A Nation Of Political Fools, 1713 Edition

by Stephen J. Gertz

 

"Although this Island of Folly cannot be found on the map, you will have no difficulty in guessing its real name and location by observing its mores and inhabitants" (Preface).

 In 1713,  A New Voyage to the Island of Fools was published, an  anti-Utopian satire of England's Tory government disguised as a voyage of exploration led by a Venetian nobleman. Pseudonymously written, it has been variously attributed to Jonathan Swift, Edmund Stacey, or Edward Ward. 

By 1713 the Tory party had dominated Parliament for the three preceding years and had made further gains in the current year's elections. Prime Minister Robert Harley, appointed after the downfall of the Whigs in 1710, attempted to pursue a moderate and non-controversial policy, but had  to contend with extremist Tories on the backbenches who were frustrated by the lack of support for their legislation against dissent. 

In five letters, the primativist narrator of ...the Island of Fools observes and reports on the mores of a nation in a sad state of affairs.

The inhabitants of Stultitia, the island of fools, were not "Stultitian [that is, foolish] by nature, but by practice," we are told. Foolishness is considered a moral failure and here refers to the vices that consumed the nation. "Slaves of sentiments, inclinations, interest, avarice, ambition, and desire for vengeance and of 'fantasies,' the Stultitians are suckers for adulation, flattery, false evidence, crime, rebellion, cheating, treason, rioting, prostitution and 'all manner of wickedness and folly'" ((Braga, The Rationalist Critique of Utopian Thinking, University of Bucharest Review, Vol. I. 2011, no. 1, p. 128).

Obsession with superstitions and collective illusions is the cause of human corruption, according to Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan, and the Stultitians enjoy a surfeit of superstitions and collective psychoses. "In order to impinge them to riot or rebellion and to any action in general, it is enough to excite their fancy with a few new Notions or Projects that they will embrace without giving the least thought about their Truth, Reason or their Probability." Imaginary “epidemical pseudosciences”  lie at the core of the Stultitian mind-set.

"During the 17th-18th centuries, the pressure exercised by combined critiques due to religious ideology and later on by rationalist mentality rendered utopias suspect to the eyes of many authors. Christian counter-utopists, ranging from Joseph Hall to Jonathan Swift, accepted and adopted the dogmas related to the Lost Earthly Paradise and Man’s Cursed City, transforming the utopian space into hell on earth, into monstrous kingdoms that would rival Dante’s circles.

"In turn, humanist counter-utopists, skeptical regarding man’s capacity of establishing a perfect society, found other means of expressing their incredulity as well as sarcasms. They imagined madmen islands and kingdoms of fools, demonstrating, by reductio ab absurdum, that the application of the ideals of reason to social programs would only lead to nightmarish societies" (Ibid.).

Slings and arrows from satirists skewering the Tories did not change a thing. Their government remained popular with the electorate for its effort to end the War of the Spanish Succession and ratify the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. 

As for Jonathan Swift being the author of this pamphlet, not true. At this point, Swift, who, as a political pamphleteer simultaneously played tennis on both sides of the net, had permanently moved from the Whig to the Tory party, joining its inner circle: he was a one-issue voter and found Tory policy on the Irish clergy in agreement with his own sympathies as an Irishman. Edmund Stacey, author of The Parliament of Birds (1712), also published by John Morphew, is the likeliest suspect, though Edward Ward is given credit in a manuscript annotation.

Those on the Right or Left seeking ammo in this satire will find it; Right and Left politics as we understand it today did not exist at that time - ideology was fluid and not as sharply defined as now -  It was in the post-Revolution French Assembly that those political directions were established: monarchists sat on the right, republicans on the left side of the Assembly's aisle. Contemporary American Conservatives may plotz to learn that in the 18th and 19th centuries Liberal Conservatism was, far from an oxymoron, a recognized, respected and viable political viewpoint.

The enduring lesson here is that utopias look good on paper but are a disaster in practice, no matter the ideology. Heaven on earth is an impossibility, whether as an ideal society in which government plays no role at all in the lives of its citizens and taxes are non-existent, or an ideal where the government will help the vulnerable from birth to death if necessary at a price shared by all good citizens. It's always a fool's game. People tend to get in the way when a perfect world is pursued; your perfection is my purgatory. One man's sage is another man's fool.

The population of the Island of Fools is exploding yet it's a protean destination resort and can accommodate all who wish to vacation in folly and call it wisdom.

