nov 1814 Coleridge referred to Piranesi’s “astounding Engravings from Rome and the Campus Martius” (CL III 541). In 1808 he had sent to SH in Penrith various books “in a Box containing the Piranesi Folios for William”: CM II under Homer § 1. Q in the London Magazine (Oct 1821), and in Pt II of his Confessions (1822) 163–4, recorded looking at some Piranesi reproductions with Coleridge, who gave him a vivid account of the Carceri etchings as Piranesi’s “Dreams”. In 1829 Coleridge, in some interesting remarks on space, referred to them as “the Delirium of Architectural Genius” (N 39).

Intuitively, without having seen Jerusalem, Coleridge readily envisaged a Piranesi treatment of stone columns, walls, buildings whole or crumbling, the interior and halfinterior perspectives through circular arches, balconies, stairways, in the brilliant chiarascuro light of Jerusalem, with all its varied, enfolding light-attracting architecture on the Judaean hills. One remembers that the Destruction of Jerusalem had been amongst Coleridge’s themes, early and late, for an epic poem; see (1803) CN I 1646n and (1820) CL V 28.

5164 16.395 In ink.

29 Sept^r, 1824…: The appearance of the MS (ink, slope of hand, etc) suggests one entry about events of these two dates, though there is a considerable gap before the second date. Interpretations of the incoherent Greek, with the few transliterated Latin and English words must be tentative, with alternative readings being shown in square brackets. Coleridge was with the Gillmans at No. 3 The Grove, Highgate.

Translated, the first part may read: “Wednesday Night, 29 Sept 1824. The explanation. It was however the fear of giving pain did more than half. Reproach about/Shame over lust—. Ought the first kisses of her who was then the lover rather than the beloved, to have awakened or not awakened, the passion of lust? If I [verb omitted—behaved] over another woman as she over Pansophos [i.e. Allsop]? Did I sacrifice nothing [?to Allsop/to passion]? Can Love exist without sacrifice? To seem, not to be, this is to be feminine.”

It is difficult to make much sense of this in isolation from whatever painful private facts lie behind it. The Greek letter π could perhaps stand for the initial of another name, but may refer to Pansophos already mentioned, or παθος, “passion”. See Coleridge’s letters of 24 Sept, 20 and 22 Oct 1821 to Allsop about the latter’s pre-marital perplexities (CL V 176–84), and particularly a note by Allsop on one letter, “for him read her & viceversa” (ibid 182).

Coleridge was evidently writing with an attempt at greater than usual concealment.

For Coleridge on marriage, see above 5097 and n.

Thursday, 30 Sept^r, 1824: “GNA [i.e. Anne Gillman] with [Miss] Br [a] d [ley] and Duenna to Ram’s Gate”. Coleridge followed them a few days later to Ramsgate. The duenna was perhaps young Eliza Nixon? Not this time, apparently, Jane Harding. See CL V 255, 374, 378, 392–3.

5165 16.396 In ink, hard upon the previous entry. AP 303–4 var. The entry breaks off in mid-sentence, the remainder of the page and the eight pages (i.e. f f125^v-129) being blank.

For another attempt to describe sounds, cf 4927.

5166 29.115 Coleridge’s quotation, with very minor variants, is from a letter from Lady Rachel Russell, “to (supposed) the Bishop of Salisbury”, as it appears in The British Prose Writers (1819–21), Vol VI of which comprises Lady Russell’s Letters. His excerpt is on 81–2, where Lady Russell is writing about her deceased sister. We do not know which edition of her letters Coleridge was using.

M^rs Tulk’s death: Susannah Hart Tulk, affectionately mentioned in many of Coleridge’s letters, was the wife of C.A.Tulk, Coleridge’s Swedenborgian friend. The notice of her death appeared, however, in the Morning Herald of Thursday 21 Oct, a date that usually threw Coleridge into error.

more than usually cheerful Birthday: See 5032 for another good one, and 4606 and n on the date.

Nix ista teterrima spes nostras et fidem sepelivit: “that most hideous snow buried our hopes and faith”. The snowstorm was a canvass and an election in Highgate for a surgeon-apothecary, in which James Gillman lost to Bernard Geary Snow by four votes to seven. Whittington College (known locally as the Whittington Alms houses), run by the Mercers Company, had recently moved from The Archway to Highgate. The board advertised for a new surgeon-apothecary to keep an eye on the twenty-four elderly ladies with a tutor in charge. Dr. Snow’s election was a severe blow to the Gillmans, whether because of the £63 annual salary or the prestige in Highgate; Coleridge took the affair much to heart, perhaps in part out of sensitivity to the Gillman’s financial burden in looking after him; see CL V 377, 381–6.

The following year there seems to have been another competition between Snow and Gillman, over a prospective well-to-do patient; Coleridge’s letters at the time were rude about Snow. CL V 420, 432n. See also 5457.

5167 29.116 Conscience: Cf “Consciousness itself, that Consciousness of which all reasoning is the varied modification, is but the Reflex of the Conscience”: Coleridge’s MS note on a copy of the 1818 Friend: Friend (CC) I 522–3 n.

The Act of Self-consciousness…a Subject that is its own Object: See CN III 4186, 4265 and nn, and in this volume e.g., 4717 among many others.

Conditio sine quâ non: “Indispensable condition”.

ponit et imponit: “posits and imposes”.

pigra ejusdem repetitio: “idle repetition of the same thing”.

positio υerè synthetica: “a position that truly puts things together”.

The Magnet is the Phænomen: [I.e. the specific material manifestation of consciousness whereas] Magnetism is the Symbol [i.e. the dynamic principle] of Selfconsciousness, which is the Δυναμo-δυναμις, the “dynamic power” of magnetism in its highest dignity; see 4831 and n. The entry illuminates and is illuminated by other passages on Symbol; see e.g. 4831 and n with references there.

Actio magnetica: “magnetic Action”.

Principium Identitatis et Contradictionis: “Principle of Identity and Contradiction”.

Galυanism the Synthetic: See 4512, 4639 and nn.

Magnetism…the Shadow of approaching Life: I.e. it corresponds to reproduction. Just as the production of magnetism is the first polar resolution of powers in the Compass of Nature (CN III 4420 f20), so reproduction is the first and lowest power in the scale of life.

elanguescit…Iron: “languishes away” into iron. Cf John Elliotson’s note in his translation of Blumenbach Institutions of Physiology (1817) 10: “It has generally been supposed that iron existed in the red particles of the blood as superphosphate. Berzelius informs us that he has never discovered iron nor lime in the entire blood, though both are so abundant in its ashes.” See also CM I under Boerhaave § 5. The linkages here show how magnetism fascinated Coleridge, physical terrestrial magnetism or animal magnetism, subjective and objective, positive and negative, passive and active, the midpoint of all of the poles of all of them being easily seen in human terms as selfconsciousness— a two-way polar functioning of the self.

5168 29.117 Sensibility…Irritability…Instinctivity…: See on Coleridge’s concern over these terms 4813, 4886, 5171 and nn. For instinctivity OED gives as the earliest use Coleridge’s TT 2 May 1830, where again it was held preferable to irritability. The preference is based, or so 4833 seems to suggest, on the implication of greater inner activity, or more specific initiative, hence instinctivity is more compatible with Coleridge’s vitalist physiology.

the term Centrality, or the Central Force: See 4555 f49, which is less tentative in the use in a chemical context.

Flourien’s Experiments: See also 5189. Marie Jean Pierre Flourens, the famous French physiologist (1794–1867) among other important works produced one in 1825 on the nervous system. His experiments were earlier reported to the French Academy by Cuvier and others and translated in QJSLA (Jan 1823) XIV 427–30; also in Phil Mag (Feb 1823) LXI 114–25 in a review article, “Determination of the Properties of the Nervous System, or Physical Researches concerning Irritability and Sensibility”.

On the three forms of life described in the Greek phrases for “plantlike” “insect-like”, and “peculiar to animals, or to life proper” cf 4886 and n. J.H.Green, in his Hunterian Oration of 1840 (Vital Dynamics), gave a highly Coleridgian account of organic life; his analysis (123–4) of the three “ascending stages” indicated in these phrases (without Coleridge’s Greek and without the word instinctivity) corresponds to Coleridge’s divisions here. If as Coleridge said, in 4886, this came 2 Apr 1822 as a “first thought”, this N 29 entry must be of later date; the natural notebook sequence then is probably the true one.

5169 29.118 The entry represents Coleridge’s continuing interest in the origin and composition of the four gospels, and perhaps a preliminary stage of his close study of the subject, with Eichhorn NT in the background, and possibly Johann D.Michaelis Introduction to the New Testament tr Herbert Marsh; see below 5323n.

John’s must…be made an exception: See also above 5075.

Expansions of a Proto-evangelium: Eichhorn NT I 148–415 developed the theory of an Urevangelium with which Coleridge first disagreed and then later changed his opinion, as becomes apparent in CN V.

each Evangelist excerp[t]ing…his particular views: As suggested by Marsh “Dissertation on the Origin and Composition of the Three First Canonical Gospels” in his translation of Michaelis Introduction to the New Testament (4 vols Cambridge 1793– 1801) III–2 213, 267, 278–87.

f79 Monograms, ex. gr. the Infancy of Jesus: Cf CN III 3779, also 5240 f28^v and n.

γνωμαι: “sayings”.

Doctrine of Papal Supremacy, which is mentioned only by Matthew: Matt 16:17–19.

the Repetitions…: E.g. the episode of Peter’s confession that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God, contained in Matt 16:15–20 is repeated in Mark 8:29–30 without the commission and the promise of the keys, and in Luke 9:20–21 without the commission or promise. Eichhorn NT I 155–62 gave variants and contradictions in the gospels generally.

17 & 18 verses of Mark XVI: Eichhorn NT I 577–8 and 578n held that the passage was genuine. By 1826 Coleridge had come to the view that it was spurious, as he suggests here; see 5372 and n.

traditions of the third century…: I.e. there were stories in the Fathers in the first three centuries of the gift of tongues, but these are not a matter of credible history.

speaking unknown languages: Acts 2:1–4. For an interesting example of Coleridge’s scepticism about speaking with tongues, see Chap VI BL (CC) I 112–13.

proof positive of the contrary in S^t Paul?: Possibly a reference to I Cor 12:4–10 and 14:1–10, in which Paul speaks of the “gift of tongues” as an ability with foreign languages and as a gift of the Spirit, and distinguishes this from the ecstatic “speaking with tongues” understood by no one, which that marked religious frenzies of the day, against which he cautions.

17 υ.: I.e. of Mark 16.

5170 29.119 In a small space on f79^v opposite this entry, someone pinned a piece of grey paper bearing a few lines of Coleridge’s writing on both sides; these have been transferred to the final paragraphs of 4909 where they belong.

What is a Mystery!: See 4909 and n, and CN III 3517. On his proposed work on the “Mysteries of Christianity” see especially CN III 3678n, and also Index I in CN III and in this volume under Coleridge, S.T., PROJECTED WORKS.

a truth of Reason: In the Kantian sense; closer to Coleridge’s view of imagination than to reason in the scientific or common use.

only by Negatives, or contradictory Positives: As, e.g., the intuition that good and evil, or good and love, are parts of a larger prothetic idea which the Understanding can neither comprehend nor name. See 4513, 4829 on the Dyad.

5171 29.120 Coleridge appears to have been looking into Goldfuss Zoologie; See 4758 and n above. Goldfuss considered himself a follower of Oken and Cuvier; Coleridge’s estimate does not place “Sweet Fairy-Foot-of-Gold”, as he dubbed him, so high.

After generalizing about the animal organs, including the heart (12–13), Goldfuss went on to classify animal life from the protozoa and infusoria upwards, reaching the “Regenwurm” (Rain-worm) and “Blut-egel” (Leech) in his Third Class, Annularia (149– 50). Coleridge’s par-enthetical German phrase does not seem to be a quotation from Goldfuss but is close to his description of the sac with its throat or gullet closed throughout its whole length; he described both worm and leech as essentially a muscle.

Heart…a very remote analogon: On the importance of the heart in the evolutionary scale, see 4604.

or amphoteric: See 4942 and n.

Hirugo Officinalis: Goldfuss 151 refers to Hirudo medicinalis, “leech”, giving among his references Everard Home Phil Trans (1815) II i 13. Coleridge’s writing at this point appears irregular, hurried perhaps, possibly with a difficult pen; his Hirugo was a slip.

On Irritability (“more correctly” instinctivity) see 5150, 5168 and nn.

5172 29.121 The entry seems to continue from 5169 above.

common interpretation of the passage respecting Luke: Rom 2:16; Eichhorn NT I 597–8.

Tr: The ancients attempted to validate the credibility of Luke by deriving his Gospel from Paul, from whose discourses they supposed Luke had taken his information, and said that Paul himself had later confirmed this with his Apostolic authority, naming it as his gospel because of the accuracy of its reporting (Rom 2:16).

Eichhorn cited Eusebius Ecclesiastical History III 4 as an example.

And what should be the probable interval…Eichhorn very unsatisfac-tory: Eichhorn gives the acceptable dates for Justin Martyr (98–163), but he puts Irenaeus a little late. This, Coleridge considers, leaves too short an interval for the development of the four gospels as we know them. Eichhorn assumes (NT I 78–106) that the “memorials of the Apostles” mentioned several times by Justin as his source, were one single Gospel, having a common source with Matthew. Coleridge in this entry, perhaps for the sake of argument, accepted this view. Cf in addition to Coleridge’s annotation on Eichhorn NT I 79 (CM II) Eichhorn’s statement in NT I 144.

Tr: For since before the end of the second century and the beginning of the third, there are no traces of our present Matthew, Mark, and Luke; since Irenaeus (about the year 202) is the first to speak decidedly of four gospels and to think up all kinds of reasons why there should be this many.

In a note on his copy of Eichhorn NT (A) 179, Coleridge marked this and commented:

Yet this according to E[ichhorn] was the very time when the Church, of which Irenaeus was a Leader, was employing itself in making the selectionl!!—and how pitifully does E[ichhorn] pass over the odd circumstances of the Diatessaron of Tatian, how criminally falsify the [which are called gospels] of Justin Martyr!

Eichhorn NT I 79–106 theorized that the “Memorials of the Apostles” quoted by Justin Martyr did not come from the four gospels, which were unknown to him, but from sources which also produced the four gospels, later. He cites “the usual view” of Tatian’s Diatessaron (NT I 110) as a gospel book conflated at the end of the second century from the four gospels.

writer of the article “Abendmahl” in the Probe-Heft of the Ger. Ency.: J.S.Ersch and J.G.Gruber Allgemeine Encyclopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste (167 vols Leipzig 1818–89) I 71–7. Coleridge referred to this encyclopaedia in a letter to J.H.Green 8 Dec 1821 (CL V 191). The article is by F.G.Zimmermann, and the relevant passage is at I 72.

Tr: Where Justin describes this service [the Eucharist] of the Christians, he writes: …for We do not consider these ordinary food and drink but as Jesus Christ our Saviour who through God’s wisdom became man, who put on flesh and blood for our redemption.

It evidently refers to John’s Gospel: John 1:1–14 and 6:53–63.

Palestine Ruach: “spirit” (Heb); see 4870 and n.

πνενμα…Λογος…Aληθεια… On these terms and Coleridge’s view of their use by the Christian church see e.g., 4870, 4911, 5078 and nn.

Corpus et Sanguis νουμενα: “noumenal flesh and blood”.

Irenaeus…cannot have originated: The encyclopaedia article summarizes Irenaeus Adversus omnes haereses V 112; see also 5161 and n.

Consubstantiation: See 4632 and n.

Multiplication of the loaves and fishes: The reference is to the account in John 6, which is followed by the command to eat the flesh and blood of Jesus.

our Dissenters…making it nothing: see 5161.

5173 28.71 Gay-Lussac (see 4566 and n) enunciated the law of combining volumes (1809) to which Coleridge refers here, i.e. that gases combining with each other do so in simple proportions by volume.

the Experimental Chemists: E.g. Davy, and Dalton, as distinguished from e.g. the Naturphilosophen Steffens and Schelling discussed earlier in this notebook?

5174 28.72 Pleuronectoe: The flat fish, sole or flounder, were noticed as “the only animals in nature which have both eyes on one side of the head”, in Blumenbach’s Handbuch der Naturgeschichte (Göttingen 1799) 274 (VII V § 36); see CN I 1747 and n.

The final sentence does not close with the required (and intended?) question mark; on Coleridge’s readiness to be tentative and exploratory see SC’s statement quoted in another context in CN III 3847n.

5175 28.73 See the previous note. Blumenbach’s Handbuch Sect VIII is on Insects, Sect IX Worms, of which division ii is Mollusca. Blumenbach in his general remarks on Worms (§ 146–§ 153 153) makes the point that insects differ from worms in having more distinct and positive sense organs, noting that the deficiency in external organs in worms

is partially compensated for by their remarkable powers of reproduction. The query as to the possibility of an ecological law is Coleridge’s.

5176 28.74 A history of a military campaign portrayed only in pictures and sound, without any understanding of its goal, would be unintelligible as would a study of natural history that dwelt on externals or sensory phenomena only, ignoring internal, causal, informing aspects. The Duke of Wellington leapt to mind as an illustration because Coleridge thought he relied too heavily on external force, a deus ex machina giving the “word of command”: TT 4 July 1830. Coleridge saw all organic life as subject to the laws of growth ab intra (5177 f71); see above also 4650, 4722 and nn.

5177 28.75 Blumenbach in the first Section of his Handbuch discussed the differences among natural bodies as to their origin, growth, and structure, and distinguished between organic bodies having vital powers (“Lebenskräfte) and inorganic bodies, minerals. He did not in these pages use Bildungsgeschäfte, but Bildungstrieb is his word (e.g., here in 1 § 10) and see CN III 3744 and n. In an essay of 1780, “Über den Bildungstrieb (Nisus Formativus)” tr J.C.Prichard in his A Review of the Doctrine of a Vital Principle (1829), he referred to it “as among the first causes of all natural phenomena of generation, nutrition, and reproduction”. In his description of bees, he paid considerable attention to their various kinds of skills in building their nests. Sect VIII v § 60.

Slime: By implication in Blumenbach, but Oken saw all life derived from primal slime. (See 5179n.)

Flues or…Fasern [Fäsern, “Fibres”] appear in Blumenbach’s general introduction Sect I § 3, and he discussed the muscles (Sect III § 26–31); there he made Coleridge’s point that in some animals there is no determinate connection between the Organ and its ultimate constituents.

The Law Zweckmäss[igkei]t: The Law of appropriateness to the purpose/goal.

f71 Whether our schemata were dreams from Jupiter Stator, or from Momus: Jupiter Stator was so named for staying the flight of the Roman army when it fled from the Sabines; Momus was a God personifying mockery or censure. Presumably the meaning is, our Schemata of subjective constructions in outward Nature may be positive, really constructive, either making a stand or merely a mockery of reality.

f71^v Common to all three, growth ab intra…: Blumenbach in his first pages of his Handbuch (1 § 2) referred to the process of assimilation and the principle of growth “from within”.

517828.76 Blumenbach in his Handbuch, in the introductory Sect I dealing with natural organization and the division into three kingdoms, discussed monsters and deviants at some length, I § 11-§ 16, referring to the influences of cold and hot climates, and to both plants and animals as undergoing deviation. He does not appear to have made Coleridge’s reference to the sea as a provision of Providence to separate the continents.

5179 28.77 Oken in the Introduction to his Zoologie: Naturgeschichte V discussed the nerves of animals in the first dozen pages, of which Coleridge was highly critical in his annotations. Oken suggested (9) that some animals have no nerves—like corals, polyps, infusoria—but it is not clear that he specifically withheld nerυous power, though his way of deducing every form of life from slime (12), and considering it as unorganized atomic “Stoff’, might be so interpreted. See 4813 and n.

5180 28.78 Of Hogarth’s paintings and engravings, these are the two series most extolled by Lamb in his essay “On the Genius and Character of Hogarth” (1811), where he refers in the case of the “Harlot’s Funeral” to the sense of duration of time or succession of events that Coleridge seems to have in mind: “What reflections does it not awake of the dreadful heartless state in which the creature (a female too) must have lived, who in death wants the accompaniment of one genuine tear”.

Coleridge was thus reversing the process of e.g. 5176 and using Hogarth’s art as the metaphorical correspondent to those who would deny Blumenbach’s insistence on the Law of Zweckmässigkeit (see 5177 n) as seen in the Bildungstrieb or Nisus Formativus. Handbuch I § 9.