__________

[UTOPIAN SATIRE]. A New Voyage to the Island of Fools, Representing the Policy, Government, and Present State of the Stultitians. By a Noble Venetian. Inscib'd to the Right Honorable The Lord Fernando. Translated from the Italian. London: John Morphew, [September] 1713. Attributed to Swift (in Wrenn catalogue) but not in Teerink.  Octavo (188 x 118 mm). [2], 62 pp. Wrappers.

A second edition was issued in 1715.

Claeys, Utopias of the British Enlightenment, p. xxix. Letellier, The English Novel 1700-1740, p. 336.

__________

Image courtesy of Christie's, which is offering this title in its Fine Printed Books and Manuscripts sale November 15, 2013. With our thanks. 

__________

__________

Politics, Astrology, And The Weather: A Guide To The 2012 Election

by Stephen J. Gertz

Because of its topical nature, Booktryst revisits a book we first took a look at in 2010, here with an updated slant.

 

Action in the sky = Politics on the ground.
Frontispiece to Meteorologia Philosophico-Politica.

"The more things change the more they stay the same" 

(Alphonse Karr, Les Guêpes, 1849).

Every four years American Presidential politics plays out an ancient non-partisan script: Virtue is stained, throw the bum out.

In 1698, Francisco Reinzler published Meteorologia, Philisophico-Politica, a tract on the influence of weather and astrology on politics and guide to reading meteorological omens via astrology so that correct political decisions can be made.

If this seems outlandish, consider that politicians routinely stick a moistened finger in the air to discern the direction of the wind. Perhaps "you don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows," but no politician says or does a thing until atmospheric conditions are considered. We all know what happened to President Bush when he misinterpreted the omen that hurricane Katrina augered.

One of the last of the great emblem books - those popular volumes from the 16th-17th century that instructed through symbolic illustrations - Meteorologia, Philisophico-Politica remains as fresh today as when originally published.

In the tableau above, for instance, the bright, shining city on a hill is under assault by a meteor shower, i.e. the opposition party. It's time to drive the snakes out.

Above, we learn that, not only is it lonely at the top, it's dangerous when the sky thunders and lightning strikes the tower of power. The President may wish to hunker-down and spend the weekend at Camp David away from the tumult.

 

It's an all-out assault on Congress, the pillars of the Capitol struck by angry citizens who strike as bolts of lightning.

 

Meanwhile, inside the House of Representatives all is not well. The primaries have decimated incumbents, slaying careers on the floor of that venerable chamber. As Zeus hurling thunderbolts, the people are pissed-off and no one is safe.

But never fear, Virtue, suppressed for the last four years, will rise and conquer after the election. Then, Virtue will slowly and inevitably be corrupted until, four years later, she resembles a  Gorgon and must be cleansed anew through another wash, rinse, and spin cycle. Afterward, of course, she'll be hung out to dry.

 __________
 

REINZER, Francisco. Meteorologia Philosophico-Politica, in duodecim Dissertationes per Quaestiones Meteorologicas & conclusiones Politicas divisa, appositisque Symbolis illustrata... Ausburg: J. Wolfus, 1698.

First edition, second printing, rarer than the first printing (of 1697), and subsequent 1709 and 1712 editions, with no copies at auction within  the last thirty-five years.  Folio (12 1/4 x 7 3/4 in; 311 x 197 mm). [6], 297, [5 index], [2 blank] pp. With engraved frontispiece by A.M.Wolffgang after W.J.Kadariza, and eighty-three in-text copperplate emblem engravings  by J.Müller, J.Stridbeck, & J.S.Krauss after W.J. Kadariza.

Praz p. 463. De Backer-Sommervogel IV, 1640.3. Landwehr 494.

__________

Images courtesy of David Brass Rare Books, with our thanks.
__________
__________

Politics and the Weather (A Weird Rare Book Adventure)

by Stephen J. Gertz

Action in the sky = Politics on the ground.
Frontispiece to Meteorologia Philosophico-Politica.

It was either sunny and warm or cold and rainy on Election Day last week, depending on your political perspective. 

Climate change was in the air in the aftermath of the election, though no one seemed to know whether it was man-made or a natural phenomenon. Politicos and the Commentariat have moistened fingers in the air and still no one knows which way the wind is really blowing. About the only thing everyone can agree upon is that a high-pressure system is stuck over Washington with no relief in sight.

In these troubled times, our obvious need is for a guide to politics based upon the weather, right? But where to find one?

Hop in my  Time Machine, zip into the future, take a look at the lissome Eloi, recoil from the troglodyte Morlocks, and gnash gears as we tear into reverse,  wave to Washington D.C. 2010, and  wind up in Ausburg, Bavaria 1698.
 