5181 28.79 See 4724 24n above for Coleridge on the value and importance of classification. Here he was inventing terms, based on his own earlier attempts, for the three main classes of the simplest forms of animal life; see above 4758 and n.

Hypozoa: “lowest forms of life/sub-living things”.

Entomozoa: “creatures divided into parts”, i.e. insects. Not in OED. Cf in 4894.

Catholozoa: “living creatures functioning as one whole”. Not in OED.

Genus generalissimum Organizomena: “the Broadest Class, i.e. organized [living creatures] ”.

In a lively note on his copy of Oken’s Zoologie: Naturgeschichte V (see 4813, 5086 and nn) Coleridge paid ironic compliments to Oken for similar inventions, “the ingenuity shown by him in the nomenclature of the microscopic animals, which would have done honor to a Swift, had he given us a Natural History of Lilliput”.

Polymerea: Coined from poly “many”, merea “parts”, “having many parts”. Not in OED. See 5183.

5182 28.80 Coleridge was enjoying Blumenbach’s Section XI on Minerals in General where, in giving a Wernerian or Neptunian account of the building up of the earth’s crust and describing the importance of external characteristics of minerals, he said of crystallization that it has a determined form produced by a determinate number of facets, bound together in a determinate manner (§ 238). Hence the contrast to the lifeprocess from within (5177).

The LAW. That Nature leaves nothing behind is chemically demonstrated in 4583.

5183 28.81 Cf 4724 and 5181 above.

No single Classification perfect: In a note on the front fly-leaves of Blu-menbach’s Über die natürlichen Verschiedenheiten im Menschengeschlechte Coleridge wrote that no final system of classification was possible as each would have to be according to some “guiding principle, diagnostic, or teleological”, and Nature provided hundreds of different ones at the same time. See CM I under Blumenbach.

1. Zωαι rectius quam Zωα: “lives, more correctly than living things”.

Stœchœa , seu Elemental/First <Lover> Classis Infima: “Elements [Greek], or Elements [Latin] and the Products of Elements, the lowest Class”.

1. Pro-organismata, vel Zωο-στοιχεια…: “Pre-organisms or elements of life”.

Ord. 1. Elementa—vel Monozoa Monomorpha: “Elements or singleform living monads/units of life”.

Ord. 2. Elementigena—vel Monozoa Polymorpha: “Products of Elements—or manyformed living monads”.

1. Intervallaria: “1. Intermediates”.

2. Classis is Penultima: “2. The penultimate Class”.

Organismata Panzoa—Sc. Regnum Vegetabile: “complete living Organisms—that is, the Vegetable Kingdom”.

2. Intervallaria: “2. Intermediates”.

3. Classis Antepenultima

Organismata Entomozoa: “3 Ante penultimate Class, Divided (i.e. insect) Organisms”.

3. Interuallaria: “3. Intermediates”.

4. Classis Suprema

Organismata, Catholozoa: “The Highest Class, Whole Organisms”, i.e. plants, vegetable organisms are complete in themselves? Animal organisms are whole, but not complete?

5184 29.262 The blank space in the first line was created by an effective erasure of two or three words.

3 1825—Jacob & Rachel: from 5192 and n it seems clear that Coleridge thought of himself at times as Jacob to Mrs Gillman’s Rachel (Gen 29), and we are made aware here of Jan-Feb 1825 as a period of strain.

Later notebook entries show Coleridge’s deep interest in Jacob, a focal point for personal conflict, i.e. there was an emotional identification in childhood with Esau (N 42) and an analysis of Jacob’s character in the same notebook suggests Coleridge’s comparison of himself with Jacob, e.g. in Jacob’s likeness to his father, and his feminine characteristics; these are entries of 1829 (CN V).

Youth and Age: See 4993, 4994, 4996 and nn.

Indifference of [?Eromere/Grσmere]: The writing is deliberate enough, perhaps intended to conceal by word-play as well as by odd calligraphy rather than to reveal. If the initial letter should be read as E, is “Eros” in mind? If the meaning is Gr[a]smere, the word indifference has been applied to it before; see CN III 3555 and n, and for similar but more agonized charges, CN III 3304, 4243. Is history repeating itself in Highgate? Or is the tension in Highgate being commented on as at least more bearable than the Indifference of Grasmere? There is no doubt Coleridge suffered at times from the paranoia common to drug addicts.

5185 29.122 Eight lines were deleted with two different inks, one light brown, which could be Coleridge’s, the other on top of it, with determined broad black criss-crossing strokes that suggest Mrs Gillman’s heavy hand. The obliterating was too successful for ultra-violet or infrared light to penetrate.

See 5216n.

5186 28.82 In pencil. The works referred to are all by the sculptor John Flaxman, to whom Coleridge wrote a letter 24 Jan 1825 asking permission to call at his studio the next day to see as many of his works as possible and to obtain a list of others accessible in or near London. He explained that he was writing an essay “on the connection of Statuary and Sculpture with Religion”, tracing it historically through ancient times, culminating in “the true essence of the Ideal and its intimate connection with the Symbolic” (CL V 408). Whether this work was projected as a lecture for the RSL or as part of one of the projected works on religion is not clear. In any case the list of Flaxman’s works here may have been compiled in Flaxman’s studio, as the pencil, the erratic hand, and the back and forth discontinuousness of the notes all suggest. Except for showing individual works as they were completed, Flaxman did not hold any one-man exhibitions of his works, so far as can be learned. Coleridge had been acquainted with him for some years, and possibly with much of his work. Late in 1799 they were both living in Buckingham St, Fitzroy Sq; did they meet then? But they had numerous friends and acquaintances in common, e.g., HCR, the Aders, and the Wedgwoods.

1. Cupid and Psyche (Roger): A chimney-piece in the home of Samuel Rogers in St James’s with the two small figures.

2. Pastoral Apollo: A life-size figure in Petworth House made for Lord Egremont in 1824.

3. Bas Relievo: The children of Sir Thomas Frankland, Thirkleby, Yorks (1800).

S^t Michael: A group in which St Michael is overthrowing Satan, in Petworth House, made for Lord Egremont in 1821.

First, Resignation: A memorial to Lady Baring, in Micheldever Church, Hants (1809). “In the centre is a sitting figure of ‘Resignation’, inscribed—‘Thy will be done’; on each side is a very fine alto-relievo, also from the Lord’s Prayer; the subject of one—‘Thy Kingdom come;’ the other—‘Deliver us from evil’. The tranquil piety of expression in the single figure is finely contrasted with the terrific struggle on the one hand, and the extatic joyfulness of the female, who is assisted in rising by angelic beings, on the other.” From the anonymous memoirs prefixed to Flaxman’s Lectures on Sculpture (1829) xix.

Faith: Relief figures of Faith and Charity, on the monument to Countess Spencer (1814) in Great Brington. The comment might well refer to something pointed out by the sculptor himself in the studio.

An ancient Feast: Probably Bacchanalian relief (1801) in Wolverley House, Worcs.

Clergyman instructing his youthful flock: A monument to Rev John Clowes in St John’s Church, Manchester (1820).

Bosanquet’s Parting scene: The Good Samaritans monument to William Bosanquet, Essex (1813). Possibly Coleridge’s Ditto M^r Clowes refers to some similar sentimental aspect of “parting” in the Clowes monument above?

Charity: See Faith above. Coleridge’s eye was caught by the two children here, the two Boys & the intermediate Girl above, and the thoughtful Shepherd, Coleridge sharing posterity’s opinion that Flaxman’s best work is in his simpler less heroic reliefs.

5187 29.263 Uterine [to] atmospheric [as] atmospheric [to] future life: See also CN II 2209n; and in this volume, 5360 and n. Again, of uterine life Coleridge said in a note on Sir Thomas Browne’s Religio Medici (1669) 85: “Yes! the History of a man for the 9 months preceding his Birth would probably be far more interesting & contain events of greater moment than all the 3 score and ten years that follow it.” CM I under T.Browne. Possibly John Bostock was in mind here, for he wrote at length of uterine life in his Physiology; see 5150n.

my honoured friend: his Hunterian Oration, Vital Dynamics (1840), which is full of Coleridgian material and references, Joseph Henry Green acknowledged (62n) his “obligation to that distinguished cultivator of physiological science, Tiedemann and to the first volume of his Zoologie.” Friedrich Tiedemann Zoologie (3 vols 1808) was sold in Green SC (780). There is no evidence that either Green or Coleridge saw the work on the brain about which Coleridge was curious, the Anatomie und Bildungsgeschichte des Gehirns (Nuremberg 1816) later incorporated in F.Tiedemann Physiologie des Menschen (Darmstadt 1830), also in Green SC (781).

5188 29.264 Excitability and Resistance: The attempt to relate positive and negative energy as opposites meeting may be associated with references to John Brown above in 5142; see also 5189 and n.

5189 29.265 adynamic Fevers: OED cites the first use of the word in 1829, attached to typhoid fever; “adynamia” appeared in 1830.

Sensibility…Irritability…Ichheit…sensation…Central Principle…Emp-findung: In these paragraphs Coleridge’s central argument appears to be that whatever irritability and sensibility are (see 5138, 5150 and nn) they require time in order to become Sensation but cf on sensation and sensibility 4734 f15^v that they may relate their information to selfconsciousness, (cf CN III 4029) Dr William Hyde Wollastons Experiments are brought in for support. In the Croonian Lecture of 16 Nov 1809: Phil Trans (1810) c 1– 15, on “The Duration of Muscular Action” Wollaston noticed that in muscular actions “each effort, apparently single, consists in reality of a great number of contractions repeated at extremely short intervals”. He performed personal experiments with sensations of sound by putting a finger in his ear, and predicated that “in cases of great debility the number [of contractions and vibrations] might be even considerably less” (5). Coleridge speculates that fever, by quickening irritability, might not reverse the process.

See 5168 above, and the reference there to the review article by M.G.Cuvier on M.Flourens’s experiment; also 5342n.

Ichheit: See also 4636 above, 5301 f24^v below.

υita propria…Vita Monadica: “proper life”, i.e. proper to it, and “Monadic Life”, i.e. separate from the organism of which it should be a part.

τo παοσχειν…res fieri: Coleridge translates his own Greek “the suffering”, “the passivity”, but not the Latin, “becoming a thing”,

f92^v Emp-findung: See CN III 3562 and n, 3605 f118^v, 4443 and n, and also the discussion of this and other matters in this entry, in 5432.

a centro versus peripheriam: “from the centre towards the periphery”.

pati et agere: “to be passive and to be active”.

Querification: Not in OED.

Excitability…Resistance: See the previous entry and n. Is the reconsideration here a reconsideration of 5197?

…a painted or motionless Wheel: Cf CN I 1627.

f92 Pain: See also CN III 4235; and on the pain-pleasure conjunction see 5360 f43.

the reduction of a quality to…Quantity: See 4515 and n, with the other references there.

Analogon of Will in the Life: A concept more fully developed in 4648.

Fichte has some valuable remarks on this point: In CN II 2382 Coleridge noticed with approval Fichte’s views on the relation of will to the “I”, to perception and thought, without identifying the passage.

f91^v the Tic Doloreux: Cf an article in QJSLA (July–Dec 1827) 346–50 signed “Medicus”: “The genuine tic douloureux is usually considered as a morbid affection of the nerves of the face, very commonly attacking the circumstance of the orbit, and producing frequent and violent paroxysms of excruciating pain”. (346). Various ailments came to be given this name, under various incorrect spellings.

an abnormous center in a conducting nerue: See on “The polypus nature of every nerve” 4865.

Is it not by concentration that Pleasure passes into Pain: concluding, after attempted physiological explanations, that the answer is psychological? Based on self-observation?

5190 20.2 9 Feb 1825, Coleridge was at Highgate, reading proofs of AR.

5191 20.3 Dated by its appearance, which is similar to that of 5190 [c 9 Feb 1825]. AR was published by c 23 May 1825.

Rose: William Stewart Rose (1775–1843) or Hugh James Rose (1795–1838)? The former, whom C met in 1816 (CL IV 671), was a friend of J.H.Frere, a translator and a poet. (See also The Friend (CC) II 454.) He wrote in translation an abridgment of Amadis de Gaula (1803), and translated Orlando Furioso (8 vols 1825–9). Note Coleridge’s mention in 4968 of Orlando Furioso. Or the reference may be to the Rev. Hugh J.Rose to whom Coleridge sent copies of The Friend (1812) and (1818), and who sent Coleridge a copy of his Cambridge Latin oration Prolusio in curia Cantabrigiensi recitata nonis Jul mdcccxviii in Comitiis Maximis (Cambridge 1818) comparing the styles of the Greek and Roman historians, on which Coleridge made careful corrections and approving annotations. The copy is in the BM. H.J.Rose at this time (May 1825) had recently returned from Germany, and was delivering lectures in Cambridge on The State of the Protestant Religion in Germany (Cambridge 1825); much of his material would be common ground with Coleridge, e.g., an attack on Schelling’s theology as “mystical” (97).

5192 29.126 Printed in PW II 1110–11 App IV var as from “Notebook No. 29, p. 168”. The page number was Coleridge’s, the notebook number on a label now lost probably EHC’s or Mrs Gillman’s. EHC’s reference to this entry in PW is of interest as establishing beyond doubt that the “Clasped Vellum Notebook” now in the Berg Collection in NYPL was originally N 29 in the series sold by him to his cousin James Duke Coleridge; see CN in N 29 Gen N. The entry was printed also var in CL V 414–16, as “To Unknown Correspondent”.

The entry was begun at the top of f82^v, before the preceding blank pages were used; see 5216n. A peculiarity of the MS is a small piece of paper, stuck with dabs of glue or paste over part of f83^v; it contained ten lines of verse, apparently afterthought insertions, and covered parts of lines 15–24, i.e. the last part of what has come to be known as the poem, Work without Hope. (The covered lines are now visible, the patch having been floated off, and an attempt has been made to reproduce them in the text.)

Mrs Gillman has written on f83, immediately below the prose and before the poem, “It was fancy”. She thus made it clear that the dear Friend to whom the entry was addressed was herself; see 5184 above. Coleridge had gone to live with the Gillmans in April 1816.

At the foot of ƒ83^v to the left, opposite Coleridge’s JACOB HODIERNUS (“the Modern Jacob”) either Coleridge or Mrs Gillman has written the ah! me!!—it is difficult to be certain which of them. At the foot of this same page, “Campbell p. 643” appears in EHC’s hand, a reference to J.Dykes Campbell’s 1893 edition of Coleridge’s Poetical Works, probably made when EHC was preparing his own edition of 1912.

f82^v a Self-conscious Looking-glass: Coleridge’s narcissism did not escape his own notice; see “Reflexions” 417–19; also Coburn SC Imagination 13–14, 22.

the Eolian Harp of my Brain: The suggestion of the brain as a passive receiver here reflects his objection to his poem The Aeolian Harp of 1795. “The mind does not resemble an Aeolian Harp—but a violin, played on by a musician of genius.” Note on Kant quoted by Wellek Immanuel Kant in England (Princeton 1931) 82. The metaphor here is part of the description of his depressed feelings of failure.

pheer…for Mate: Cf the strong sense of the word Mate in Housemate/gravemate in CN III 3307 and n, 3547; Housemates in CL V 177; Housematesbedmates in CL V 498; House-& Hearth-mates in CL VI 572. Cf also an interesting context in 4703.

Spencer: Does not use the word pheer or phere, nor does Herbert. But Coleridge did— in The Three Graves (“fere” line 37) and in a variant line in the Ancient Mariner; see PW I 270, II 1035.

G.Herbert: EHC draws attention to the last stanza of George Herbert’s Praise: The Temple; see CN III 3532, 3533, 3580, 3735; also below 5327, 5399, 5401 and nn. Coleridge was annotating the 1674 edition in June 1824 (CM II under Herbert) and returned to The Temple frequently. Cf Herbert’s Employment (1674) 49 § 5:

All things are busie; only I Neither bring Honey with the Bees, Nor flowres to make that, nor the husbandry To water these.

I am no link of thy great chain, But all my company is as a weed. Lord place me in thy consort; give one strain To my poor reed.

f83 saw in her or fancied that he saw Symptoms of Alienation: Hence Mrs Gillman’s “It was fancy”.

All Nature seems at work…: There is no doubt that the next word is slugs, corrected from snails. The first fourteen lines were published var first in The Bijou for 1828, entitled Work without Hope, Lines composed on a day in February; see PW I 447 and n. By some error the date 21 Feb 1827 was assigned to the poem in PW (1828), (1829), (1834). The footnote, in which Amaranth is derived from Maraino, may be a recollection of the use of that word by Plotinus; see 4909 above. Or of Luther? As an ardent reader of Luther’s Colloquia Mensalia (see 4594, 4599, etc) Coleridge could hardly have missed the description of the Amaranth (1652) 270–1:

Amaranthus is a flower that groweth in August, it is more a stalk than a flower, it is easily broken off, and groweth in joiful and pleasant sort; when all other flowers are gon and decaied, then this (being with water sprinkled) becometh fair and green again, insomuch that in winter time they use to make Garlands thereof. It is called Amaranthus (said Luther) from hence, that it neither withereth nor decaieth. I know nothing (said Luther) more like unto the Church then this Flower Amaranthus, (called with us in Germanie, Thousand fair).

f83^v I speak in figures…: The revisions are such as to make some readings doubtful, and the order of the lines uncertain. The x before the third line is not the copyist’s but Coleridge’s, to indicate that the lines similarly marked on ƒ84 opposite are alternatives. They are crowded on the left side of the page; on the right side, a little below, the lines With viscous masonry of films and threads seem to be another attempt.

HC wrote a touching answer to his father’s Work Without Hope in a sonnet that appeared in Poems (1833), which volume was dedicated to him. It begins, “All Nature ministers to Hope”, treats mainly of winter, and ends:

Why, then, since Nature still is busy healing, And Time, the waster, his own work concealing, Decks every grave with verdure and with flowers,— Why should Despair oppress immortal powers?

Poems (1833) 118, (1851) 128.

5193 29.127 The word means “upright” and occurs in Deut 32:15 and 33:5, 6, and as a place name in Isa 44:2. It is also a symbolic name for Israel.

5194 29.128 On the principles of Cranioscopy of Gall and Spurzheim see 4763 and n.

5195 29.129 The reference is apparently to Paley’s sermon on “The Efficacy of the Death of Christ”: Sermons on Various Subjects (2 vols 1825) I 58–60. The sermon is the first of five so entitled and appeared also in Posthumous Sermons and Six Sermons on Public Occasions (1823) 139–41. It is not certain which edition Coleridge used, as he is abstracting the leading idea rather than quoting Paley’s exact words.

5196 20.29 Australis and Caledon: Southey and Scott, a disrespectful way of referring to their rapid and prolific production—of books?

5197 20.30 The beginning of the entry was written in pencil (with some words retraced in ink) on a small piece of paper, f14, possibly a leaf out of a small notebook, pasted on to f13. There being space left on the right hand side of f13, the passage from Ingenious but not satisfactory was written as a commentary.

Bliss, Happiness, and Pleasure: Cf CN III 3558 and n.

f14 proprium spatii: “property of space”.

Self-finding: CN III 3605 and n and in this volume 5189 and n.

the sense of Resistance overcome: Cf also on the creative value of the sense of difficulty overcome CN I 34n and the Preface to LB (1800): WPW IV 401.

f13 jam, jam, υicturus: “now, now, about to overcome”.

appetence: See 4616n.

ut in æstûs primo et medio stadio concubitalis: “as in the first and middle stages of the ardour of copulation”.

Imo! Hoc satis facere υidetur: “No! on the contrary! this does seem satisfactory”.

sub formâ υitæ: “in the form of life”.

5198 20.31 <p. 24>: Coleridge wrote this in the corner of the page, not referring to some work, but to page 24 of this notebook; he had numbered alternate pages with odd numbers, and wished to note that this was p.24 because here he had continued entry 5202.

Book I.C. 10 St. 23; I.e. Faerie Queene I X 23. In Eng Poets III where, however, the stanzas are not numbered, the stanza reads:

And streight way sent with careful diligence, To fetch a leach the which had great insight In that disease of grieved conscience, And well could cure the same; his name was Patience.

For earlier use of Eng Poets III for Spenser see CN III 4501 and n.

the witling, if he ever was a specific critic, has escaped into obscurity.

to obtuse: For too obtuse.

Coleridge’s classic statement on the importance to poetry of “the sense of musical delight, with the power of producing it”, as in Shakespeare, is in Chap XV BL (CC) II 20.

5199 20.32 The hand is shaky, tired or perhaps aged; possibly a word or phrase was omitted after make it—make it [lie down?] The entry, on the bottom half of the page, could have been written in the space left below 5202 at almost any time after c May 1825.