Say hello to Meteorologia Philosophico-Politica, a remarkable, delightfully bizarre, unique, and fantastical natural science emblem book by Francisco Reinzer (1661-1708), a Jesuit priest and professor of philosophy, rhetoric, and theology, who took the science out of poli-sci by tying it to atmospheric conditions, astrology, and Western Hermetic tradition.

Within, he posits that political wisdom can be derived from meteorological phenomena and that  appropriate political policy and behavior can be revealed by them, the weather as oujia board, sort of like predicting political action by examining the entrails of  a TV meteorologist. (Watch out, Willard Scott). Reinzer liberally references his Jesuit brothers of the prior generation, Fathers Athanasius Kircher (d. 1680) and Gaspar Schott (d. 1666) and their works throughout, including Mundus Subterraneus (1664), Ars Magna Lucis et Umbrae (1665), Physica Curiosa (1662), etc.

Scoff if you will but the results of last week's election were foreseen by Reinzer long ago.

Dawn on the Potomac, Nov. 2, 2010.

Citing the writings of Julius Caesar, Cicero, and Pliiny, amongst other ancient politician-scribes, Reinzer proffers advice, like Machiavelli to Lorenzo de'Medici, to his patron, Joseph I, eldest son of Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I, and King of the Romans/Emperor-designate, on political action within the context of, well, just about everything in the atmosphere and on the ground as it was then understood.

Divided into twelve Dissertations of eighty-three questions and answers with marvelous copperplate engravings to illustrate each, Reinzer (1661-1708) covers, with typical Jesuit thoroughness, every aspect of the atmosphere and its manifestations. Among the associated subjects discussed and illustrated are mining, metal working, diving for corals, fossils, ice and freezing landscapes, volcanos, pharmacy and hot springs. What those things have to do with politics is a mystery to me. And unless you’ve had a classical education it will be all prehistoric Greek to you, too.

It’s written in Latin.

7PM EDT, Nov. 2, 2010, Washington D.C.

But for the sake of this discussion, let’s say, for instance, that a vote is up in the legislature to pass a major, landmark health care bill. All of a sudden, a tornado rips down the Mall right up to the Capitol building. Coincidence? Not to Reinzer! Hunker down, wait for it to blow over, then vote your health care bill; no one can think straight when the House is carried away. Best to wait until the tornado stops and the home of Congress finally rests atop the Wicked Witch of the East. Welcome to Oz.

High humidity? Moisture in the air means tears in Congress. We know from empirical knowledge that this is true; Washington D.C. is a steam bath during the summer months; it’s no accident that Congress recesses from August to mid-September. When Congress sits, don't want to shvitz. Sweat the big issues when it's cold outside.

"A dark and stormy night"? Let Bulwer-Lytton’s opening line in purple to Paul Clifford be your watchword: War is in the air. Button up your trench coat; before the military starts shooting, legislators will be lobbing mortar shells across the aisle in mortal trench combat.

Message to Sharron Angle from The Big Man, up.

You can only raise taxes when the earth shifts its axis.

If a hurricane should hit get your ass on the scene, don't sit.

If lightning should strike tell Congress, "Take a hike."

If an earthquake rocks town welcome back Jerry Brown.

This book was published during a fascinating time in the sciences. By 1698, Isaac Newton and the Rationalists had begun to move science away from the Hermetic blend of naturalism and metaphysics into a strictly fact-based, tested by replicable experiment endeavor; the transition of the Renaissance  to the Age of Enlightenment. Men like Kircher and his disciple, Schott, stood at the nexus of the old way and new. Even though Kircher was roundly criticized for his many blunders in thinking by the new generation of scientists, he was still the most influential investigator of nature of his time, whether you agreed with him or not. In 1698, he’d been dead for eighteen years; we tend to think that Hermeticism in the sciences died with him. It did not. It lingered as a legitimate, if somewhat dubious, way to look at the world for another generation. Reinzer and Meteorologia Philosophico-Politica provide the evidence.

The Democratic Caucus, 11PM EDT, Nov. 2, 2010.

With fifty states each with their own typical climate and weather patterns, as well as micro-climates, trying to gauge political action by atmospheric conditions is tough. As anyone living in Florida can tell you, it can be raining on one side of the street and sunny on the other; clear skies one minute, a downpour the next. We know how wacked-out politics in Florida can often be. Perhaps Reinzer was on to something.

__________

REINZER, Francisco. Meteorologia Philosophico-Politica, in duodecim Dissertationes per Quaestiones Meteorologicas & conclusiones Politicas divisa, appositisque Symbolis illustrata... Ausburg: J. Wolfus, 1698.