5200 20.26 This entry was already on f11^v before a few words of 5203 were written there; see 5203 f11v.

Another (possibly more modern) hand has written in pencil alongside this entry, in the outer margin: “This not yet done”.

Lucus a non lucendo: “Lucus (a grove) is so called from not giving light”; see on the same antiphrastic figure of speech CN III 4134 f167^v and n; also CL VI 606.

Church Arminian: Rationalizers such as Paley.

schismatic Unitarian: E.g. Thomas Belsham The Right and Duty of Unitarian Christians to form Separate Societies for Religious Worship (1802); see LS (CC) 181–4.

5201 20.27 Opera universa (Leyden 1726) 300 of Thomas Sydenham (Coleridge’s edition) gives Epistola I in reply to Dr Brady, Regius Professor of Medicine in Cambridge, on the subject of treating “epidemic diseases”. Coleridge refers to Sydenham’s paragraph numbered 16 by translators, not, after all, transcribed:

Quo autem pacto deprehendemus Corticem vi sua adstrictoria Febres fugare? Qui id probare velit, necesse erit, ut prius alia adstringentia pari virtute praedita in medium adferat; mihi certe, vel eorum fortissima adhibenti in experimentum, nondum è voto ceffit. Quid quod illos etiam sanat, qui ab ejus usu tamquam à Cathartico adsumto, quod nonnullis accidit, frequenter alvum deponunt? Id vero demum est recte sapere, suo se quemque pede, ac modulo, metiri. At si quis fucum sibi faciens, aliis se praeditum esse facultatibus existimaverit, quam quae inserviunt percicipiendae vel Naturali Theologiae (ut Deo scilicet, rerum omnium Architecto & Moderatori, debita veneratio, cum profundissima animi prostratione, jure merito exhibeatur;) vel Philosophiae Morali (ut virtutem exerceat, & mores tam ad privatum, quam publicum, Societatis Humanae bonum adcommodet,) vel denique Arti Medicae, Mathematicae, & Mechanicae, (quibus vita communis adjuvatur;) hic primum Hypothesin aliquam è schola Naturalis Philosophiae depromat, qua vel unicam differentiam specificam rerum in natura possit enodare; ex. gr. rationem reddat, quare Gramen omne viridi ubicumque colore, nusquam alio, cernitur infectum, &c. Hoc si effecerit, in ejus castra haud invitus transeam; sin aliter, non verebor dicere; quod Medici cura omnis, atque industria, in expiscanda Morborum Historia, iisque remediis adhibendis, quae experientia Indice, ac Magistra, eosdem valent depellere, debent collocari; observata tamen ista medendi Methodo, quam recta ratio (non speculationum commentis, sed trito & naturali cogitandi modo innixa) ei dictaverit.

Tr: But how does it appear that the bark cures intermittents by its astringency? In order to prove this, other astringents, possess'd of the same virtue, must first necessarily be produced; I have tried the strongest ineffectually. Besides, the bark cures even where it purges, which is sometimes the case. Upon the whole, therefore, they act the wisest part, who confine their enquiries to their abilities. But if any body will delude himself and imagine that he is possessed of other faculties than such as either help him to understand natural religion, which teaches that God, the creator and governor of all things, is to be worship’d with profound veneration, as he justly merits; or moral philosophy, that he may practise virtue, and makes himself an useful member of society; or, lastly, the medical, mathematical, and mechanical arts, which are so useful to the purposes of life: let him, first, deduce an hypothesis from natural philosophy, that will enable him to explain the cause of but a single specific difference of things in nature. For instance, let him account for the universal greenness of grass, and why it is never of any other colour, and the like. And if he can do this, I will readily embrace his sentiments, but if not, I shall not scruple to affirm, that all the diligence and caution of a physician should be employ’d in investigating the history of diseases, and applying those remedies which stand recommended by experience for the cure thereof; pursuing notwithstanding that method which is founded on right reason, and not the result of idle speculations.

Tr John Swan The Entire Works of Dr Thomas Sydenham (2nd ed London 1749) 277–8. For Coleridge on Sydenham see above 4595 and n.

Empiry: Not in OED though empirie (1651 “obs”) is there. From the Greek, “experience”, “practice”, “experiment”.

historicism: Not in OED, The Greek word before it was used in the modern sense of history, meant scientific inquiry or observation and the knowledge so obtained. Cf Logic (CC) 29.

5202 20.28 Coleridge’s annotated copy of Peter Heylyn’s Cypri-anus Anglicus: or, the History of the Life and Death, of…William… Archbishop of Canterbury (1671) is in the BM. After the dedication there follows “A Necessary Introduction to the following History” for 38 pages. On 7 Coleridge wrote “I scarcely know a more unamiable Churchman, as a Writer, than Dr Heylyn”. P3 reads:

In Doctrinals and Forms of Worship there was no alteration made in the Reign of Henry VIII, though there were many preparations and previous dispositions to it; the edge of Ecclesiastical Affairs being somewhat blunted, and the people indulged a greater Liberty in consulting with the Holy Scriptures, and reading many more Books of Evangelical Piety, then they had been formerly: which having left the way more open to Arch- Bishop Cranmer, and divers other learned and Religious Prelates in King Edwards time (seconded by the Lord Protector, and other great ones of the Court, who had their ends apart by themselves) they proceeded carefully and vigorously to a Reformation. In the managing of which great business, they took the Scriptures for their ground, according to the general explication of the ancient Fathers; the practice of the Primitive times for their Rule and Pattern, as it was expressed to them in approved Authors: No regard had to Luther or Calvin, in the procedure of their work, but only to the Writings of the Prophets and Apostles, Christ Jesus being the Corner-stone of that excellent Structure.

“But the Archbishop knew the man”: The passage continues, with the word “offer” penned in the margin for other in the text:

And Calvin made an offer of his service to Arch-Bishop Cranmer (Si quis mei usus esset, if they might use him to promote the work) but the Arch- Bishop knew the man and refused the other, so that it cannot be affirmed, that the Reformation of this Church, was either Lutheran or Calvinian in its first original.

P. 4. all Plausible: Heylyn continued pointing out that the Reformation of the Church of England returned to church forms that were originals laid out in Scripture regardless of their use by the Catholic Church:

Nothing that was Apostolick, or accounted Primitive did fare the worse for being Popish; I mean for having been made use of in times of Popery: it being none of their designs to create a new Church, but reform the old. Such Superstitions and Corruptions as had been contracted by that Church, by long tract of time, being pared away, that which was good and commendable did remain as formerly: It was not their intent to dig up a foundation of such precious stones, because some superstructure of Straw and Stubble had been raised upon it. A moderation much applauded by King James, in the Conference at Hampton-Court; whose golden Aphorism it was, That no Church ought further to separate it self from the Church of Rome, either in Doctrine or Ceremony, then she had departed from her self, when she was in her flourishing and best estate.

Heylyn gave as an example the rules for the consecration of Bishops, pointing out that the first Book of Articles, confirmed under Edward VI and again in the Articles of Religion under Elizabeth I in 1562, was in agreement with both Scripture and the canons of the Council of Carthage in A.D. 407.

f13^v <turn to p. 24> : I.e. turn to f13^v; see 5198n. In turning to f13^v, 5202 had to be written below 5198 already at the top of the page. Then after filling f13^v, 5202 went on to the next page, i.e. f15, there being no fI4^v in the BM’s foliation on account of the pastedown; see 5197 n.

as Leighton(Sion’s Plea) observed: Alexander Leighton (1568–1649) Scottish physician and aggressively antiprelatical puritan divine, published in Holland in 1628 An Appeal to the Parliament, or Sions Plea against the Prelacie, which when it became known in England led to his being fined, imprisoned, tortured, and defrocked from 1630 to 1640, at which time the Long Parliament reinstated and compensated him. He was as bigotted as his son Robert was benign and tolerant, the son whom Coleridge admired so greatly as a “Spiritual Divine” that his work was a major inspiration to the writing of AR. See AR iii-iv and 150 foll. Coleridge refers here to Sions Plea 14:

The Protestants (saith the Rhemists) otherwise denying the pre-eminence of Peter: yet to uphold the Archbishops, they avouch it against the Puritanes. Hence appeareth the trueth of that assertion, whence the Prelacie disputeth against the Puritanes, they use Popish arguments, but when they dispute against the Pope, they use Puritanes arguments, & thus they use the trueth as Moses used the rod, whilst it was a rod, Moses could hold it in his hand, but when it became a Serpent, he fled from it.

Ceremonial Protestantism in Germany: Here Coleridge returned to Heylyn Cyprianus Anglicus 3–4, “A Necessary Introduction”:

And yet it cannot be denied, but that the first Reformers of it did look with more respectful eyes upon the Doctrinals, Government, and Forms of Worship in the Lutheran Churches, then upon those of Calvins platform; because the Lutherans in their Doctrines, Government, and Forms of Worship, approach't more near the Primitive Patterns, than the other did: and working according to this rule, they retained many of those ancient Rites and Ceremonies, which had been practised; and almost all the Holy Days or Annual Feasts which had been generally observed in the Church of Rome.

Quirks of Consubstantiation; Cf 4632.

The pretence of the Hierarchy to a positive Power, through control over Ceremonies to control over men's Faith, is the main theme of Leighton's continuing argument.

The remainder of Coleridge’s comment is at least in part a reflexion on the narrow Puritanism of Alexander Leighton, an example of extreme reaction against church ceremonies in general, as being associated with Roman Catholicism and an hierarchical church.

f15 Luther held them in small reverence: E.g. Colloquia Mensalia (1652) 349–53, “Of the BOOKS of the FATHERS of the CHURCH”, where Luther wrote that he would not have had St Jerome for his chaplain, for although he might be read for history, he should not be consulted for faith or doctrine; that he had already “banished” Origen; that St Chrysostom was nothing but a prattler; and that St Basil was a friar “not worth a hair”. On Coleridge’s annotated copy see 4594 and n.

f15^v πατριζοντων θεολογων: “patristic theologians”. OED lists Patrician in this sense as “rare”, the only two examples cited being from Coleridge Marginalia in LR. The Greek

word translated by Coleridge as Patrician, i.e. patristic Divines, appears to be his own coinage.

large number of Texts…unappellable with those acknowledged: Heylyn Cyprianus Anglicus 1–38, “A Necessary Introduction”, summarizes the scriptural points contended between the Pontifical Divines and the Puritans and between the Romanists and the Reformers.

f16 Wooden Horse: The famous ruse that brought about the fall of Troy. Aeneid II 13– 268.

Minerva: The patron goddess of Troy, but also the inspirer of the building of the horse; Aeneid ibid.

5203 20.25 Written around 5200. The entry is similar to AR 295–6; see also 4935.

S^t Paul commences his Reason…general sense of Law: in Rom I and 2, Paul defines the Law uniting the ideas of Jews and gentiles. The essence of the argument is that behind the Torah of the Jews and the Christian system is the larger Will of God, of which both are proximate expressions.

Law, as the correspondent opposite of the Will: The Law here in the above sense, as an expression of the Will of God; the Will as the individual echo of this in the human Reason. Cf Ch XIII BL (CC) I 304–5. This relation should be kept in mind throughout the entry.

in animals, the Will is absorbed in the Law: Cf AR 295: “In irrational agents, namely, the brute animals, the will is hidden or absorbed in the law. The law is their nature.” But for Coleridge’s speculations on the incipient ability of dogs to make moral distinctions see AR 241.

in the pure or unfallen Nature…one with the Divine Will: Cf AR 295: “Nay, inasmuch as a will perfectly identical with the law is one with the Divine Will, we may say, that in the unfallen rational agent, the will constitutes the law.”

f12^v ab extra quoad animum: “from without as regards the spirit”.

S^t Paul’s argument…ceremonial Orders: Cf AR 296: “That by the law St. Paul meant only the ceremonial law, is a notion that could originate only in utter inattention to the whole strain and bent of the Apostle’s arguments.”

in ordine ad Legem: “in order to the Law”.

f13 ab altero, and quoad animum…ad extra: “by another” and “as regards the spirit” existing “outwards”.

5204 20.33 In May 1825 Coleridge was using at the same time, without apparent method, N 20 and N 29; see 5219 and n.

From this entry it is clear that his reading of Vico’s Vita and Scienza nuoυa began 2 May 1825, not in May 1824 as stated by Croce in Bibliografia Vichiana (2 vols Naples 1947) I 518–23. The point has a bearing on the composition of AR announced in LMLA as published 10 May 1825, prematurely; see 5216n. Some time between May 2 and May 10, Coleridge sent some corrected proofs to Hessey and asked for a last-minute insertion of a motto from Vico, which appeared in AR on the verso of the Contents page; cf CL V 445. On 15 Apr 1825 Coleridge had received a visit from the Italian radical refugee Gioacchimo de’ Prati (CL V 426–7), who either then or on another visit on or before 2 May 1825 brought to Highgate Principj di scienza nuoυa (3 vols Milan 1816) containing also the Vita. All references in these notes are to this edition. Quotations are from the translation, The New Science, by T.G.Bergin and M.H.Fisch (Ithaca, NY 1968). Because of their length, quotations from Vico in these notes will be given only in this translation, where the paragraphs of The New Science are numbered, although not numbered in the original.

A quotation from Vico in TL 36, and its footnote reference, came from Jacobi Von den göttlichen Dingen: Werke (3 vols Leipzig 1816) III 352–3, as M.H.Fisch pointed out in a useful article “The Coleridges, Dr. Prati, and Vico” in Mod Philol (Aug 1943) XLI 111– 22. If TL is datable c 1817–18, as seems possible at least for some of it, a reading of Vico then is not implied, rather of Jacobi. As TL was posthumously edited and published, one does not know whether had Coleridge prepared it for publication he would have remembered Jacobi as the source. Coleridge’s annotated copy of the Jacobi Werke, bought by Coleridge probably in 1816, is in Columbia University Library. Vol III, though annotated, has no annotations on these pages. See CM under Jacobi. Also 4815, 4823 and nn for two references to Jacobi Werke I.

The Vico reference in TL, together with a note by EHC dating that work in 1816, misled Sir Isaiah Berlin in his Vico and Herder (1976) into saying that Coleridge quoted Vico in 1816; he did, but via Jacobi. This entry is evidence that Coleridge’s first direct introduction to Vico’s work is datable 2 May 1825, in the Milan edition of 1816, to which all references here apply.

the true Theory of the ‘Oμηρoι vice ‘Oμερoς: The theory that there were several Homers, rather than one, was developed by Vico through his whole Book III–III 1–41— “Discovery of the True Homer”, where he contended that the Iliad and the Odyssey “were composed and compiled by various hands through successive ages”. The New Science § 804. For Coleridge’s interest in and opinions on the question see above 5071, CN III 3656 and nn.

the character of the ancient History of Rome: Vico argued, chiefly in Bk IV (III 42– 114) that “civil equity” was the supreme law in Roman heroic times, when “the safety of the people” was the natural care of the aristocrats whose private interests were identical with those of the state.

Plato, Tacitus…: Coleridge with amazement quotes Vico Vita, which is in this edition at I 1–68 (literatim but for an occasional capital letter and reflessione for “riflessione”), where Vico referred to Grotius after Plato, Tacitus, and Bacon, as the “fourth author which he admired above all others”. On the same page (I 50) is the account of Vico’s intention to annotate Grotius’s The Law of War and Peace, which in part he did but (to translate Coleridge’s quotation) “abandoned the task, reflecting that it was not fitting for a man of Catholic faith to adorn with notes the work of a heretical author”. The Autobiography of Giambattista Vico tr M.H.Fisch and T.G.Bergin (Ithaca, NY 1944) 155.

Coleridge, sensitive to the petty descents of great minds, was apparently shocked equally by Vico’s bracketting of Grotius’s name with the other three, and by his reasons for not writing his commentary on Grotius. Vico had written in the same paragraph cited above:

…Plato adorns rather than confirms his esoteric wisdom with the common wisdom of Homer. Tacitus intersperses his metaphysics, ethics and politics with the facts, as they have come down to him from the times, scattered and confused and without system. Bacon sees that the sum of human and divine knowledge of his time needs supplementing and emending, but as far as laws are concerned he does not succeed with his canons in compassing the universe of cities and the course of all times, or the extent of all nations. Grotius, however, embraces in a system of universal law the whole of philosophy and philology, including both parts of the latter, the history on the one hand of facts and events, both fabulous and real, and on the other of the three languages, Hebrew, Greek and Latin; that is to say, the three learned languages of antiquity that have been handed down to us by the Christian religion.

Ibid 154–5.

f17 In spite of Coleridge’s P. 60. Vita di. G.B.Vico here, he was using the sixth edition (Milan 1816) as stated above, where this material is at I 50. The paper is very soft, and the inking of the printed pagenumber on the other side of the leaf so blurred the figure that one almost more naturally reads 60 than 50. See 5207 and n.

In AR where he used this Latin sentence (var) as a motto—see par 2 above—he corrected his notebook reference, P. 60, to “p. 50”; he also inserted SIVE SPIRITUS after MENS and made the last phrases read: “cujus Oculus est RATIO; cui lumen praebet Deus.—” In at least two annotated copies of AR he also corrected the typographical error “unam” to “unum”.

The passage (given by Vico not in Italian but in Latin) reads in translation: “All divine and human learning has three elements: knowledge, will and power, whose single principle is the mind, with reason for its eye, to which God brings the light of eternal truth.” Tr Autobiography 156. It is on the basis of Coleridge’s use of this quotation from Vico that Croce saw Vico’s influence in AR: Bibliografia Vichiana I 520.

Coleridge’s excitement about Vico was quickly aroused by this first reading of one in whom he was delighted to find anticipation of his own approaches to cultural history; see CL V 454. There is ample support for the genuineness of his sense of “genial coincidences”.

5205 20.34 In discussing “this contest of antiquity” in Scienza nuoυa (ed cit 5204n) I 118–19, Vico provided Coleridge with the material in this entry, coming down on the side of Hebrew as opposed to Egyptian, Chinese, Scythian, Chaldean, Assyrian claims. He began with “the Hercules that every ancient gentile nation boasts as its founder” (tr cit § 3), describing with awareness of geographical factors the obscurer ages of man and the evidence of developing religions and cultures. He attacked particularly the Egyptian insistence that their Jove was the oldest and the origin of all other national Joves, and similarly that their Hercules gave the name to all others (tr cit § 53).

Of the Chaldeans I 118–19) he said that…in geography it is clear that the most inland monarchy of all the habitable world must have been in Assyria, and… it is shown that the inland nations were populated first, and then the maritime nations. And certainly the Chaldeans were the first gentile sages, and the common opinion of philologians regards Zoroaster the Chaldean as their prince. And without question universal history takes its beginning from the monarchy of the Assyrians, which must have begun to take shape among the Chaldean people; from whom, when it had grown to great size, it must have passed to the nation of the Assyrians under Ninus, who must have founded that monarchy not with people brought in from outside but with those born within Chaldea itself, whereupon he did away with the Chaldean name and brought forward the Assyrian in its stead. It must have been the plebeians of that nation through whose support Ninus made himself king…. Now the same [universal] history tells us that Zoroaster was slain by Ninus. We shall see that this was said, in heroic language, in the sense that the kingdom of the Chaldeans which had been aristocratic (and of which Zoroaster had been the heroic character) was overthrown by means of the popular liberty of the plebeians of that people.

Tr cit § 55.

He then added:

Zoroaster is shown in this work to have been a poetic character of founders of peoples in the East. There are as many of these founders scattered through that great part of the world as there are Herculeses scattered through the opposite part, the West. And perhaps the Herculeses whom Varro observed to exist in the likeness of the western ones even in Asia, such as the Tyrian or Phoenician, were considered by the Easterners as so many Zoroasters.

Tr cit § 59.

The word is not Vico’s: “sprung from Zeus”, “of divine origin”, used especially of kings in Homer.

a radice: Also Coleridge’s, “from their origin”; cf 4839, 4866 and nn.

5206 20.35 Coleridge’s play in schoolboy vein with the old name for Dandelions, Piss-abed, as the French, piss-en-lit, both terms vulgarly related to the medical use of dandelions as a diuretic.

Tempus edax!: “Time, the devourer!”, a tag from Ovid Metamorphoses XV. 234.

f17^v Vico’s Scienza nuoυa (ed cit 5204n) I 120 provided the springboard and the names that follow, from Zoroaster to Orpheus

But this conceit of the scholars did not stop here, for it swelled even further by deriving from him the scholastic succession among the nations. According to them, Zoroaster taught Berosus for Chaldea; Berosus, Thrice-great Hermes for Egypt; Thrice-great Hermes, Atlas for Ethiopia; Atlas, Orpheus for Thrace; and finally Orpheus founded his school in Greece.

Tr cit § 59.

Mercurius…Salivation: Cf above 5140 and n.

[ Morbus sacer ] “the sacred disease” i.e. epilepsy.

Teutonice=Virus sive Pus atque υenenum: “In German ‘Gift’, means poison, or pus and venom”. “Pus atque venenum” is in Horace Satires I 7.1.

vaccination or iodation: On vaccination see CN I 1521 and n. Iodation was a recent medication, iodine having been first named by H.Davy in 1814.

All my Eye and Betty…Martin: According to HCR, Coleridge explained the expression as “a corruption of a ridicule by the Protestants at the time of the Reformation of the Catholic address on the feast of St. Martin. Mihi beate Martine. Se non υero è ben trovato”. On Books and their Writers ed Edith J.Morley (3 vols 1938) I 114. Cf also the play with it above in 4809, below in 5377 and in Chap IX BL (CC) I 159.

putamenta: For “putamina”? The clippings that fall off when trees etc. are pruned, useless waste twigs; or, as putare means “to think” as well as “to trim”, useless twigs of thoughts?

Judicial Astrology: Cf 4683; i.e., astrology in the modern sense, not “natural astrology” or what is now astronomy.

5207 20.36 Vico 1. p. 135: Referring to Vico, Scienza nuoυa Bk I “De principij”. The page reference is evidence for Coleridge’s use of the 3-vol 1816 Milan edition (see above 5204 and n), which reads: “la quale in tutte le Nazioni del Mondo i Sacerdoti custodivino arcana al υolgo delle loro medesime plebi; ond’ ella ha avuto appo tutte il nome di Sagra, ch’ è tanto dire, quanto segreta”:

for in all nations of the world the priests kept such doctrine secret even from their own plebs [999f], indeed it was everywhere called sacred doctrine, for sacred is as much as to say secret

Tr cit 5204n § 95.

The Irish Bible Society: Founded in 1805, called the “Hibernian Society”, and later the “London Hibernian Society”, its objects were the establishment of schools and the circulating of the scriptures in Ireland. It was at once condemned by Irish Roman Catholics; in 1824 scenes of turmoil were reported in various pamphlets and in The Irish Times.

romantic tales…by the Chinese Jesuits: A few pages earlier in discussing competitive claims to antiquity of their civilization by Egyptians, Chaldeans, Scythians, and others, including the Chinese, Vico referred to two Jesuit priests, one of whom declared he had read Chinese books printed B.C., the other ascribed great antiquity to Confucius; these statements Vico contraverted with other authorities saying that printing did not occur in China more than two centuries before it appeared in Europe, and that Confucius lived at most five centuries before Christ. Tr § 50. See 5232 below. Coleridge is probably referring to Vico but it should also be noted that he had a much earlier interest in Jesuits in China; in a letter of 9 Feb 1808 to RS he wrote, “My Jesuit Volume, 3 in one, the first Italian, the second Portuguese, and the third Italian, all relate to Japan or China”. CL III 58. The volume has neither been found nor identified.

Solar Microscope: David Brewster in A Treatise on Optics (1831) 346 said a “solar microscope” was “nothing more than a magic lantern, the light of the sun being used instead of that of a lamp”.

Katterfeltos of France: Gustavus Katterfelto (d 1799) a conjuror, was a sensation in London from 1782, i.e. in Coleridge’s schooldays. Announced as a professor of natural philosophy and mathematics, he gave lectures and exhibitions that included “experiments” with magnetism, the loadstone, electricity, games of chance, the elements, etc. He was alleged to have discovered perpetual motion, and by his “improved” solar microscope he was said to show “above 5000=(or 10,000) insects in a drop of water”, of great interest in the influenza epidemic of 1782. Prominent also in his “Wonders, Wonders! Wonders!” was his black cat. The number of insects in a drop of water rose to 50,000, but after many threats to leave the country, Katterfelto stayed too long, and was finally committed as a rogue and a vagabond in Kendal to a house of correction. Information from Daniel Lyson’s Collectanea 1661–1840 (5 vols) I 190—205 (in BM).

See also “Omniana 1809–16”: LR I 321. Coleridge in a note on Edward Irving’s For Missionaries after the Apostolical School (1825) waxed satirical about “Katterfelto’s Glass, that shewed 500 non-descript Animals, each as clear as his Black Cat, in a drop of Water”. See CM under Irving.

Aristobulus: Fl 2nd century BC, a Jewish philosopher who sought to show that Homer, Hesiod, “Orpheus”, Pythagoras, Plato, and Aristotle had all borrowed from the OT. Coleridge annotated Valckenaer’s Diatribe on him (CN III 3824 f111^v n), which claims that his otherwise unknown quotations from the Greek poets were forgeries. His work has survived only in fragments quoted by Clement and Eusebius.

Iamblichus, Porphyry: See Lect 4 P Lects (CC) ff162–163 for a similar view. They were Tricksters of the Same School who both wrote lives of Pythagoras emphasizing his divine parentage and wonder-working powers and bearing resemblances to NT stories.

The Science of comparative History—Comparative ANTHRopotomy: A Coleridge coinage; the first use of anthropotomy, the anatomy of the human body, is dated by the OED 1855.

5208 20.37 The Law of Connubia: Vico wrote in Bk I of Scienza nuoυa (ed cit 5204n) I 143:

Now when the plebeians saw [on the one hand] that they could not transmit the fields intestate to their kin, because they had no direct heirs, agnates or gentiles (to which relations legitimate succession was then confined), since their marriages were not solemnized; and [on the other hand] that they could not even dispose of their fields by testament because they did not have the rights of citizens; they demanded for themselves the connubium of the nobles; that is the right to solemnized marriages (for this is the meaning of connubium)…. But since marriage is, by the definition of the jurisconsult Modestinus, “the sharing of every divine and human right” (omnis divini et humani juris communicatio), and since citizenship itself is nought else, the fathers thereby gave the plebeians the privileges of citizenship. Then, in the (natural) course of human desires, the plebeians went on to secure from the fathers the communication of all those institutions of private law which depended upon the auspices: …In this way the tribunes of the plebs, by performing the function for which they were created, that of protecting the natural liberty of the plebeians, were gradually led to secure for them the whole range of civil liberty as well.

Tr cit §§ 110–11.

Collate Negroes in West Indies: See also 5211 below.

Was Coleridge contemplating similarities or dissimilarities? Was he thinking of the frequent West Indian rejection of marriage as understood and reported by European historians? Cf Bryan Edwards History…of …the West Indies (3 vols 1801) II 176. Coleridge read this work in Malta: CN II 2297 and n.

5209 20.38 Exclude Utility?: Was there a real questioner, perhaps discussing Vico or questions arising out of Vico’s view of history, in this run of Vico entries, or does Coleridge simply prefer dialogue to monologue?

My System of Moral Philosophy…includes it: The same point was made by J.S.Mill, when he saw Coleridge’s position as “less extreme in its opposition, it denies less of what is true in the doctrine it wars against” than any previous attacks, pointing to Coleridge’s “catholic and unsectarian” spirit. Dissertations and Discussions (1859) I 403, 458–9; see also AR 37–9 from which Mill supported his views.

Reflection: Another instance of Coleridge’s awareness that in man “much lies below his own Consciousness” (CN I 1554) and conduct therefore is not wholly founded on Reflection or U Understanding (f19^v). See e.g. 4534 and n.

Self-love: Cf CN III 3559 and n, and in this volume, 5115 for some finer distinctions.

f19^v Pope’s Essay on Man: Coleridge may refer to the passage in Epistle III that begins

See him from Nature rising slow to Art!… Great Nature spoke; observant Men obeyed; Cities were built, Societies were made: Here rose one little state; another near Grew by like means, and joined, through love or fear…. Thus States were formed; the name of King unknown, Till common interest placed the sway in one.

III lines 169, 199–202, 209–10.

Or again possibly he is thinking of

So drives Self-love, through just and through unjust, To one Man’s power, ambition, lucre, lust: The same Self-love, in all, becomes the cause Of what restrains him, Government and Laws…. Forced into virtue thus by Self-defence, Even Kings learned justice and benevolence: Self-love forsook the path it first pursued, And found the private in the public good

III lines 269–72, 279–82.

Or the ending,

So two consistent motions act the Soul; And one regards Itself, and one the Whole. Thus God and Nature linked the general frame, And bade Self-love and Social be the same

III lines 315–18.

in specie: “in species”.

f20 ipso genere: “by the actual genus”.

Coleridge here followed the traditional (Aristotelian) logic, genus being the larger subdivision of which species is the smaller, e.g. genus, animal, species, man. The terms were taken over and applied more exactly in botany and zoology. In logic, but not in botany, the genus (e.g. plant) could be subdivided into species (e.g. trees, mosses, etc), which in turn could be treated as genera and again subdivided many times until the single individual is reached (5276).

Aids to Reflection, p. 240, §. 2: I.e., in paragraph 2: “if I suppose the Adaptive Power in its highest species or form of Instinctive Intelligence to co-exist with Reason, Free will, and Self-consciousness, it instantly becomes UNDERSTANDING: in other words, that Understanding differs indeed from the noblest form of Instinct, but not in itself or in its own essential properties, but in consequence of its co-existence with far higher Powers of a diverse kind in one and the same Subject. INSTINCT in a rational, responsible, and self-conscious Animal, is Understanding.” AR was published on 23 May 1825 (see 5216n), but the page reference here does not necessarily mean that this entry must be dated after that date, for the proof stages of AR were prolonged; see 5204 and n.

f20^v See the old red Cottle Pocket-book: A reference to N 21 (see CN I N 21 Gen N) and probably to CN II 2412 on “Wherein is Prudence distinguishable from Goodness (or Virtue)—and how are they both nevertheless one and indivisible”? Did that entry wait some twenty years for this development of a recurrent subject? There was in the interval inter alia the attack on Paley and “General Consequences” as moral criteria: see The Friend (CC) I 313–25.

5210 20.39 This entry is substantially what Coleridge wrote on the front fly-leaf of a presentation copy (in BM) of AR (presumably sent June 13; see CL V 462) to John Taylor Coleridge, with additions here of the parenthesis on f21 (I call this…Truth), and on f20^v of the paragraph This alone is Reason…Indigenae. Perhaps the entry represents an early stage in Coleridge’s intention to republish AR in a “considerably improved” edition. See a letter to Hyman Hurwitz [21 Nov 1828] CL VI 772–4.

Scheme of Argument, from p. 200 to p. 242: I.e. the argument on Reason and Understanding, from “Aphorisms on that which is indeed Spiritual Religion, Aphorism VIII with Comment” to “On Instinct in connexion with the Understanding”. The first half of the entry is an abstract of this argument. At the foot of p 242 of AR, at the end of this Scheme of Argument, Coleridge wrote in JTC’s copy “Here a Titlepage should have been interposed, with an appropriate Title and Motto, and a fresh Chapter or Section commenced”. In the second edition of 1831, however, no such break was made; an Appendix was added instead, in which the material of the first part of this entry ff21–21^v was used.

(subtracting the interposed aphorisms from 228 to 234): Aphorism IX, erroneously printed as IV, with its “Sequelæ: or Thoughts suggested by the preceding Aphorism”, 228–34, is the obvious interruption to the discourse on Reason and Understanding.

PRACTICAL REASON: Does Coleridge’s double underlining of this and other terms here, indicate a renewed attention to Kant’s distinctions? Or to someone’s ignoring them?

f20^v Indigenae: “native/inborn elements”.

f21^v toto genere: “completely in kind”.

my larger work: “Assertion of Religion, as necessarily involving Revelation; and of Christianity as the only Revelation of permanent and universal validity.” AR 152. A MS note on the verso of the front fly-leaf of JTC’s copy reads: “In the larger Work, announced and described at p. 152, in which I proceed synthetically from the idea of the Absolute, to the Idea of the Tri-une God, it was in my power to give in a more satisfactory because more positive form the Idea and Genesis of Reason, as it exists for Man, than was possible in the present Volume, in which I was obliged to proceed analytically and a posteriori/or rather, a datis. But taking it as analytic, the unprejudiced and competent Inquirer will I dare assure myself, find the reasoning legitimate, and the demonstration compleat.” Cf 4744, 4746, 4890, 4946 and nn.

Λογος: “Word”, or “actualizing power”; see 4554, also 5297 and nn.

“Being/I am”; see 5256 f63^v, 5396 and nn.

“the firstborn”. See SM:LS (CC) 44 and nn. In a note on Chillingworth (CM II under Chillingworth B) Coleridge interpreted the word, “begotten before all time”.

5211 20.40 A continuation of the reading of Vico and of the argument above in 5207 and 5208.

Livy: Vico inevitably draws heavily on Livy for early Roman history but frequently contradicts or disparages him.

Jus bonitarium…and the jus connubiale: Cf Vico (who did not here use Coleridge’s Latin phrases) Scienza nuoυa Bk I (ed cit 5204n) I 141–2:

Tr: Subsequently, Junius Brutus, casting out the Tarquin tyrants,…reestablished the liberty of the patricians as against their tyrants, not the liberty of the people as against the patricians. But, since the nobles did not keep faith with the plebeians …the plebs brought about the creation of the plebeian tribunes…to protect for the people that degree of natural liberty represented by bonitary ownership of the fields

In consequence of all this, the nobles proceeding to take back the fields from the plebs after they had cultivated them, and the latter having no civil action for laying claim to them, the plebeian tribunes now demanded the Law of the Twelve Tables …By this law the nobles conceded to the plebs the quiritary ownership of the fields.

Tr cit § 108–9.

Black Regiments in the W.I.—Jealousy of the Planters respecting them: See above 5208. Bryan Edwards in his History…of…the West Indies (see CN II 2297 and n) pointed out that Negroes held no civic offices “neither are they permitted to hold commissions even in the Black and Mulatto companies of militia” (3 vols 1801) II 22.

jus connubiale’. See above 5208 and n; cf Scienza nuoυa tr cit § 410, 433, 567, 587.

qui ciere patrem poterat—nam nuptiæ demonstrant patrem: “who could name his father—for marriages show who is the father”. Livy X. 18. 10 (var).

Coleridge’s last two sentences in the entry draw also upon Vico Scienza nuoυa (II 188–9) Bk II the section “Dell’ origine de’ comizi romani”; cf Scienza nuoυa, tr cit § 433, 567, 587.

Tr: Thus the majestic title of Quirites must have been first used at a time when the people consisted entirely of nobles, who alone had the right to arm. Later, when Rome had become a popular commonwealth, the title passed to the people including the plebeians. For the assemblies of the plebs, who at first did not have the right to arm, were called comitia tributa from tribus, tribe. And among the Romans…the term tributum, tribute, came from tribus tribe, because the tribes of the plebeians met to receive the orders of the reigning senate, the chief and most frequent of which were demands upon the plebeians for contributions to the treasury.

Subsequently, however, Fabius Maximus introduced the [reformed] census which divided the whole Roman people into three classes according to the patrimonies of the citizens. Before this only the senators had been knights, for in heroic times only nobles had the right to arm, and hence in Roman history we read that the ancient Roman commonwealth was divided into fathers and plebs. Thus in those days senator and patrician had been interchangeable terms, and likewise plebeian and ignoble. …But now that Fabius had divided the citizens according to their means into the three classes of senators, knights and plebeians, the nobles ceased to be a separate order in the city and were placed in one or another of the three classes according to their wealth. From that time on patricians were distinguished from senators and knights, and plebeians from the base-born; and plebeians were no longer contrasted with patricians but with knights and senators. A plebeian no longer meant a baseborn person but rather a citizen of small patrimony who might well be a noble; and on the other hand a senator no longer meant a patrician but a citizen of ample patrimony who might well be of low birth.

Tr cit §§ 625–6.

5212 20.41 The entry is perhaps a consequence of Coleridge’s association with Blanco White in the summer of 1825; see 5240 f28 and the letters to Blanco White in CL V 476, 485–6, 522. Cf White’s The Poor Man’s Preservation Against Popery (1825) 93–4 “Dialogue III”: “The Romanist Church makes the confession of every sin by thought, word, and deed, necessary to receive absolution from a priest; and teaches that, without absolution, when there is a possibility of obtaining it, God will not grant remission of sins.”

5213 20.42 What do I mean by a Socinian Spirit in the Clergy …: Cf AR 338–9:

…those, who while Socinianism and Ultra-Socinianism are spreading like roots of an Elm, on and just below the surface, through the whole land, and here and there at least have even dipt under the garden-fence of the Church…can yet congratulate themselves with Dr. Paley (in his Evidences) that the Rent has not reached the foundation—i.e. that the

Corruption of Man’s Will; that the responsibility of man in any sense in which it is not equally predicable of Dogs and Horses; that the Divinity of our Lord, and even his pre-existence; that Sin, and Redemption through the merits of Christ; and Grace; and the especial aids of the Spirits; and the efficacy of Prayer; and the subsistency of the Holy Ghost; may all be extruded without breach or rent in the Essentials of Christian Faith!—that a Man may deny and renounce them all, and remain a fundamental Christian, notwithstanding!

what they had been on my own mind: See CN I 6 and a letter to J.Estlin [22 Aug 1796] CL I 232–3.

5214 20.44 In pencil, earlier on the page than 5215 which had to avoid it on f23^v.

Henry: Henry Gillman? As Coleridge took an interest in “Hen-Pen” ‘s schooling (see CN III 4341n, and in this volume 5236, 5254 nn), the entry could be a memorandum to obtain an Ancient Geography for him. Was it suggested by Coleridge’s nephew Edward, at this time an Assistant Master at Eton?

Edward appears to have lent to Coleridge Philip Skelton’s Works in 6 vols, with Burdy’s Life prefixed; Richard Baynes, 28 Paternoster Row, was the publisher. A copy in the BM, annotated by Coleridge, bears the autograph inscription of “Edward Coleridge/Eton College/May 28, 1825. Bought of Parker, Bound .4.0.0.” Coleridge’s notes in the flyleaves of the first volume were written later than the inscription; he was reading it (Oct-Nov 1825); CL V 510. See 5271 f6 and n.

According to Edward Coleridge’s holograph autobiography (BM Add MS 47,555), at the end of which is his careful “List of my pupils commencing at Easter 1825”, Henry Antony Gillman was entered as a King’s Scholar at the age of 11 on 22 July 1825. An unhappy student, he was there only little more than a year (5456n).

5215 20.43 The entry was written after 5214 was on the page (see 5214n), a continuation of the comments in that entry on AR.

U. and R.: The diversity of the Understanding and Reason was the main theme of The Friend: see The Friend (CC) I 154–8, II 104 fn. In AR the same distinction is discussed with its particular bearing on the conscience, the moral law, reason and will both human and divine. See above 5210 and n. See also CN III 4005 and n.

the word of God in Scripture: A succinct allusion to Coleridge’s view that the Scripture is a human and proximate rather than literal expression of the Word of God; cf e.g. 5337, 5372 and nn.

f23^v in the very constitution of the Human Mind: For Coleridge’s statement that he laboured early to ground his opinions “in the component faculties of the human mind itself” see Chap I BL (CC) I 22. On the Imagination as the repetition in the finite mind “of the eternal act of creation in the infinite I AM” see ibid Chap XIII I 304.

SubjectObject: Subject as opposite to Object; see App A; the subsequent course of the argument depends on this correlative relationship. See also 4522, 4656 and nn; also CN III 4186, 4265, 4426, 4427 and nn.

there must be conceived an Antecedent: I.e. an entity comprising both, usually called by Coleridge the Prothesis. For the cosmic application of this view see CN III 4418 and n.

an I Am, or Self-conscious Being: Cf similar terms to designate God in 4644 and n; see also e.g. 4523 and n.

f24 distinction not in absolute division: See 4947 and n.

universal Organ of a truly philosophical Logic: see 5130, 5133 and nn.

set at nought all Heresies: See The Friend (CC) II 104 fn.

Tritheism: See 5133 and n.