First edition, second printing, rarer than the first printing (of 1697), and subsequent 1709 and 1712 editions, with no copies at auction within  the last thirty-five years.  Folio (12 1/4 x 7 3/4 in; 311 x 197 mm). [6], 297, [5 index], [2 blank] pp. With engraved frontispiece by A.M.Wolffgang after W.J.Kadariza, and eighty-three in-text copperplate emblem engravings  by J.Müller, J.Stridbeck, & J.S.Krauss after W.J. Kadariza.

Praz p. 463. De Backer-Sommervogel IV, 1640.3. Landwehr 494.
__________

Images courtesy of David Brass.

Political wonks and the curious can read the full text of Meteorologia Philosophico-Politica here. A Latin to English dictionary and grammar will help. A lot.

__________

__________

Subversive Book Asserts Rule By Law, Not King

In 1644, Samuel Rutherford, a Presbyterian theologian, published Lex, Rex, the now excessively scarce, enormously important treatise on limited government and constitutionalism. Only four copies have fallen under the hammer within the last thirty-five years.

Lex, Rex is the first treatment of rule by law, not by men, based upon the separation of powers and covenant between king and subjects, (foreshadowing the social contract). It laid the foundation for the later thinking of political philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. As such, this volume sowed the seeds for modern political systems, including that of the United States.

"The title, Lex, Rex, is a play on the words that convey the meaning the law is king. When theologian Samuel Rutherford published the book in 1644, on the eve of the revolutions that rocked the English nation from 1645 through 1688, it caused a sensation, and provoked a great deal of controversy. It is ostensibly an argument for limited monarchy and against absolute monarchy, but its arguments were quickly perceived as subversive of monarchy altogether, and in context, we can perceive that it provided a bridge between the earlier natural law philosophers and those who would further develop their ideas: the Leveller movement and such men as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Algernon Sidney, which laid the basis for the American Republic.

"This book has long been undeservedly neglected by scholars, probably because it is written as a polemic in the political and sectarian controversies that are distasteful to later generations, and many of its references are somewhat obscure, but a closer reading reveals how it laid the foundation for the contractarian and libertarian ideas that came to be embodied in the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

"Rutherford's main idea is that in the politic realm the real sovereign is the people, and that all officials, including monarchs, are subject to the rule of law, a phrase Rutherford uses only once, in Question 26, 'Whether the King be above the Law or no,' but this is the book that developed the contrast between the rule of law and the rule of men. He does not use the term social contract, but does develop the earlier idea of covenant in a way that leads naturally to the idea of the social contract. He also develops the idea of a separation of powers between legislative (nomothetic), executive (monarchic), and judicial functions, in a way that they can balance one another, in a mixed constitutional order that combines the best features of monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic forms of government.

"What made the book controversial was Rutherford's argument that not only does the magistrate lose his authority when he violates the law, but that it is a right, and perhaps even a duty, for the people to resist such violations" (Roland Jon. Introduction to Lex. Rex, 2002 edition).

Samuel Rutherford (c.1600–1661) "published a number of major works, including Lex, Rex, or, The Law and the Prince (1644), a lengthy and sometimes bitter defence of armed resistance to Charles I. It was written in response to Sacro-sancta regum majestas (1644) by the deposed bishop of Ross, John Maxwell, and drew on Calvinist resistance theory and the political theory of Spanish neo-scholastics. It argued that legitimate government was grounded in a covenant between king and people. Because Charles I had violated his covenant with the Scottish people by trying to force idolatry upon them, they had been duty bound to resist him by force under the authority of lesser magistrates.

"The restoration of Charles II in 1660 augured ill for Rutherford. In September the committee of estates issued a declaration against Lex, Rex and copies of the book were burned in Edinburgh and outside New College in St Andrews. Rutherford was deprived of his position in the university, his charge in the church, and his stipend, and was confined to his own house. He was cited to appear before parliament on a charge of treason and his friends feared that he might well face execution. However, early in 1661 Rutherford fell seriously ill. On 8 March he issued a last will and testimony, and near the end of the month he died, at St Mary's College, St Andrews" (Oxford Online DNB).
___________


RUTHERFORD, Samuel. Lex,Rex: The Law and the Prince. A Dispute for the just Prerogative of King and People. Containing the Reasons and Causes of the most necessary Defensive Wars of the Kingdom of Scotland, and of their expedition for the ayd and help of their dear Brethren of England. In which their Innocency is asserted, and a full Answer is given to a Seditious Pamphet, Intituled, Sacro-Sancta Regum Majestas, or The Sacred and Royall Prerogative of Christian Kings:... In XLIV Questions. London: Printed for John Field, and are to be sold at his house upon Addle-hill, neer Baynards-Castle, Octob. 7. 1644.