Socinian Materialism: See CN III 3968 and n, also 5144 f25 and n.

my disquisitions on Baptism & the Eucharist: The essay on Baptism appears in AR 331–3, 354–76; the essay on the Eucharist was one of six proposed for a small supplementary volume, never published. For the nature of these essays see a letter to J.A.Hessey [7 May 1825] CL V 434–6. See also below, 5360 f43n; also LR III 291 and fn.

guard the Symbol from being rarified into a Metaphor: I.e. to prevent the sacrament from becoming a mere commemorative act. On Symbol and Metaphor more generally see App C SM:LS (CC) 79, CN III 3847 and n, 4831 and n; also MC 28–32. Cf 5161.

f24^v candidus imperti: “pass it on, my good fellow”; Horace Epistles I 6 68 tr H.Rushton Fairclough.

my dear Sir!: J.H.Green? J.A.Hessey? See CL V 435. Blanco White? See below 5240 f28 and n.

form a very small part of the Volume: I.e. the volume referred to above, supplementary to AR, or the proposed Assertion of Religion? See 4744 and n, and a letter to JTC [8 May 1825] CL V 444.

reprehensible obscurity: See 4676 and n.

f25 the Personeity…of God: A phrase coined by Coleridge to cut through the equal and opposite difficulties of the personality of God on the one hand, and the idea of God as an abstraction on the other? See 5297 and n. For Coleridge’s fondness for the eity ending see CM I under Athenaeum § 31 n³.

which is denied by Archb^p . Magee: See CN III 4140 on Bishop Magee. His denial of Christ's death as the unique, sole possible means of salvation is in his Discourses and Dissertations on the Scriptural Doctrines of Atonement and Sacrifice (2 vols 1816) 4th ed I 188–94.

It becomes Mahometanism, Mono-idolism, or what not: For Coleridge’s explicit meaning see 4857, 4860, 4973.

f25^v sic Deo placuit: “it so pleased God”.

At Deo placuit?: “but did it please God?”

Miracles: See CN III 3278 and n; also above 4611, 4621, 4985 and nn.

f26 negative knowlege: Knowledge that something can be true without concrete evidence; cf “The Destiny of Nations” (1796) PW I 134, lines 80–1.

I have written a loose sheet: Unlocated.

sombring: OED dates the first use 1849.

5216 29.123 It appears impossible to date entries 5216–5218, the state of the MS and the facts surrounding publication of AR being equally confusing.

AR was announced in LMLA as published 10 May 1825 but pageproofs had apparently circulated earlier, at least to John Taylor Coleridge (CL V 443), and later, on 19 May Coleridge said to Edward Coleridge that it would be “out on Monday next” (23 May) and that Hessey hoped to give him on May 20 an advance copy for the Bishop of London. CL V 462. The letter implies last minute difficulties in patching up copy which had been sent in sections to Hessey since Nov 1823 (CL V 305). It suffered in the process many sea changes; a fact laid bare by Coleridge himself in the “Advertisement” that precedes the “Preface”; The “Advertisement” was partly cancelled by Coleridge in a letter of 17 May (CL V 459–60). Copy appears to have been sent after 16 Feb 1825 (CL V 413). By June 1824 234 pages were already in proof. CL V 366. The first half of p 234 of the first edition completed the "thoughts suggested” by Aphorism IX (misprinted IV) of the Aphorisms on Spiritual Religion. This section is followed by a break, with the heading that followed discussion of the previous aphorisms, “COMMENT”, the first sentence then beginning: “Since the preceding pages were composed and during an interim of depression and disqualification…”

The length of the interim is not known, but there is evidence to suggest that work proceeded steadily through the winter and spring of 1823–4. This and other questions of dating will be explored more fully in the introduction to AR (CC).

The relevant part of the Note p. 226 in the first edition reads:

Yea, this is the test and character of a truth so affirmed, that in its own proper form it is inconceivable. For to conceive is a function of the Understanding, which can be exercised only on subjects subordinate thereto. And yet to the forms of the Understanding all truth must be reduced, that is to be fixed as an object of reflection, and to be rendered expressible. And here we have a second test and sign of a truth so affirmed, that it can come forth out of the moulds of the Understanding only in the disguise of two contradictory conceptions, each of which is partially true, and the conjunction of both conceptions becomes the representative or expression (=the exponent) of a truth beyond conception and inexpressible. Examples. Before Abraham was, I am.—God is a Circle whose centre is every where and circumference no where.—The Soul is all in every part.

Nos numerus: “We, the common herd”. Horace Epistles I 2 27.

image-abstray’d: For a similar if simpler nonce use of the ab prefix, see 5217.

Hic et Hæc: “He and She”.

a temporary Amphisbæna: I.e. a kind of serpent; the name implies that it travels in either direction. Aeschylus Agamemnon 1233. Cf Pope:

Thus Amphisbaena (I have read) At either end assails; None knows which leads or which is led, For both Heads are but Tails.

Dunciad III 201n.

f81 Must not the same powers: On the “powers” cf e.g. 4835 and 4929 and nn.

5217 29.124 For earlier entries on animal physiology see 5171; on the graduating…of classes, orders and genera, see e.g. 4758 and n.

Sense…of Smell with the υis reproductiva projectrix: Coleridge’s linking of the sense of smell with the male sexual act, i.e. as projecting rather than, like taste, assimilating, was perhaps an independent observation, ahead of his time.

υis reproductiva projectrix: “reproductive force projecting”.

peppery dilative…honey pungent lineal ( pung. punctual): See for these signs App A.

f81^v sc[ilicet] similific: “That is, like-making”; absundering and ecarceration (opposite of “incarceration”) are not in OED.

animal punctuale futuriens: “infinitesimal animal seeking to exist”. forma formata…forma formans: “formed form…forming form”; see 4835 f64 and n, also Logic (CC) 232 fn.

the Brain Nerυes : : Excitability Excitancy: Cf 5150n.

f82 Oken with the elder Naturalists: Coleridge may have known Oken’s Grundriss der Naturphilosophie (1802), an attempt to derive all organisms from one original slime or mass of cells, diversified in functions but united in the pinnacle, man and selfconsciousness. This doctrine, developed in his Lehrbuch der Naturphilosophie, and also in Steffens Beyträge, meant the classification of animal life according to the sense organs, an application of Kantian a priori critical method of natural history. The French school worked from observation and induction, many of them and their German followers as anatomists.

Meckel: Johann Friedrich Meckel, Vol I of whose System der υerglei-chenden Anatomie (6 vols in 7 Halle 1821) was described in Green SC (471) as bearing a page of Coleridge MS of which six lines of verse were quoted in the catalogue. The same lines appear in the following MS fragment (WM 1821) now in the Berg Collection in NYPL; these, together with the measurements of the MS, and of the pages of the volume, and the references to Meckel, make it clear that we have here a fly-leaf torn out of the Meckel work. It is closely relevant to this entry:

12 Jan^y 1825. It rather surprizes me to find in the Work of a German physiologist the Fact, which was to be referred, laid down as the Principle, from which it is to be deduced: and thus the Problem itself metaphrased into its own Solution. That an organized Body is a Whole consisting of several and various Parts is the fact/as fact of every man’s knowlege. And what are we the knowinger for being told, that Manifoldness and Unity are the Laws of Plastic Life? i.e. that Animal-making is the way pursued by Nature in making Animals! And then still further to prove the vagueness of the Author’s conception, he gives Relation and Analogy as two synonimes of Unity—“Unity or Relation or Analogy!—But page VI and 7VII (i.e. the 2^nd and third page of the Vorrede) awakened my suspicions—

O these facts! these facts! Of such facts I’m aweary Light I can get none— For all my eye is mere eye! My Eye and Betty Martin! And that’s a fact for sartain! S.T.C.

Mem. How comes it that Meckel in his Preface cuviers away at a great rate; but makes no mention of John Hunter, and (worse still) is silent respecting his obligations to Schelling, and H.Steffens—as <to> the potenziated Magnetism & Electricity of Organic Life? p. 11.

Spix: Johann Baptist (1781–1826) naturalist; he went with Martius to Brazil 1817–20 and wrote part of Reise in Brasilien (3 vols 1823–31), chiefly on plants and animals.

Schweigger: August Friedrich in 1819 published his observations on coral and bernstein or amber, Beobachtungen (Berlin 1819), and a manual on elementary animals, infusoria, polyps, medusae, molluscs etc, attempting a classification of zoophytes.

Goldfuss: See 4785, 5171 and nn above; also 4646, on the subject matter, 4854, 4866 and nn.

French Naturalists’. Doubtless Coleridge knew the ones he mentions mainly from articles in English scientific journals and quotation by Germans. But on Cuvier see CN III 4328, 4356, 4357; Jean Baptiste Lamarck (1744–1829), the distinguished French botanist and zoologist, believed in spontaneous generation and an active principle behind the diverse forms of all life; André Marie Constant Dumeril (1774–1860), less known, was a French physician and zoologist; Ducrotay de Blain-ville, Henri Marie de Blainville (1777–1850), the distinguished successor in the French Academy of Sciences to Cuvier in the Chair of Anatomy and to Lamarck in the Chair of Natural History, wrote in both fields. It is not known what Coleridge may have read of the last three naturalists.

Oken: For Coleridge’s use of the works of Oken see the indexes to these CN volumes.

5218 29.125 The omission of have between probably and been (line 4) and known after never (line 14) suggests hasty writing.

It may be relevant to the dating of this entry to notice a letter of 14 May 1825 to G.de’ Prati, in which Coleridge discussed with regret his poverty and inability to offer financial help.

5219 29.130 Vico, 7 May 1825: Having sent off the MS of AR and completed his Prometheus lecture for the Royal Society of Literature in April, Coleridge on May 2 turned with zest to read Vico; see 5204– 5209, 5211 and nn. The link here is Vico’s similarly adverse opinions of Egyptian chronology.

and so Monsieur Champollon: See above 4794 f54^v and n, and the two reviews in Vol XXVIII QR there referred to. The second review credited Dr Thomas Young with having anticipated Champollion (192–3). Young had in 1819 in his article on Egypt in the Supplement to EB deciphered the name Ptolemy, and suggested a hieroglyphic alphabet. This review also discussed Champollion’s Lettre à M.Dacier (1822) and his alphabet for deciphering names of Greek and Roman rulers of Egypt, his interpretations of its antiquity, and French theories of the zodiac found at Dendera (see also CN III 4317 and n). Critical debates on these matters were rife throughout the 1820’s.

a series of Kings, the last of whom was elder than Adam!: Coleridge's reference has the contemptuous tone of hearsay rather than of study, but appears to be (perhaps indirectly) to a more recent work of Champollion, his Précis du système hieroglyphique (Paris 1824), which applied his alphabet not only to foreign names, but to Pharaohs going back to Amenophis, the 18th dynasty, c 1546–26 B.C. Coleridge’s love of any Francophobic jest, and especially a punning one, makes him exaggerate.

elder than Adam: No doubt Coleridge’s joke is for the sake of his pun chiefly, but it may be noted that Vico (5232 f39^v and n) mentioned “Isaac de la Peyrère, author of the Preadamitae”; see CN III 4317n for a reference to him and other matters relevant to this entry.

Stones of which I cannot make Bread: Matt 4:3–4.

make my Wine (whine): Ref to John 2:1–11.

first Book of the Pentateuch…the other four…: On Coleridge’s belief that Moses was the author of the Pentateuch, see CN III 4418 f12^v and n; see also above 4794 and n.

that Moses was learned in all the Learning of the Egyptians: Acts 7:22. See also 5232 and n below, on Coleridge’s argument for the superiority of the Hebrew chronological tradition.

5220 29.131 Cf 4879 for a similar interest. These lines were not reproduced by EHC in his Fragments section of PW; that he did draw upon this notebook, however, is proved by 5192.

Bombyx Muscorum: I.e. the Moss-bee of the verses.

oυi-position: “the act of egg-laying”?

honey-dew: Coleridge in annotating Gilbert White Natural History of Selborne (1802) II III, against a reference to honeydew wrote, “This is now known to be the saccharine excrement of the Aphides. It is a true sugar: no wonder, therefore, that though not directly vegetable, the Bees are fond of it.”.

5221 29.132 The entry refers to an editorial in The Times for 23 May 1825 p 2 cols 2– 3, favouring Catholic Emancipation:

Indeed, if religion were connected more than it is, with the statesmanlike view of the subject of emancipation, we do not feel that such an argument [the alleged divided political allegiance of Catholics] ought to be rudely or acrimoniously proposed. The Catholic, with all its errors, was the existing church of the 16th century—our, with all its excellence, the innovation. The Catholics did not desert us; we abandoned them. We stripped them of their power, authority, property, liberty, and credit. We have completely superseded them, and trampled on them, and transferred to our use all the worldly advantages which they had been possessed of for ages. It must be at least a conscientious infirmity which binds them still to an humbled communion, having no access to the temporal sources of honour, wealth, and greatness, but which is frowned on or sneered at by the mighty of the land. Let us, then, if we do drag religion into the fray, consult our own dignity by treating with forebearance those over whom we have triumphed.

See 4802.

the Editor a Clergyman: the editor was Thomas Barnes (1785–1841), editor from 1817 to his death. No evidence has been found that Barnes was ever a clergyman.

5222 29.133 In heavier ink than the preceding.

f85^v Holy! Holy! Holy!: Isa 6:3 and Rev 4:8.

catena theologiæ: “chain of theology”.

the “I Am”: Ex 3:14; see 4523 and 5130 and nn.

I am the Lord, the HOLY ONE: Ezek 39:7.

The knowlege of the Holy is Understanding: Prov 9:10.

scientia quæ cæteris omnibus substat: “knowledge that substantiates/stands under all else”. Cf AR 6, 26, and 4679, 5418, 5422 and nn.

5223 29.134 “On 10 May 1825 on the motion of Mr Curwen [known to Coleridge], the Roman Catholic Relief Bill was read for the third time, and passed by a majority of 21. During the pending of this Bill, immense numbers of petitions were presented for and against it. A petition from Manchester, opposing the claims of the Papists, bore 28,000 signatures.” Gentleman’s Magazine (May 1825) XC i 455.

Cf on universal suffrage TT 21 Nov 1830; and on the function of parliament compared with the church, also TT 19 Sept 1830: “A church is…in idea, the only pure democracy”.

5224 29.135 The entry is one of Coleridge’s clearest statements of his view of belief and Biblical Criticism; cf 5337 below.

with the judgement, my understanding. Obviously with the judgement [which] my understanding.

170 decide+a, & 130−a: I.e. 170 for a doctrine, 130 against.

Christ came with Signs & Wonders: John 4:48. The phrase signs and wonders is common in both the Old and New Testaments—e.g. Ex 7:3; Deut 6:22; Neh 9:10; Isa 20:3; Acts 2:43; 2 Cor 12:12; Heb 2:4—although nowhere is it applied directly to Christ. See Matt 24:24 and Mark 13:22 for the association of the term with false Christs.

5225 29.136 Before the writing of this entry one and a third leaves were cut out; they had been written on, but not numbered. What remains (the lower part of f87 and f87^v) shows ten lines heavily obliterated, presumably not excised in order to save what was on the verso (5227). Coleridge later paged, with odd numbers only, the remaining leaves in sequence dropping down his 177 (now f87) to the lower part of the page left below the excision; clearly he had not earlier numbered the whole excised leaf as 175 for that number is still in the book (f86). Moreover, the cutting out must have been done by him, for he numbered afterwards, and probably did the obliterating also.

The excision makes the meaning of his reference to the last but 5 leaves of this way of writing (in 5238) uncertain. See 5238 and n.

5226 29.137 The top of this leaf was cut off; see 5225n and 5238n. The despairing note chimes with Work without Hope; cf 5192 and n.

totus in illo, et mei et audientium immemor: “totally absorbed in that, and forgetful of myself and my audience”. Cf Horace Satires I ix 2, “…totus in illis.” See also 5280.

5227 29.138 [No note needed]

5228 29.139 The entry apparently continues in thought from 5224 above.

Will…the dark and hidden Radical of the bodily Life: See CN I 1717 and nn.

since the words of Christ imply the contrary: Possibly Matt 5:48 in mind, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

since the apostolic James: Cf James 1:4; on the perfecting of faith.

subjective Correlate: Cf T.S.Eliot’s “objective correlative” in his essay on Hamlet Selected Essays (1951) 145.

apostolicity of the Evangelia Infantiæ…: 5240 and n.

κατα Mατθαιον: “according to Matthew”.

Lumen Spiritûs Dei: “Light of the Spirit of God”; see above 5224 and below 5337.

f89^v which the Fathers made a criterion of Inspiration: As discussed commonly by many of the church historians Coleridge used, e.g. by Richard Field in Of the Church (1635) 355–8, 378–82, 867–8. Cf Sara Coleridge: “Mr D——…will have it that my father’s view would have been much modified had he read the ancient Fathers. I think he would have read them more at large had he not felt assured, from what he had read of them, that this would not bring an adequate return in the way of sound Christian knowledge. We have the grain without the chaff, I should imagine, in our great divines.” Sara Coleridge Memoir and Letters (1873) II 118.

την“the harmony and sameness of spirit”. blasphemous Parthenolatry: Cf 5240 f28^v.

τι μοι και σοι, γυνη: A slight variant of the Greek of John 2:4: (AV) “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” The phrase is the translation of a traditional Hebrew idiom, meaning “What have you and I in common?” The word γύναι (woman) further distances Jesus from his mother. See 5240, also Coleridge’s full comment on the text in TT 31 Mar 1832.

“Who are my Mother & my Brothers?: Mark 3:32–3; cf Luke 8:19–21.

the one word “supposed”: Luke 3:33, “And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph…”

Marcionites affirmed not to be in <Marcion's> Luke’s Gospel: Eichhorn NT 162–7.

not intentionally corrupted…Eichhorn has, I think, unanswerably shewn: Eichhorn NT I 67–78, pointed out that Marcion’s gospel, in many places parallel verbatim with Luke’s, is not a corruption or mutilation of the canonical gospel, as Tertullian and Origen said, but came from a source common to both.

original Gospels…all began with the Baptism of John: Eichhorn NT I 142–3 argued that the earliest gospels lacked all information about the genealogy, the birth, the childhood years, and the background of Jesus, beginning their account with the baptism by John.

superiority in kind of Christ…from Moses to John: See e.g. John 1:14; Rev 1:1–6; Heb 1:1–6. It was Coleridge’s view that John, author of the fourth gospel, was not the author of the Apocalypse; CM II Eichhorn NT (A) II 87.

verses in Isaiah…bring forth, &c: Isa 7:14–16. The texts have commonly been interpreted by Christians as prognosticative of the birth of Christ; the Hebrew word translated in AV as “virgin” is almoh, “a young woman”, and in rabbinic tradition has never been interpreted as implying virgin. The footnote along the side of f90 seems to refer to this.

conceptio υirginis sine υiro: “conception by a virgin without a man”.

Traditionsauthentic Historical Records: For a table of Coleridge’s conventional symbols see App A. On Tradition as opposed to Historical Records see 5075 and n.

f90 even thesplits (in the Genealogy I mean): C’s thick vertical line appears to refer to the Matthew-Luke genealogical diagram; if a footnote was intended it was not written. Matt 1:1–16 and Luke 3:23–38 give discrepant genealogies.

four Narratives of the Resurrection: Matt 28; Mark 16:1–8; Luke 24: I–12; 2; John 20: I–II.

appointed Dividers & Expounders of the Word: 2 Tim 2:15.

Members of the Body of Faith: I Cor 12:12.

f90^v the Glass thro’ which we see: I Cor 13:12.

5229 29.266 In pencil, in mid-page, surrounded by entries in ink, presumably this could have been written on the page at any time when the page was blank. However it appears to follow 5189, which in turn appears in a natural sequential use of the book to be datable after 5184, i.e. after 3 Jan 1825; the last entry in this notebook appears to be 3 Aug 1825–5234.

M^r Stutfield: Charles Sr or Jr? The first was an old Stowey acquaintance, a wine merchant. The son and J.H.Green paid for amanuenses for the Logic and other projected works from about March 1820; the young Stutfield was one of the “Thursday Evening Class”, and a constant visitor in Highgate until the end. See Logic (CC) xliv–xlvi, liii and n, lv.

All the circumstances point to the ticket being one for Coleridge’s lecture “On the Prometheus of Aeschylus” at the Royal Society of Literature 18 May 1825; possibly James Gillman or J.H.Green had a supply.

5230 29.267 The entry is not datable precisely, but it was written on the page after 5189 and before 5234 below it, i.e. before 3 Aug 1825; 5236, 6 Sept 1825, overran it already at the top of the page and had to skirt it. The book being used from both ends, this with 5229 and 5234, in fact with all entries from 29.181 to 29.268 running the same way of the book, sequentially in place but not in time; 5236 was written from the opposite end; see 5236n.

Possibly there is some link here with 5184.

5231 20.62 Vico in Scienza nuoυa (ed cit 5204n) I 165 wrote:

Tr:…that for a long period of time the impious races of the three children of Noah, having lapsed into a state of bestiality, went wandering like wild beasts until they were scattered and dispersed through the great forest of the earth, and that with their bestial education giants had sprung up and existed among them at the time when the heavens thundered for the first time after the flood [369ff].

Tr cit § 195.

Oronooko, Maranha: The rivers Orinoco and Maranon? The spelling of unknown place-names by travellers is notoriously idiosyncratic, but whether Coleridge found these in his wide reading in S. American travel literature, or heard of them from acquaintances, e.g. James Burney, is not evident; see CN II 2874 and n.

5232 20.63 Again a discussion arising from Vico’s Scienza nuoυa Bk I (ed cit 5204n) I 114–15.

Tr: But the Chinese are found writing in hieroglyphs just as the ancient Egyptians did (to say nothing of the Scythians, who did not even know how to put their hieroglyphs in writing). For many thousands of years they had no commerce with other nations by whom they might have been informed concerning the real antiquity of the world. Just as a man confined while asleep in a very small dark room, in horror of darkness [on waking] believes it certainly much larger than groping with his hands will show it to be, so, in the darkness of their chronology, the Chinese and the Egyptians have done, and the Chaldeans likewise. It is true that Father Michele Ruggieri, a Jesuit, declares that he has himself read books printed before the coming of Jesus Christ. It is true further that Father Martini, another Jesuit, in his Sinica historia ascribes a great antiquity to Confucius, which has led many into atheism, as we are informed by Martin Schoock in his Diluvium Noachi universale, in which he says that Isaac de la Peyrère, author of the Preadamitae, perhaps for that reason abandoned the Catholic faith and then wrote that the flood spread over the lands of the Hebrews only. Nevertheless Nicolas Trigault, better informed than Ruggieri or Martini, writes in his De christiana expeditione apud Sinas that printing was in use in China not more than two centuries earlier than in Europe, and that Confucius flourished not more than five hundred years before Christ. And the Confucian philosophy, like the priestly books of the Egyptians, in its few references to physical nature is crude and clumsy, and it is almost wholly devoted to a vulgar morality, the morality commanded to the people by laws.

Tr cit § 50.

The third paragraph is Coleridge’s condensation of Vico’s full page (I 116–17); the all but illegible abbreviations can be read in the light of it: Heroes, to which Sch[effer] att[ributes] inv[ention] of the Symbolical; and of Man to which S[cheffer] att[ributes] inv[ention] of the epistolary or popular characters. To quote Vico again:

Tr: The first is narrated by Herodotus:…that the Egyptians reduced all the preceding time of the world to three ages, the first that of the gods, the second that of the heroes, the third that of men. The other (as related in Scheffer’s De natura et constitutione philosophiae italicae seu pythagoricae) is that, with corresponding number and sequence, through all that period three languages had been spoken: the first hieroglyphic, with sacred characters; the second symbolic, with heroic characters; the third epistolary, with characters agreed on by the peoples. This division of times was not followed by Marcus Terentius Varro; we must not say because he did not know of it, for, with his boundless erudition, he deserved the honor bestowed on him in the title “most learned of the Romans” in their most enlightened period, the age of Cicero; but rather because he did not choose to; perhaps because he applied [only] to Roman history what by our principles will be found true of all the ancient nations, namely that all Roman institutions, divine and human, were native to Latium. He therefore studied to give them all Latin origins in his great work [The Antiquities] of Divine and Human Institutions of which the injustice of time has deprived us. (So far was Varro from believing in the legendary bringing of the law of the Twelve Tables from Athens to Rome!). [According to Censorinus, Natal Day 21,] he divided the times of the world into three; a dark time, corresponding to the Egyptian age of the gods; a fabulous time, corresponding to their age of the heroes; and a historic time, corresponding to their age of men.

Tr cit § 52.

The “Scheffer” referred to was Johann Scheffer (1621–79), the learned philologian, Professor in Upsala of Rhetoric and Politics. Vico repeated this material in his Bk II (§ 437, § 438 in tr).

f39 Varro’s Opus Grande…a Loss! Again Scienza nuoυa 117, tr cit § 52, as just quoted. On Varro see also above 4901 and n.

De Nationum Jactantiâ communi & ingenitâ: “Of the boastfulness of nations, universal and inborn”, presumably Coleridge’s own phrase.

words of Diodorus Siculus: Vico Scienza nuoυa I 117:

Furthermore the antiquity of the Egyptians will help us with two pretentious memories, examples of that conceit of nations by which, as Diodorus Siculus observed, every nation barbarian or civilized has considered itself to be the oldest and to have preserved its records from the beginning of the world; a privilege, as we shall see, of the Hebrews alone.

Tr cit § 53.

Tests of Tradition: Coleridge was following Vico, but offering his own additions: Indefiniteness of Imagination or the childlike Rivalry in bigness are his, illustrated by his English Hercules, Jack-the-Giant-Killer and the personification in “King Olim” of the Latin for “once upon a time”.

this Hebrew Chronology is the more probable: Vico is more dogmatic (ibid I 117–18):

The first column is dedicated to the Hebrews, who, on the most reliable authority of Flavius Josephus the Jew, and Lactantius Firmianus, lived unknown to all the gentile nations. And yet they reckoned rightly the account of the times passed through by the world, now accepted as true by the severest critics, according to the calculation of Philo the Jew. If his estimate varies from that of Eusebius, the difference is one of a mere fifteen hundred years, which is a very short period of time compared with the variations among the chronologies made up by the Chaldeans, Scythians, Egyptians, and in our own day by the Chinese. And this should be an invincible proof that the Hebrews were the first people in our world and that in the sacred history they have truthfully preserved their memories from the beginning of the world.

Tr cit § 54.

From here onwards Coleridge was allowing his own thoughts to expand on the Hebrew chronology. Cf also 4794, 5228 and nn.

f38^v §§ 8 and 9 were written in reverse order, with Coleridge’s instruction to transpose them.

Porphyry & Iamblichus’s Citation of Pythagoras: Not referred to by Vico, but simply Coleridge’s ready example; their Lives of Pythagoras (cf 5207n) are full of quotations from works of doubtful authenticity; cf also 5081 and n.

§ 9 That Varro counted forty Herculeses (and forty Joves) is stated by Vico, who adds “and the Egyptians claimed theirs to be the most ancient”. Scienza nuoυa I 80–1, 121: tr § 14, 53.

§ 10. Anthropognosy: Not in OED, Coleridge’s coinage from the Greek.

I hold myself: Coleridge’s view that all verbs are grounded on the verb substantive, the verb “to be”, was one accepted in some form by the majority of philosophical grammarians up to his time; see e.g. J.G.J. Hermann De emendenda ratione graecae grammaticae 4831 and William Vincent The Greek Verb Analyzed. An hypothesis (1795), both of which Coleridge annotated. (The former is in the BM, the latter in VCL.) For the hypothetical form (eo) see above 4679 and n.

On prepositions, conjunctions, and nouns, Coleridge disagreed with Vico, who thought first interjections, then pronouns, then nouns were invented (tr cit §§ 448–52). Much that is relevant here will be found in the entries on Greek grammar listed in this volume as appearing in SWF.

f37^v σηματα: Again referring to Vico Scienza nuoυa II 52: “So Homer in whose time so-called vulgar letters had not been invented, says Proetus’s letter to Eureia [sic] against Bellerophon was written in sēmata, signs” (tr cit § 433). Iliad VI 168 foll was a key passage in the controversy over the date, authorship, and transmission of the Homeric poems.

the children of Noah: i.e. the six verbs that follow, the ancestors of the rest.

Sum, as the root of all supersensuous terms: Coleridge is reading Vico’s Bk II of Scienza nuoυa, Della Sapienza Poetica “Corollary d’interno all’ Origini delle Lingue, e delle Lettere…”. It seems necessary here to quote from the original (II 69–70).

Finalmente gli Autori delle lingue si formarono i υerbi…. E pur i υerbi, che sono generi di tutti gli altri, quali sono sum dell’ essere, al quale si rid ucono tutte l’ essenze, ch’ è tanto dire, tutte le cose metafisiche; sto della quiete, eo del moto, a’ quali si riducono tutte le cose fisiche; do, dico, e facio, a’ quali si riducono tutte le cose agibili, sien o morali, o famigliari, o finalmente civili: dovetter incominciare dagli imperativi; perchè nello Stato delle Famiglie, povero in sommo grado di lingua, i Padri soli dovettero favellare, e dar gli ordini a’ figliuoli, ed a’ famoli; e questi sotto i terribili imperj famigliari, quali poco appresso vedremo, con cieco ossequio dovevano tacendo eserguirne i comandi; i quali impetrativi sono tutti monosillabi, quali ci son rimasti es, sta, i, da, dic, fac.

Tr: Last of all, the authors of the languages formed the verbs…. Even the verbs which are genera of all the others—as sum is of being, to which are reduced all essences, which is as much as to say all metaphysical things; sto of rest and eo of motion, to which are reduced all physical things; do, dico, and facto, to which are reduced all feasible things, whether moral economic or civil—these verbs must have begun as imperatives. For in the state of the families, which was extremely poor in language, the fathers alone must have spoken and given commands to their children and famuli, who, under the terrors of patriarchal rule, as we shall soon see, must have executed the commands in silence and with blind obsequiousness. These imperatives are all monosyllables, as they have remained: es, sta, i, da, dic, fac, “be,” “stand,” “go,” “give,” “say,” “make”.

Tr cit § 453.

5233 20.64 Basing his discussion on the sentences quoted above in 5232n, Vico went on to argue that this general theory of the genesis of language conforms to the “principles of universal nature, by which the elements of all things, out of which they are composed and into which they are bound to be resolved, are indivisible; and also with the principles of human nature in particular…. So much the more must we deem the first men of the nations to have done so [begun with monosyllables], for their organs were extremely obdurate”. Tr § 454. It was perhaps enough to stimulate Coleridge’s metaphysical flight.

Cf what HNC entitled “Formula Fidei de Sanctissima Trinitate” and dated 1830 in LR III 2: “The supreme being… whose definition is, the pleroma of being, whose essential poles are unity and distinctity… or the essential infinite in the form of the finite…N.B. The distinctities in the pleroma are the eternal ideas, the subsistential truths”. The entry, beginning from the foundation laid in CN III 4418 and continuing from 4554, sets forth the philosophical notion of the pleroma, “fullness”, of Being before the original Fall. By self-seeking, the Will caused the inversion, Chaos. God’s antithetical act to this was the reordering of that Chaos into distinctities, later phenomenalizations, and finally redemption and return to the pleroma. Throughout the later notebooks Coleridge traced the process.

OED attributes distinctity to Coleridge, but unaccountably dates the LR reference 1812. Pleroma was a frequent gnostic term for the “habitation of God”; see also 4901 and n.

5234 29.268 The date here makes it plain that except for 5229 this page [f91^v] was blank when 5110 was written and that Coleridge’s renumbering of pages took place in Jan 1824.

Wed. 3 August 1825 Times: An editorial:

The Irish papers inform us that the new Catholic Association has had repeated meetings…. But the language is all of the same spirit and character, because there is no variety of speakers—Messrs. O’CONNELL and SHIEL at one Catholic meeting change places with Messrs. SHIEL and O’CONNELL at the next….

It seems to us as unexampled as it is deplorable, that an object, in the accomplishment of which so many Lords and Baronets, and men of family and fortune, representing a nation of seven millions, declare themselves to have so deep an interest, should be left to the exclusive management of two or three individuals engaged in the business of a laborious profession. The Catholic aristocracy, in thus abdicating their proper functions, ought by this time to be sensible of the sinister use which is made of their supineness by the enemy. Such conduct has been construed in various senses—and each of them unfavourable to the emancipation. Why, it is asked, should a Protestant Legislature go a yard out of its way to admit Catholics to the Constitution, when, first, the multitude enjoy already the most important rights which they could at any time hope to exercise, and when, secondly, the Lords and Gentlemen of that persuasion give themselves no trouble upon the subject, but listen or look on while a handful of barristers are year after year appealing to the universe in their names? This interrogatory is followed up by an assurance that Messrs. O’CON-NELL and his colleagues of the Four Courts, are the only parties who care one farthing for emancipation, and that half a dozen silk gowns, with a seat or two on the Bench, are the real and only advantages aimed at.

The Times did not refer to either the Jesuits or Canning.

O Canning! Canning! Dupe or Traitor!: It is obvious that Coleridge’s attitude towards Canning had worsened after 1822; see 4938.

5235 20.71 The attack of jaundice was described at greater length in a letter to Edward C, 6 Sept 1825 CL V 489–90.

Among references to illnesses at Christ’s Hospital there is no mention of jaundice in 1788–9 or in any other period.

Nebuchednezzar’s Idol: Dan 2; see 5374 and n.

f36 Miserere…factus es: Me is a slip for mei: “Have pity on me, God my Saviour! Have pity on me; Word of God in whom is the life, who became Flesh”.

für jedem endlichen Ich: Coleridge put his English phrase into German, perhaps in need of the “endlich” as closer to his feelings of the moment than “finite”. Similarly his Latin Suppositum is translated by his own sub-position below.

blind tho’ plastic Appetence: See 4616 and n.

Lust, but cannot rise into Love: See above 4848 and n.

view, that has been υouchsafed me, of the VI^th Chapter of S^t John: See above 5126 and n.

5236 29.140 When Coleridge turned over leaf f91 to f91^v on 6 Sept 1825 he found there entries 5189, 5229, 5230, 5234. for which the notebook had been used from the other end.

On this date Coleridge wrote to his nephew Edward at Eton that Henry Gillman was taking certain books to Eton with him, including an (unspecified) “Pantheon” (CL V 492). Andrew Tooke’s? See 4618 and n, also CN III 3683.

the Ideal Beauty of the Grecian Divinities: See 5186 and n. Does this entry reflect a continuing intention to write the essay on sculpture he described to John Flaxman in his letter of the previous January (CL IV 408–9)? From a letter of 26 Apr 1825 one might deduce that this entry represents a chain of thought connected with the lecture given to the Royal Society of Literature in May, which was to have been followed by other “Disquisitions” on related classical subjects including the fine arts. It is of some interest to notice that Coleridge’s treatment of religion and philosophy historically often included discussion of the fine arts. See e.g. his lecture “On the Prometheus of Aeschylus”: LR II 323–59, and announcements in P Lects (CC) passim.

the Ideal Beauty: I.e. formal, abstract, like numbers, based on proportion; useless, and ultimately, like chemicals, inexplicable.

f91 The Metals from Carbon to Nitrogen: For Coleridge the metals were constituted predominantly by the North and South powers in the Compass of Nature; see 4555 and n.

Cf his note on Steffens Beyträge 262–3: “It is an error…in Steffens to speak of the Metals as composed of Carbon and Nitrogen unless where these are taken as the names of the Power predominant in each. And even so, yet not as composed of them but as constituted by them. S.T.C.”

“the other in kind”.

f91^v portraiten-mässig: “portrait-like”.

the Apollo: Presumably the Apollo Belvedere; see 4839 f122n.

5237 29.1 Written on the paste-down inside the front cover, this entry is not clearly datable; see CN in N 29 Gen N. 1825 is suggested by related entries.

John Macculloch A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland (2 vols Edinburgh, London 1819) was perhaps verbally recommended by someone. Possibly Greenough? See 5119n. William Brande in the second edition of his Outlines of Geology (2nd ed 1829) referred to it, but his first edition antedated it. Coleridge knew some of Macculloch’s work: see 5247 and n.

5238 29.2 The entry appears below on the page, but there is no clear evidence which entry was written first. On the problem of these random jottings on the inside covers, see CN III N 29 Gen N.

2 αυγ, αωκε: 2 Aug 1825.

The entry is not elucidated by what is on the last but 5 leaves, i.e. f86; see 5224 and n; but see also 5225 n. The leaf referred to may have been excised. The rest may mean “Hu[ssey’s] i.e. Southey’s character formerly/already worse”; or, perhaps with a double implication: “Upsilon is a letter that represents deterioration”. See above 4787, 4985 and nn.

Of the Greek letters the upsilon represented to Coleridge “Descent, Dependence” as he had pointed out on f30 of this notebook (4644).

5239 29.5 The hand and ink here are similar in appearance to 5237 and 5238. Cf the use of these four signs in 4799. The sense of the last paragraph was apt to be present in any of Coleridge’s anti-Schelling-ian discussions with Green in this period. See also 4513 f5, 4644 f26^v, 4784 and 4550 f72^v; in 4662 Steffens is under attack where the argument appears a more expansive version of this statement.

5240 20.45 From the reference to the “lately recovered & published work” of Milton, De doctrina christiana, found and published in 1825 and reviewed in ER (Aug 1825) and in QR (Oct 1825), the entry appears to have been made in the autumn of 1825.

Coleridge’s copy of the first edition of Southey’s delightful Life of Wesley (2 vols 1820) heavily annotated, is in the Berg Collection of the NYPL; his marginalia were in part printed in the third edition (1846) and reprinted in later editions, including the edition by M.H.Fitzgerald (Oxford 1925); complete publication will be found in CM. On the page referred to (II 67 below) there is no annotation.

against Election & Reprobation & Absolute Decrees: E.g. the long denunciation of the doctrine of predestination quoted by RS in his Wesley II 384–92 RS comments, “It is, indeed, in a tremendous strain of eloquence, and shows with what indignation the preacher, in his zeal for God, and in his love for his fellow creatures, regarded a doctrine so injurious to both.”

Life of Wesley, Vol. 11, p. 67:

Preaching in a Monk-town church, he says, “I suppose it has scarce had such a congregation in it during this century. Many of them were gay genteel people; so I spoke on the first elements of the gospel: but I was still out of their depth. Oh, how hard it is to be shallow enough for a polite audience.”

(Wesley’s Journal for 25 Aug 1771). RS added that Wesley preferred “middling and lower classes of society to the rich”, but that those “he liked least were the farmers”.

f26^v Rivington’s: An old firm of booksellers from 1760, publishers to S.P.C.K., and in 1813 of the British Critic; the leading publishers of theological works, they had a large trade in sermons published by commission.

Bartlett’s Court: Bartlett’s Buildings, Holborn, from 1824 was the address (No. 5) of S.P.C.K. (in 1824 also of William Hart Coleridge, Bishop of Barbadoes.)

R.S. of Literature: The Royal Society of Literature met from 17 June 1823 onwards, the council being largely made up of bishops, archdeacons, and other clergy, with natural consequences in the choice of topics; Coleridge was elected a Royal associate in March 1824.

Blair-Sermon People: See CN III 4249n.

Evidences, Natural Theologies: E.g. Paley; see CN III 3278, 3754, 3817 and nn.

Bishop Prettyman alias Tomkins: A reference to the attention paid by Sir George Pretyman to his name (see CN I 951 and n). After March 1823, when he acquired a Nova Scotia baronetcy, he elected to be known as Sir George Pretyman Tomline (not Tomkins). He was a socially powerful clergyman, delivering many charges to the clergy. See also below 5241 f30^v and n.

the last Bampton Lectures: The prestigious Oxford series was founded by John Bampton (1689–1751) “to confirm and establish the Christian Faith, and to confute all heretics and schismatics,” the first of which was given in 1780. Lecturers had to be M.A.’s of Oxford or Cambridge.

the Bishop’s Charges: A common type of theological literature; e.g. (see above) Bp George Pretyman Tomline’s Charge Delivered to the Clergy of the Diocese of Lincoln (1794).

the Quarterly: The QR insertion is not surprising in Coleridge’s list of theological critical antipathies, but what may be interesting as an indication of submerged feelings is that J.T.Coleridge, his nephew, accepted from Murray the editorship of QR from Dec 1824 to Nov 1825, thus coming in between Gifford and Lockhart. See 5210n, and CL V 432–4, 436–45, 45 6–7, 461.

the Christian Advocate’s Answer to Jeremy Bentham: The reference is to the Rev. T.S.Hughes, “Late Fellow of Emanuel College, Cambridge, and Christian Advocate in that University”, and his publication of A Defence of the Apostle St. Paul against the Accusation of Gamaliel Smith, Esq.. in a Recent Publication Entitled, “Not Paul but Jesus” (1823) followed by On the Miracles of St. Paul, Being Part II. of a Defence of that Apostle against the Accusation of Gamaliel Smith (1824). The “Gamaliel Smith” was Jeremy Bentham, whose Not Paul but Jesus appeared thus pseudonymously in 1823. Coleridge was aware of the authorship, possibly through his nephew or some other personal link.

Edinburgh Reviewer: See e.g. CN III 4323 and n.

Species, or Effluvial Onion-Films of Democritus: The Greek atomists explained perception by the theory that objects constantly emit films of atoms which enter the eye or affect the other senses. But Species, “appearances”, is the scholastic word, and the Greek word for “having bloodless flesh” is attributed by Liddell and Scott only to “Anacreon” ’s The Grasshopper; see CL I 17 and BL (CC) II 34.

mundus intelligibilis: “intelligible world”.