First edition. Quarto. 467 (i.e. 435) pp; (A4, a-d4, B-Z4, Aa-Ii4, Kk-Rr2, Ss-Zz4, Aaa-Nnn4, Ooo2; error in pagination: nos. 281-312 omitted).

Wing R2386.

Thanks to David Brass for title page image.

Subversive Book Asserts Rule By Law, Not King

In 1644, Samuel Rutherford, a Presbyterian theologian, published Lex, Rex, the now excessively scarce, enormously important treatise on limited government and constitutionalism. Only four copies have fallen under the hammer within the last thirty-five years.

Lex, Rex is the first treatment of rule by law, not by men, based upon the separation of powers and covenant between king and subjects, (foreshadowing the social contract). It laid the foundation for the later thinking of political philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. As such, this volume sowed the seeds for modern political systems, including that of the United States.

"The title, Lex, Rex, is a play on the words that convey the meaning the law is king. When theologian Samuel Rutherford published the book in 1644, on the eve of the revolutions that rocked the English nation from 1645 through 1688, it caused a sensation, and provoked a great deal of controversy. It is ostensibly an argument for limited monarchy and against absolute monarchy, but its arguments were quickly perceived as subversive of monarchy altogether, and in context, we can perceive that it provided a bridge between the earlier natural law philosophers and those who would further develop their ideas: the Leveller movement and such men as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Algernon Sidney, which laid the basis for the American Republic.

"This book has long been undeservedly neglected by scholars, probably because it is written as a polemic in the political and sectarian controversies that are distasteful to later generations, and many of its references are somewhat obscure, but a closer reading reveals how it laid the foundation for the contractarian and libertarian ideas that came to be embodied in the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

"Rutherford's main idea is that in the politic realm the real sovereign is the people, and that all officials, including monarchs, are subject to the rule of law, a phrase Rutherford uses only once, in Question 26, 'Whether the King be above the Law or no,' but this is the book that developed the contrast between the rule of law and the rule of men. He does not use the term social contract, but does develop the earlier idea of covenant in a way that leads naturally to the idea of the social contract. He also develops the idea of a separation of powers between legislative (nomothetic), executive (monarchic), and judicial functions, in a way that they can balance one another, in a mixed constitutional order that combines the best features of monarchic, aristocratic, and democratic forms of government.

"What made the book controversial was Rutherford's argument that not only does the magistrate lose his authority when he violates the law, but that it is a right, and perhaps even a duty, for the people to resist such violations" (Roland Jon. Introduction to Lex. Rex, 2002 edition).

Samuel Rutherford (c.1600–1661) "published a number of major works, including Lex, Rex, or, The Law and the Prince (1644), a lengthy and sometimes bitter defence of armed resistance to Charles I. It was written in response to Sacro-sancta regum majestas (1644) by the deposed bishop of Ross, John Maxwell, and drew on Calvinist resistance theory and the political theory of Spanish neo-scholastics. It argued that legitimate government was grounded in a covenant between king and people. Because Charles I had violated his covenant with the Scottish people by trying to force idolatry upon them, they had been duty bound to resist him by force under the authority of lesser magistrates.

"The restoration of Charles II in 1660 augured ill for Rutherford. In September the committee of estates issued a declaration against Lex, Rex and copies of the book were burned in Edinburgh and outside New College in St Andrews. Rutherford was deprived of his position in the university, his charge in the church, and his stipend, and was confined to his own house. He was cited to appear before parliament on a charge of treason and his friends feared that he might well face execution. However, early in 1661 Rutherford fell seriously ill. On 8 March he issued a last will and testimony, and near the end of the month he died, at St Mary's College, St Andrews" (Oxford Online DNB).
___________


RUTHERFORD, Samuel. Lex,Rex: The Law and the Prince. A Dispute for the just Prerogative of King and People. Containing the Reasons and Causes of the most necessary Defensive Wars of the Kingdom of Scotland, and of their expedition for the ayd and help of their dear Brethren of England. In which their Innocency is asserted, and a full Answer is given to a Seditious Pamphet, Intituled, Sacro-Sancta Regum Majestas, or The Sacred and Royall Prerogative of Christian Kings:... In XLIV Questions. London: Printed for John Field, and are to be sold at his house upon Addle-hill, neer Baynards-Castle, Octob. 7. 1644.

First edition. Quarto. 467 (i.e. 435) pp; (A4, a-d4, B-Z4, Aa-Ii4, Kk-Rr2, Ss-Zz4, Aaa-Nnn4, Ooo2; error in pagination: nos. 281-312 omitted).

Wing R2386.

Thanks to David Brass for title page image.