Without a Soul there can be no Spirit: For Coleridge’s distinction between Soul and Spirit see e.g. 5377.

f27 the Blood is the Life: Gen 9:4, var.

what is substantial must be subjective: On substans see 4679, 4935, 5422 and nn.

Understanding to the Fancy…sense of Contact: A usual scale of the human powers with Coleridge, the sense of touch, as being most physical, the lowest; cf 4636.

Peter Boehler & the Moravian Confederates: The “love feasts” of the Moravians in their large meeting hall in 32 Fetter Lane were described by RS in Life of Wesley I 153– 60, 228–9, 349. He said that in their excess of devotion they were “over-whelmed with the Divine Providence …as with new wine” until “many cried out for exceeding joy, and many fell to the ground”, adding that if these love-feasts “found the mind sane”, they “were not likely to leave it so”. Peter Boehler (1712–75) was one of the Moravian leaders to whom Wesley was strongly attracted despite his feeling that the general scheme of the Moravians was more “mystical” than “scriptural”. See CN III 4169 and n.

oτ πλειονες: “the majority”.

Hysteron Proteron: Cf CN III 3421.

f27^v “They busy themselves in building conduits…: Neither the source nor the extent of the quotation is known.

out of their belly might flow rivers of living water: John 7:38.

If any man thirst, let him come to me: John 7:37, var.

των προληψεων κακισται: “the worst of prolepses”, in the OED sense 3 of prolepsis, “the representation or taking of something future as already done, or existing”.

uterine previous & indispensable to the atmospheric life: See 5187 and n, also CN I 1718n.

f28 The Heart that was in Christ: Eph 3:17 and 6:5.

the Life is the Light of Men: John 1:4; on light as the basis of life see e.g. CN III 4418 and 4677 and n.

The Reυ^d Blanco White: Joseph M.Blanco y Crespo, later Blanco White (1775–1841), an Irish-Spanish priest who renounced Roman Catholicism, and fled from Spain to England in 1810, to become an active member of the Church of England until about 1835, when he became a Unitarian. Coleridge met him on 14 July 1825 (CL V 481) and wrote several letters to him (CL V 485–6, 522–3) in July and Dec 1825 and annotated Practical and Internal Evidence against Catholicism (1825), The Poor Man’s Preserυation Against Popery (1825), and A Letter to Charles Butler Esq. on his Notice of the “Practical and Internal Evidence against Catholicism” (1826). See CM I under Blanco White.

another doctrine of the early Moravians…New Birth: I.e. in addition to the emphasis on flesh-blood-soul-spirit progression discussed above (f27); on the “new birth” see 4604, CN III 4409 and n and RS Life of Wesley I 158–60.

opus operatum et perfectum: “a work done and perfected”; opus operatum was a phrase much used in discussion of the efficacy of the sacraments, a work done without reference to the persons concerned.

any other form of Time: Cf 4912.

transcendency to Time: For Coleridge’s comments on the necessity of thinking of the “beyond time” in accommodations of temporal patterns, cf 4853, 4909 fx79^v. See also CN III 3973, 4418 ff11^v 12.

f28^v Parthenolatry: OED attributes this word for “worship of the Virgin” to Coleridge, unaccountably dating it 1818 from LR III 174, the annotations on Hacket’s Sermons. Coleridge may be referring here to what he described as “these blasphemous Parthenolatries”, in a marginal note on Blanco White’s quotations from the Breviary in Practical and Internal Evidence against Catholicism 215, which he had received by 20 July 1825 (CL V 485).

Evangelium Infantiæ: Coleridge held that the birth stories in Luke and Matthew were spurious additions to the original gospels, which he took to have begun with the baptism of Jesus. See e.g. 5075, 5228 and nn. The stories of the infancy of Jesus had interested him as early as May 1810 (CN III 3779, 4402). Did he now consider whether to print or not to print his views in his projected Assertion of Christianity (see 4946 and 5210) or in C&S (see CL V 485)?

lumen Dei apparens: “the manifest light of God”.

Angel’s Promise to the Virgin: Luke 1:28–33.

f29 τι μοι και σοι, γυνή: (AV) “Woman, what have I to do with thee?” John 2:4, var. Jesus’ reply to his mother when she told him at the marriage feast in Cana that there was no wine. Coleridge interpreted the reply as Jesus’ statement that his divine mission had no necessary connexion with his maternity; see also 5228 and n; also TT 31 Mar 1832.

these 4 or 5 Chapters: I.e. the birth stories in Matt 1 and 2, and Luke 1:5–2:52.

the Harmonists: The increase of interest in Biblical Criticism in the 18th and 19th centuries led to an increase in the number of harmonies of the gospels. For a good account of the principal ones in Coleridge’s day see Johann D.Michaelis Introduction to the New Testament tr Herbert Marsh (4 vols Cambridge 1793–1801) III i 31–36; see Marsh’s notes in III ii 29–49, which give some account of the shifts of the compilers in their attempts to reconcile inconsistencies. See above 4902 and n, CN III 3817 and n; also Lects 1795 (CC) 168 foll.

Origen: His answer to Speusippus, or rather to Celsus, on the divine paternity of Plato and others was “These words would be appropriate to a vulgar buffoon.” Contra Celsum I 38, tr cit 4899n. On Speusippus see 5075 f29^v n.

the Devil’s having been permitted…Incubus: Source untraced. The mortal Rea (Rhea) Silvia and the god Mars were said to be the parents of Romulus and Remus.

lene clinamen: “slight inclination”.

Paulinity of the Epistles to Titus & Timothy: Coleridge answered Eichhorn’s arguments against the Paulinity of these epistles in a marginal note on Eichhorn NT (A) III 340, in CM II; see 5312 and n.

since Chillingworth Watch-word: See CN III 3743 and n.

Scripturoe…obcludunt: “The Scriptures are not only enough in themselves, but they exclude all other sources”.

Milton’s lately recovered & published work: A Treatise of Christian Doctrine, compiled from the Holy Scriptures alone, a translation of Milton’s De Doctrina Christiana by C.R.Sumner, was published, along with the original Latin, in Cambridge in 1825. In his preface Milton upheld private judgement in scriptural matters and said, “I adhere to the Scriptures alone”; see 5262 and n.

f29^v Arians: See CN III 3964 and 3968 and nn. The allusion here is apparently to the Unitarians as well as to those Church divines who gave lip service to the belief in “the divinity of Christ” while actually denying it. See above, 5213 and n.

Milton seriously representing the Deity…: Coleridge is objecting to Milton’s way of reconciling essence and substance in the Treatise 182–193, Chap II “Of God”. Milton stated that God did not create the universe out of nothing, but “of himself”, forming man from this “dust” and breathing into him a living soul—i.e. the spiritual substance became material.

the Mosaic account of God’s Train or Skirts: Ex 33:18–23 and 34:5– 8.

5241 20.46 essential character of Ideas…: See e.g. 4940 above, and 5406 below, and nn; also CN III 3268, and the letter to Derwent of 4 Jan 1826 (CL VI 533–4).

eternal, is simply, having no relation to Time: See above 5240 f28 and n.

f30 God is eternal: See e.g. CN III 3973, 3974.

Deus est Actus…: “God is Act without any impurity of potentiality”: cf 4644, 4907, 5143 and nn; also in Chap IX BL (CC) I 143 and n 2. CM I Baxter, Catholic Theology 1 n2 refers to Thomas Aquinas Summa theologia I Quaest. 3. Art. 2.

Religion differs: See below 5290, 5421 and nn.

Eternarum sive…Summâ: “the sum of Eternal or Timeless Truths”.

Catena Logica: “Chain of Logic”.

Systematic Divines in the second generation of the Reformation: See above 5202 and n.

f30^v not the Arbitrium…subspirans but the pro ratione Voluntas: “not by any means the Will in Reason as the source bubbling up in the depths of the spring” but the “wish instead of the reason”; see above 5046 and nn.

Burnet: On Gilbert Burnet see CN III 3658, and in this volume 5082 and nn.

Burnet held basically pietist Christian views, was conciliatory towards Protestant sects, and shared some of Coleridge’s views on church and state. He wrote with more vigour than elegance or sensitivity.

Porteus: Beilby Porteus (1731–1808) bp of London, a moderate churchman, who shared Coleridge’s concern about the Slave Trade, defended toleration, but opposed Roman Catholic Emancipation. Like Coleridge he was a Sabbatarian. He wrote practical essays, e.g. Tracts on Various Subjects (1796), in a style as popular as his preaching.

Tomlins (he that was Prettyman): See His Elements of Christian Theology (1799) went into sixteen editions.

Southey’s delightful Life of Wesley: See 5240 and n; the passage to which Coleridge referred is in Chap XX:

“What”, says he, “is the barrier between men and brutes, the line which they cannot pass? It is not reason. Set aside that ambiguous term; exchange it for the plain word understanding, and who can deny that brutes have this? We may as well deny that they have sight or hearing. But it is this: man is capable of God; the inferior creatures are not.”

(1820) II 189.

totidem υerbis: “in so many words”, as e.g. in The Friend (CC) I 154–5 and LS (CC) 183n.

future state of Retribution for animals: (Cf 5443) RS a page or two further on quoted Wesley:

This blessing shall take place; not on man alone, (there is no such restriction in the text,) but on every creature according to its capacity. The whole brute creation will then undoubtedly be restored to all that they have lost, and with a large increase of faculties. They will be delivered from all unruly passions, from all evil, and all suffering. And what if it should please the all-wise, the all-gracious Creator, to raise them higher in the scale of beings? What if it should please Him, when he makes us equal to angels, to make them what we are now, creatures capable of God, capable of knowing, and loving, and enjoying the author of their being?

(1820) II 191.

f31 υποθεσεως ψυχικης: “soul/animal basis”.

Eιμι αυτος: “I myself am”.

appointed to divide the Word: 2 Tim 2:15.

Rulers of the Church: 1 Tim 5:17.

Watchman on the Tower: The metaphor is common in the prophets—e.g. Isa 62:6.

1. Corinthians C. 11. υ. 6–16: A slip for I Cor 12:6–16 which describes the relative gifts of church leaders as analogous to parts of the body.

Titus 1.9: “Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.”

On the final paragraph of the entry, see the quotation from Plotinus and John Smith in CN II 2164 and n, and cf AR 197.

5242 20.47 The entry is possibly connected with Coleridge’s reading of RS Life of Wesley. See 5241 f30^v above.

perishingly everlastingly: For everlasting destruction, eternal punishment, etc, see e.g. 2 Thess 1:9; Matt 25:46; Job 4:20 and 20:7; Num 24:20 and 24:24.

Luke’s Acts of the Apostles: Coleridge’s belief in the Lucan authorship of Acts, the traditional view, was discussed in a note in CM on Eichhorn NT (A) II 41; see 5426 f50 and n.

Peter’s Discourses: Acts 2:14–36; 3:12–26; 10:34–43, on the crucifixion of the Son of God, as prophesied by the prophets.

application of the words of Moses: In Acts 3:22. The quotation is from Deut 8:15, 18– 19, in one of Moses’ farewell orations to Israel, often thought to apply, as Coleridge here indicates, to Joshua, successor to Moses.

Peter’s Hearings: for “Peter’s Hearers”.

led into all Truth gradually: John 16:13, var.

5243 20.48 Some unknown Person…Relly’s Treasury of Faith: Coleridge wrote his name at the top of the title page of a copy of James Relly’s The Believer’s Treasury (1824) and added: “Sent to me by an unknown Donor—I hope, friend—” The copy is in the BM. He might well ask, and is mild here in stating his objections to Relly’s combination of a latitudinarian theory of sin with an enthusiast’s ardour for what his subtitle called “the Union, Consanguinity, and Affinity, of Christ and his Church”. RS in his Life of Wesley (1820) II 315 referred to Relly and his friends as having formed a sect in America and in England, of “Rellyan Universalists”.

“the exceeding sinfulness of Sin”: As RS pointed out in a footnote on the page Coleridge was reading (Wesley II 316), The Sinfulnesse of Sinne is a phrase used by Edward Reynoldes (1599–1676), bp of Norwich: it is the title of the second of Three Treatises (1631) 117–366, an anti-Socinian tract of some cogency, within its adopted limitations, logical and psychological. Coleridge may have read it. The work was included in John Wesley’s Christian Library (1750).

τó quid et quale: “the what, and of what kind”.

the Redemptive Act…an incomprehensible Mystery: So described in AR 271.

Appertinents: Cf AR 294.

the fallen Nature, which Christ was born into…in each of the three Gospels: The account of the Temptation, recorded in Matt 4:1–11, Mark I: 12–13, and Luke 4:1–13; cf 30.38 5074 and n.

f32^v an I am, only under the condition of the Eternal Logos: One of Coleridge’s clearest statements of the important idea recurring in his writings that “the Finite cannot exist but with the Infinite”. See 4523 and n.

the words of the Apostle Paul: The “carnal mind” and the “natural, corruptible body” of Rom 7:14; 8:6–7 (see below); I Cor 3:1–3; 15:35–50.

f33 Spiritual Life as the Base…of the Self-conscious Will: Cf SM:LS (CC) 89; CN III 3593.

Faith the Substance…: Heb 11:1; for Coleridge on sub stans as “Understanding” see 4679 and n.

Aids to Reflection–189–191: In AR “Aphorisms on Spiritual Religion VII”, Coleridge stated the tenets he considered peculiar to Christianity.

Apostles’ as expanded in the Nicene: John Pearson (4907n) An Exposition of the Creed (1741) 157–81 traced the expansion of the Apostles’ Creed into the Nicene. The Apostles’ Creed reads: “who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary”; the Nicene Creed reads: “was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man”. See also 5413 and n.

born of the Virgin Mary…: Coleridge considered the Evangelia Infantiæ of Matt and Luke not properly parts of those gospels but interpolated material; see 5240 f18^v and n.

f33^v as old as our copy of the first Gospel: Coleridge’s belief that Matt was late was fully developed in a later entry in N 33 (CN V).

Romish Parthenolatry. See 5240 f28^v and n.

5244 20.49 Awareness of languor is recurrent: see CN II 2398, CN III 3348.

Enthusiasts converted to Methodism: A reference suggested by his recent reading of RS Wesley (1820) see I 247?

f34 Eιμι: I am. See 4523, 5241 and nn. On the distinction here between the individual will and the generic, central to Coleridge, and as he points out, part of his concept of the relation between subjective and objective life, see 4677 and n.

unregenerate the Master: A slip; is the article intrusive, or has some verb been omitted?

SoulSpirit: For Coleridge’s distinction between soul and spirit see 5377 f27 and n below.

ad per-sonandum: “for making a sound through”, dividing the word to stress the literal meaning of the verb and the pun on the noun person; see also 4642, 5297 and nn; see also a note on Donne’s Sermons Copy A § 4n, in CM II.

shapes of Truths advancing…: Illustrating Coleridge’s capacity for tentativeness, as seen also in CN III 3881.

f34^v the arbitrariness of…Grotian & even Calvinist notions respecting justification: Cf AR 155–7, in which Coleridge summarized the differences between his ideas and those of the literalists and rationalists. See 5250 and n below. He had, he said in a letter to Edward Coleridge, a “rooted aversion to the Arbitrary”. CL VI 557.

unmechanic agency of Gravitation: See CN III 4418, 4420; and above, 4554–4558 and nn.

Personeity: See 5215, 5256, 5297 and nn.

Ens realissimum: “most real Being”.

5245 20.59 Written in a small hand, with a new(?) finer pen than usual, in rather blacker ink, unlike that of 4989, 4990; it is more like 5249.

A first draft for The Pang More Sharp than All? The lines do not appear as here in PW I 457–9.

5246 20.61 This entry follows 4990 on the page and in shade of ink and general appearance resembles 5245 opposite.

Hon. R.Boyle: Robert Boyle published in 1688 his first Some Receipts of Medicines; in the third edition this was given an apologetic “Author’s Preface”. The sixth edition was entitled Medicinal Experiments: or, A Collection of Choice and Safe Remedies For the most Part Simple, and easiely prepar’d: Very Useful in FAMILIES, and fitted for the Service of Country People…. Containing above Five Hundred Choice Receipts (1718). The Preface begins:

Though Physick be not my Profession, yet I hope this small Collection of Receipts will not incur the Censure of Equitable and Charitable Persons, tho’ divers of them are professed Physicians; since, as I was induced to what I had done by the Dictates of Philanthropy and Christianity, so I was warranted by great Examples, both in Ancient Times, and in ours. Of the former Sort, I take notice of several of the Old Philosophers, such as Democritus, Pythagoras, to which some add Aristotle; and even divers Monarchs and great Men of those Times, such as Juba, King of Mauritania, another King, Nechepsos, cited by Galen, Cato, Pliny, &c.

(1718) A3.

The passage which Coleridge wished to have transcribed, in the latter half of this Preface reads:

And some ‘tis like well upbraid me with, Medice, Cura teipsum. But on this occasion, I may represent, that being the thirteenth or fourteenth Child of a Mother, that was not above 42 or 43 Years Old when she died of a Consumption, ‘tis no wonder I have not inherited a robust, or healthy Constitution. Many also have said, in my Excuse, as they think, that I brought my Self to so much Sickliness by overmuch Study. But, I must add, that tho’ both the forementioned Causes concurr’d, yet I impute my infirm Condition more to a third, than to both together: For the grand Original of the Mischiefs that have for many Years afflicted me, was a Fall from an unruly Horse into a deep Place, by which I was so bruised, that I feel the bad Effects of it to this Day. For this Mischance happening in Ireland, and I being forc’d to take a long Journey, before I was well recovered, the bad Weather I met with, and the as bad Accommodation in Irish-Inns, and the Mistake of an unskilful or drunken Guide, who made me wander almost all Night upon some Wild Mountains, put me into a Fever and a Dropsie, (viz. an Anasarca.) For a compleat Cure of which I past into England, and came to London; but in so unlucky a Time, that an ill-condition’d Fever rag’d there, and seiz’d on me among many others; and tho’ through God’s Goodness, I at length recovered, yet left me exceeding weak for a great while after; and then for a Farewell, it cast me into a violent Quotidian or double Tertian-Ague, with a sense of decay in my Eyes, which during my long Sickness I had exercis’d too much upon Critical Books stuft with Hebrew, and other Eastern Characters: I will not urge that divers have wondered that a Person in such bad Circumstances has by the Help of Care and Medicines (for they forget what ought to be ascrib’d to God) should be able to hold out so long against them. But this after the foregoing Relation may well be said, that it need be no great wonder, if after such a Train of Mischiefs, which was succeeded by a Scorbutick Cholick that struck into my Limbs, and deprived me of the Use of my Hands and Feet for many Months, I have not enjoyed much Health notwithstanding my being acquainted with several Choice Medicines; especially since divers of these I dare not use, because by long fitting, when I had the Palsie, I got the Stone, voiding some large ones (as well as making bloody Water) and by that Disease so great a Tenderness in my Kidneys, that I can bear no Diureticks, tho’ of the milder Sort, and that I am forc’d to forbear Several Remedies for my other Distempers, that I know to be good ones; and amongst them, divers, that by God’s Blessing, I have successfully try’d on others. This short Narrative may, I hope, suffice to shew that my personal Maladies and Sickliness cannot rightly infer the Inefficacy of the Medicines I impart or recommended; and if it shew That, it will do all that was aim’d at by this Representation.

(1718) A⁴−A^5ν.

he not being a Physician: He was created Doctor of Physic at Oxford in 1665, without having been enrolled as a medical student in the university; he worked in Oxford from 1654 to 1658.

the similar narration on R.Baxter: Richard Baxter in his Reliquiae Baxterianae (see CN III 4459n) describes in introverted detail his physical symptoms “because the Case of my Body had a great Operation on my Soul” (1696) 9;

I was naturally of a sound Constitution, but very thin and lean and weak, and especially of a great debility of the Nerves. At seven years old I had the Measils, and at fourteen the Small-pox; I too soon after them went into the cold, and after (in a Loosness) went into a River or Brook to wash me;…and I eat raw Apples and Pears and Plumbs in great quantities for many years: All which together brought me into a violent Catarrh and Cough, which would not let me sleep quietly in the Night. When this had continued about two years, my Body being very thin, and Consumptions then common in the Country, I was much afraid of a Consumption: And first I did eat great store of raw Garlick, which took off some part of my Cough.

He describes the experimental tactics tried on him by “Six and Thirty Physicians by whose order I us’d Drugs without number”, in spite of all of which he says he was never “overwhelm’d with real Melancholy” and that he “could Study, and Preach, and Walk almost as well as if [he] had been free”. (10).

Coleridge undoubtedly did blush & mourn at Baxter’s hypochondria but also at its similarity to his own, e.g. the attributing his valetudinarianism to a youthful exposure to cold while in swimming. See a marginal note for his comparison of himself with Baxter quoted in CN III 444 1n.

5247 20.65 Coleridge was reading the July 1825 issue of the QJSLA in which the information in the first two paragraphs here is found among the “Miscellaneous Intelligence” 353–5. On Oxalate of Lime in a variety of Lichens, cf “Presence of Oxalic Acid in the mineral Kingdom, in enormous quantities, in certain plants, and on its advantageous preparation; by M.H.Braconnot”. While Coleridge doubtless enjoyed the experiment described, its main interest for him lay in a generalisation about life on this planet drawn from it. (Cf on Braconnot 4628, 4634, 5266 and nn.)

It will not be observed without interest, observes M.Braconnot, that oxalate of lime constitutes nearly one half of the weight of a number of organized beings, performing an important part in the economy of nature. It appears that by their means vegetation has commenced on the surface of the earth, since they are found incrusting the hardest rocks, and the most compact marbles, wearing them down if left undisturbed. M.de Saussure met with them on the highest summit of Mont Blanc. M.Humboldt in his Tableau de la Nature says “these are the lichens by which the earth, void of vegetation in the north of Peru begins to be covered, baeomyces roseus,—rangiferinus, lecide muscorum-icmadophylla. Some other cryptogamous plants are joined with them in preparing for the vegetation of herbs and plants.

QJSLA XIX 354–5.

On Electric Powers of Oxalate of Lime, cf paragraphs headed Electric Powers of Oxalate of Lime.

Some oxalate of lime, obtained by precipitation, when well-washed, was dried in a Wedgewood’s basin at a temperature approaching 300°, until so dry as not to render a cold glass plate, placed over it, dim. Being then stirred with a platina spatula, it in a few moments, by friction against the metal, became so strongly electrical, that it could not be collected together, but flew about the dish whenever it was moved, and over its sides into the sand-bath. It required some little stirring before the particles of the powder were all of them sufficiently electrical to produce this effect. It was found to take place either in porcelain, glass, or metal basins, and with porcelain, glass or metal stirrers; and when well excited, the electrified particles were attracted on the approach of all bodies, and when shaken in small quantity on to the cap of a gold leaf electrometer, would make the leaves diverge 2 or 3 inches. The effect was not due to temperature, for when cooled out of the contact of air, it equally took place when stirred; being, however, very hygrometric, the effect soon went off if the powder were exposed to air. Excited in a silver capsule, and then left out of contact of the air, the substance remained electrical a great length of time, proving its very bad conducting power; and in this respect surpassing, perhaps, all other bodies. The effect may be produced any number of times, and after any number of desiccations of salt.

Platina rubbed against the powder became negative—the powder positive; all other metals tried, the same as platina. When rubbed with glass, the glass became strongly negative, the oxalate positive, both being dry and warm; and indeed this body appears to stand at the head of the list of all substances as yet tried, as to its power of becoming positively electrical by friction.

Oxalates of zinc and lead produced none of these effects.

Ibid 338–9.

Macculloch’s Facts: Dr John Macculloch, a frequent contributor to QJSLA, presented an article in two parts in the April and July numbers in 1825, “On the Origin, Materials, Composition, and Analogies of Rocks”. Ibid XIX 28–44, 200–13. He was interested in the processes of rock formations and stressed the effects of heat and consolidation in obliterating the visible evidence of vegetable and animal matter in primary as well as secondary rocks. Coleridge’s generalisation is his own from such passages as:

The formation of coral islands, proves that enormous and solid masses of calcareous rock are the produce of animals alone…. If the most minute animals of creation can thus, by their numbers, execute unassisted works of such enormous magnitude, and, as navigators think, within spaces of time comparatively limited, it is far from unreasonable to believe that the succession through unnumbered ages, of animals so far exceeding them in bulk and in the relative quantity of their calcareous produce, should have generated all the calcareous strata in the secondary series…. Every thing proves that the present secondary strata are the produce of more ancient rocks; and these must have been the continuations of those which are now the primary, as we have no reason to imagine that there has been a distinct series which has entirely vanished…. Thus, it may fairly be inferred, that while the siliceous and argillaceous secondary strata have been formed from the ruins of more ancient rocks, a large part, at least, of the calcareous, is the produce of animals. Thus also, it must appear, that from the operations of animals, the quantity of calcareous earth deposited in the form of mud or stone is always increasing.

Ibid XIX 202–4.

On the possibility that Coleridge knew Macculloch’s A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland (2 vols 1819) see 5237 and n. Alternatively, perhaps that memorandum was made in consequence of reading the articles referred to here. Or did Coleridge know The Highlands and Western Isles of Scotland…In six letters to Sir Walter Scott (4 vols 1824)? Macculloch was a crusty, original geologist, rude to other geologists who “worked out of drawers” of specimens; he was one whose direct investigations on the hills Coleridge would appreciate.

Later in A System of Geology with a Theory of the Earth, and an explanation of its connexion with the Sacred Records (2 vols 1831), a summary of his work, Macculloch remained non-aligned in the controversy about matter and whether it is a product of life, but he argued that from mere lack of evidence as to the composition of primary rocks “we have no right to determine the negative”. (I 466–7.) Yet he wrote in his final chapter, “Geology also confirms that Record which informs us that Life was created at no very remote period, by demonstrating that there was a time without previous life”. (II 460.)

5248 20.67 Hume’s remark to Gibbon respecting Macpherson’s Ossian: Similarities of phrasing suggest that Coleridge may have seen this in some edition of Ossian, e.g. cf:

“It is indeed strange,” says Mr Hume in a letter to Gibbon, “That any man of sense could have imagined it possible, that above twenty thousand verses, along with numberless historical facts, could have been preserved by oral tradition, during fifty generations, by the rudest, perhaps, of all the civilized nations, the most necessitous, the most turbulent, and the most unsettled. When a supposition is so contrary to common sense, any positive evidence of it ought never to be regarded”.

The Poems of Ossian…with…an Inquiry into the Genuineness of these Poems, Written expressly for this Edition, by the Reυ. Alex Stewart (1819). Rees’s Cyclopaedia XXV (1819) in a long article on Ossian also quoted Hume’s letter. It appears too in Malcolm Laing’s “Dissertation on Ossian’s Poems” in his History of Scotland (1804) IV 420, on the third volume of which Coleridge wrote one marginal note.

On a priori probability see 4508 f6.

The phrase “On the Canon of the New Testament” sandwiched between the two comments on the acceptance and dispersal of Ossian throws some light on Coleridge’s thinking about such passages as Matt 1,2; Luke 1,2 and John 5:8. See e.g. 5240 f28^v, 5301, 5372 and nn. Cf 5371 and n.

5249 20.66 The difficulties in finding blank pages in N 20 for this entry may possibly have led Coleridge to blank pages in N 21½; see 5256 and n.

Beginning on f37^v, the note running from the back of the notebook to the front, continues on f34^v, but here Coleridge encountered 5248 (on f37) so turned the notebook around and continued in the blank space on f34^v below 5244, adding the cue “continued from three leaves forward, the last line of the page fronting the 3rd leaf, the book turned— ” i.e. f37^v. Continuing on f35, at f35^v he encountered 5235 so went to a blank space on f40 between 5231 and 5232; here he ran over into f39^v squeezing two lines in at the top above 5232. Thus this entry is later than 5248, 5244, 5235, 5231, and 5232. The confusion is not diminished by the phrase towards the foot of f34^v in the reverse order, which refers not to the pages but to the order of the argument. See below.

f37^v As the Absolute Will…causative of all Reality+O: I.e. as zero is the point of departure in mathematical reckoning, so is it also in ontological reasoning; see CN III 4427, also 4974 and n.

Reality I=The Father…II=the adequate Idea, the eternal Alterity: See e.g. 4766, 5256, 5297, 5372 and nn.

the circulation and choral eddying of the eternal Divine Life: See 4521 and n. Cf also the last words of BL: “the great I AM, and…the filial Word that re-affirmeth it from Eternity to Eternity, whose choral Echo is the Universe. ”.

eternal Act of Communion III =+O: I.e. it is this reciprocal tension, the generative force upward into the positive, that effects the Creation.

The definite article after+O is the last word on f37^v, and was left dangling when the pages were turned over to f34^v.

f34^v in the reverse order: I.e. going back in reasoning from the reciprocal tension to the Son as the actualizing force.

The Love as the prevenient Spirit: Identifying the Holy Spirit as this reciprocal tension, prevenient because anticipatory of the Creation.

The Will of the Chaos: See 5233 and n.

disactualizing: Not in OED, nor any form of disactualize; “actualize” is attributed to Coleridge (Friend 1809–10): The Friend (CC) II 73; on the disactualizing process again see 4554.

clinging <self-> I.e. the tendency of the Chaos to opposition and individuation, i.e. to phenomenalization but not in the ordered tension of the generation.

f35 the link that was missing: In CN III 4418 and 4554 to 4558, where Coleridge did not deal directly with the nature of the ordering.

clinging wrestle, old war-embrace of Light & Gravity: Carrying over the phrase, used in various other contexts, from CN III 4418 f14. The polarity and unity of Light and Gravity is fundamental in Coleridge’s scheme, as it is in Steffens’s Grundzüge 48–9, referred to in 4929 f30.

See also 4659 and n.

of Mass to Multeity: See CN III 4450 and n.

the Sky-blink: The ice-blink, “a white, luminous appearance seen above ice” (OED); no use earlier than 1837 is cited. Cf David Crantz History of Greenland (1767) which Coleridge read before 1796 according to RX 101, and PW I 135n. Crantz described an “Ice-blink” (tr 1820) 5: “At a distance of about nine leagues from the colony [of Fredericshaab] the well-known Ice-blink. It consists of a large and elevated sheet of ice, casting by its reflection a brightness over the sky, similar to the northern lights, which may be seen at a great distance from the sea—the whole presents the spectacle of a stupendous bridge of ice, of eighteen miles long and four and three-quarters broad”.

the inward Light: The principle of life (5240 f28) as well as John 1:4.

Light particularized: As the creation of the sun in 4558 f83ⁿ.

Negative Electricity−E+Carbon=oxygen Gas: The uncertainties of punctuation make for diffident reading here. For Coleridge’s symbols see App A.−E means either negative electricity or the Easterly power, corresponding to oxygen gas in the Compass of Nature. Oxygen combined with carbon yields carbon dioxide, which like light, is essential to the growth of plants, hence the Life of Plants.

the Life of Plants… Animal Life.—::Sun:Heart: Light as a principle of life in plants is distinct from light as the principle of animal life, as the Sun and the Heart are distinct from but also central to their systems.

centro-peripherical: See 4989 f41 and n.

In-striving is Coleridge’s coinage; not in OED. Cf on in-prefixes, CN III 3263n, 4243 and n.

And now the living soul: The creation of man, Gen 2:7, see 5377 f49^v and n.

Adam: See 4702 and n.

The WILL…must originate its own acts: See e.g. 4998 f15^v.

oneness with the I Am: See 4523 and n.

fonti-fontial: Not in OED. A coinage, “giving rise to the source itself”, “fount of the fount”. Cf 5241 f30^v, fons in imo fonte; OED ascribes fontal to Coleridge.

αχρονως: “timelessly”.

In ordine ad scientiam: “For the purpose of knowing”. implicit truth: Coleridge attempted in the numerous entries referred to above to render implicit moral allegories explicit in physical terms.

Lucifer would have taken the absolute ground up into his Will: Cf Isa 14:12–14:

How art thou fallen from Heaven, O Lucifer…. For thou has said in thine heart, I will ascend into Heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God;…I will be like the Most High.

Coleridge’s allusiveness here is various and subtle. Lucifer, Latin for “Light-bearer”, is in Hebrew helel, “the shining one”. Thus this term for the Will of the Chaos suggests the attempt to expropriate light, the “principle of being” (see 4677 and n), and to make the individual will ascendant over the absolute, thus causing the inversion and indistinction of Chaos. See 4554 and n.

βυσσος αβυσσου: “deepless depth”; see CN III 4418 f13 and 5256. Cf also of Rev 20, translated (AV) as “bottomless pit”.

τοκος αμητωρ: “motherless birth”.

f39^v As he submitted compati: As he submitted “to suffer with another”. co-agere in se collevando: “to act with another in raising himself”.

5250 20.68 Ad Blancum Album: “To Blanco White”. See 5215, 5240 and nn.

White’s Practical and Internal Evidence against Catholicism was dated in the dedication 30 Apr 1825. Is Coleridge’s caution to him here a consequence of that work, in the knowledge that White was preparing his simpler and cheaper work The Poor Man’s Preservative against Popery, published that same year? His Letter to Butler appeared the next year.

f36^v The Dorpian Dogma: At the Synod of Dort, 13 Nov 1618 to 9 May 1619, disagreements about predestination and free will were worked out by Calvinists and Arminians of the reformed churches. Nominally the Calvinists won, but their restatement of predestination actually differed widely from Calvin’s and was close to Arminianism; see 5244 f34^v above and AR 15 5–7.

tertium aliquid: See above 4561 and n, 4644 f26^v, and below 5398 f75^v; also e.g. SM:LS (CC) 89.

5251 20.69 For the information here Coleridge needed no book, but possibly he was reading Malcolm Laing’s History of Scotland (see 5248n). Laing gave considerable space to the Presbyterians from the Union of England and Scotland under James VI to the close of the reign of Anne, and pointed out e.g. that William on his accession “scrupled to abrogate the rights of patronage which he considered as the only expedient to infuse a mild or more tolerant spirit into the presbyterian church. The parliament persisted in the repeal of patronage; and though episcopacy was abolished, presbyterian government, from their mutual opposition, remained unestablished”. Bk X IV 215. After further accounts of tumultuous anti-episcopalian times, rendering the union very precarious, Laing recorded the general subsiding of presbyterian political embroilment, and that “The rights of patronage were restored in the last years of queen Ann”. Ibid Bk XI IV 393.

sugar of lead: Lead acetate, which taken internally would act as an antipyretic but would produce a peripheral neuropathy and weakness of the muscles as e.g. in a dropped wrist; see C&S (CC) 127.

5252 20.70 Related to the reading behind 5251, Laing no doubt being thought of as one of the second sort of historian as also perhaps John Howie, Peter Heylyn, and even RS Book of the Church (1824) with its controversial consequents; the other kind—broad, open, smooth & safe—would be represented for Coleridge pre-eminently by Hooker and Field, both of whom he annotated profusely, but also by e.g. Lucy Aikin. See 4991, 5009, 5026, 5054, 5084 and nn, in fact much of N 30.

5253 29.181 A note on the significance of the individual letters e.g. alpha, eta, omicron, sigma, digamma in the inflection of Greek nouns.

5254 29.182 This entry appears on ff156–5 with his query on f154 in the midst of notes for Lecture the Second (see CN III 4384). In the heat of lecture preparation Coleridge appears to have skipped three pages, or else he was leaving them blank for afterthought notes; in any case the blanks were filled in later with these memoranda on Desiderata in School Books referred to in 5255. (See also 5328.) The educational planning that pervades them could be related in some way to concern about the Gillman boys’ studies (see below), and to an attempt in Jan 1826, to encourage and help Derwent as a tutor looking for pupils (see CL VI 536); or it may well be pertinent also to grander schemes of education in which Coleridge was deeply interested all his life.

1. Physiography: Later (CN V) Coleridge defined it as Description or Display of Nature. OED assigns the first use to the Journal of Science 1828–32, the second to

Coleridge in notes on Henry More in LR III 158, and the third to J.H.Green Vital Dynamics (1840). Its appearance here or in 5232 appears to be earlier than these.

2. Phytography…Phytology…3. Zöography: On the first see 4765 and n. Phytology also according to OED is a 1 7th-century word, the first being “description of plants, descriptive botany”, the second “now rare”, “the science of plants, botany”. Coleridge’s distinction is sharper. See also 5291 and n.

3. Zöography, the word implies, was to have been a description of animals from the lowest to the highest forms; see 4765 f87^v. Coleridge’s interest in the whole range of living things from the infusoria to man is evident throughout the notebooks and particularly in this volume.

The Oran-Utang sive Homo Sylvestris was the title of a work by Edward Tyson (sp var) published in 1699; his nomenclature was much used by later writers. The wording here, including the revision shown by the cancellation, draws attention to Coleridge’s awareness of evolutionism towards which he was ambivalent, or at times hostile. See C&S (CC) 66 n2. See also 4984 f87 and n.

4. Anthropology…: The study of man, his physiology, arts, etc, a familiar word, but in Coleridge’s sense here, applied to the study of the races of mankind, it appears to have originated with him. See OED under anthropology.

Anthropography: The earliest (16th-century) use had to do with describing the human body. In Coleridge’s sense the OED records the first occurrence in 1834, the study of “the geographical distribution of the races of mankind, and their local variations; ethnography”. For Coleridge’s interest in this subject and some of his reading on it see in this volume e.g. 4548, 4866, 4934 and nn. Also all indexes under Blumen-bach.

Anthropogony: (a) “The origin of man”, (b) “The investigation or an account of this” is first recorded in 1868 by the OED (1933 Sup).

f155 7. Latin <Tutor> (Domestic Lessons): See CL v 482–4, 485–7, 490–93. Coleridge had been giving Henry Gillman Domestic Lessons in Latin and Greek (CL V 132 (age 7); ibid 482 (age I I)). By Oct 1826 he was regretting having turned over to “poor dear Hartley”, who “had promised to fill it up”, his “scheme of the Domestic Tutor”, which would enable a mother to teach Latin to boys of 6 or 7 to 9. CL VI 619.

§ 8 and §§ 10–16 enter into his attempts at writing a Greek-English grammar and a vocabulary. See CN III 4210 and n, and in this volume 4644, 4675 and nn.

9. Logic. See below 5343 and n.

13. Introduction to the construing of…Euripides: See 5136 above.

Addenda: Coleridge told Poole that at the age of three he “could read a Chapter in the Bible” (CL I 312), that from three to six he was in “the reading school”, and at six had read “Belisarius, Robinson Crusoe, Philip Quarle…” (CL I 346–7). One laments the loss of the grammatical Infant R.Crusoe; or the Deaf and Dumb Nurse. Cf a marginal note by Coleridge on G.H.Schubert Allgemeine N aturgeschichte und Physiognomik der Natur (Erlangen 1826) 327: “These facts of solitary Individuals prove nothing for or against the possible growth of Language ou[t] of the Living Mind. Suppose from 12 to 20 male and femal[e] Infants to be reared humanly with human comfo [rt] and Kindness by a dumb Nurse in some Elysian Isle of the Pacific. Would or would not they gradually organize the exclamations of Joy, surprize, fear &c in <to> articulate sounds? I incline to think, that this would be the result. S.T.C.” Coleridge’s copy is in the BM. Similar situations occur in discussions on the origin of language from Herodotus onwards.

5255 29.143 This is written in the chaos of the pastedown (f171, the inside back cover) described in CN III N 29 Gen N.Here the notebook was turned around, and the already crowded page was being used again, in defiance of entries already in sufficient confusion on it.

Attempting to order his own chaos, Coleridge in referring to the next leaf after the 14^th from this end, and the next after 20 leaves onwards (f150 foll) has told himself where to look for two memoranda having to do with the Gillmans. M^r G’s views on the Absorbents (4825) begins on the next leaf after 20 leaves onwards (f150 foll), and the Desiderata in School Books appear to be those referred to in 5254, i.e. on ff156–155, which, as we go onwards from this end, i.e. backwards, are the leaves next after the 14^th from this end. (The fourteenth contains part of the lecture notes in CN III 4384, and no list of books).

5256 21½.121 The entry presents curiosities and difficulties arising not solely from yet another attempt by Coleridge to formulate the Trinity (see 4870 f60^v, 5249, and other references below in this note), but perhaps partly from its unfinished state. Without any full-stop, about a third of the page was left blank after the last words.

To the foot of f62^v the entry was written on the laid paper of the rest of the notebook; the remainder of the entry (ff63–63^v) is on a piece of wove paper with no watermark. Obviously Coleridge here pressed into use a stray piece of paper that was inserted later, possibly not until the rebinding on acquisition by the BM in 1951. At the foot of f62^v the writing became cramped because there was no space on the page opposite or on the remaining leaves, they having been filled earlier from the other end of the book. See CN II 2382 f75 and N 21½ Gen N as revised in CN III.