View text

Of Ethick in General, MS Locke c.28, fols 145-152

 
 

MS Locke c.28, f. 143-154.

[1] Introduction. Ff. 12. Paper. Quire consisting of 6 quarter sheets, each sheet folded once, resulting in 12 leaves.

[2] Size. Sizes: see [4].

[3] Watermarks.

Folio numberWatermarkCountermark
143possibly lower part of Seven Provinces Lion in coat of arms?-
144--
145Upper part of coat of arms-
146Upper part of coat of arms-
147Horn in coat of arms-
148Possibly part of coat of arms belonging to fol. 147-
149--
150--
151Possibly lower or or upper part of coat of arms-
152Possibly lower or or upper part of coat of arms-
153-GH or GI
154Lower part of Seven Provinces Lion in coat of arms-

[4] Stichings and pins. All folios have signs of punctures, used for drawing pencil lines; all punctures can be found on these lines. The punctures fall into two distinct patterns. Pattern A: fols 143-144 and 153-154 have a puncture through each of the four points where the marginal pencil line cross (but no such lines on the empty fols 153r, 153v and 154r). In addition, these fols have 1 extra puncture, located 4 mm above the inner lower puncture. Pattern B: fols 145-152, which have only a single pencil line (marking an inner margin), [CHECK DISTANCE FROM THE SPINE] have punctures at the top and at the bottom of this line. These punctures are in general more difficult to perceive than the punctures of pattern A. In the following table I give the size of each folio, its puncture pattern, and finally the distance between the top puncture and the (lowest) bottom puncture on the inner margin line. Sizes are given in mm and are not of the quarter sheets but of the individual folios. The width of the folios has to remain approximative, since part their inner vertical edge cannot be measured, due to pasting by the Bodleian librarian.

Folio numberSize (mm)Puncture patternUpper/lowest puncture distance (mm)
143101 x 163A145
14499 x164A145
14593 x 156B144
14694 x 156B144
14794 x 157B144
14894 x 158B144
14994 x 158B144
15094 x 157B144
15193 x 158B144
15290 x 157B144
15396 x 164A146
15496 x 164A146

[5] Quires and page numbers. Formula: see [11]. A precise appreciation of the relation between quires and folios is complicated by the way in which the folios have been pasted together by the Bodleian librarian. The MS consists of six quarter sheets, each quarter sheet devided into two leaves by one fold, resulting in 12 leaves=24 pages. Fol. numbers added by the Bodleian librarian. Folios 143-144 have page numbers 1-4, in the upper outer corner of each page. These numbers will be used in the transcription of the present edition. Deleted (quire) numbers in Locke’s hand, preceded by an encircled dot, at the bottom of fol. 147r: ‘1’; fol. 149r: ‘2’; fol. 151r: ‘3’. Letters/numbers at the bottom of fol. 146r: ‘a’; fol. 147r: [.] b fol. 149r: ‘c’; fol. 151r: ‘d’; fol. 152r: ‘e’. Finally, fol. 154v has the number ‘58’ at the bottom of the page. ‘Thus I thinke’ consist of one quire = 2 quarter sheets = 4 leaves = 8 pages, fols 143-144 and fols 153-154, wrapped around ‘Of Ethick in General’ on fols 145-152, this last text consisting of 4 quires, each quire 1 quarter sheet, each quarter sheet two leaves. This quiring pattern is corroborated by the table in ‘Stichings and pins’ (see [4]) and not contradicted by the table giving the watermarks (see [3]).

[6] Contents. Contents: (1) ‘Thus I thinke’ fols 143-144 and fols 153-154 and (2) ‘Of Ethick in General’, fols 146-152; the last part of section 10 and the first part of section 11 repeats a passage in section 160 of Draft B for the Essay. Fols 145r, 145v, 152v, 153r, 153v and 154r are empty.

[7] Marginal entries. Fols 143-144/153-154: no marginal entries. Fols 145-152: the following complete or partial titles can be found in the margin of fol. 146r: ‘Ethica’ and ‘Un<derstanding?>’; fols 147r, 149r, 151r: ‘[Intell] Un’; fol. 152r: ‘Un’. In addition, references to the Essay appear at the top of fol. 146r: ‘l. 4. c [2\[.\]4 [21] 2\[2\]1; fol. 147r: l. 4. c. [2\[.\]4] [21] 2\[2\]1; f151r: l. 4. c. [2\[.\]4 [21] 2\[2\]1.

[8] Catchwords. ‘Thus I thinke’ has no catchwords, but ‘Of Ethick in General’ has.

[9] Scribes/Ink. Scribe of ‘Thus I think’, fols 143-144/153-154: Locke. Scribes of ‘Of Ethick in General, fols 145-152: Locke and Brouwnover, [CHECK] in whose hand appears in the passage copied from Draft B (see [6]; this hand continues for almost a complete page after the fragment taken from Draft B. [CHECK - WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?] Ink of fols 143-144 and 153-154 seems predominantly black, while the ink on fols 145-153 is rather brown.

[10] Printed notices. P. Long, A Summary Catalogue of the Lovelace Collection of the Papers of John Locke in the Bodleian Library (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1959), p. 29. See also John Attig, ‘John Locke Bibliography’ - ‘John Locke Manusripts’ [online]. Available from: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/locke/index.html#jca [cited 22 June 2007].

[11] Miscellanea (MS). Internal relation between fols 143-144/153-154 (‘Thus I think’) and fols 145-152 (‘Of Ethick in General’). There is no evidence to suggest that the leaves of the two texts were were originally quired together. The different quire patterns (see [5]), size of the folios and puncture patterns (see [4]) all suggest that MS c.28 fols 143-154 comprises not one but two manuscripts, the first consisting of fols 143-144 and 153-154 containing ‘Thus I thinke’, formula A4; and the second consisting of fols 145-152, containing ‘Of Ethick in General’, formula A-D2.

Miscellanea (Text)

[12] Transcription included in King 2 [362], pp. 122-133; [Locke [3784] (ed. Nuovo), pp. 9-14 (see also p. xxvii); and in Locke [1452] (ed. Goldie), 297-304.

[13] Section 7 contains a reference to Book II, Chapter 24 of Draft C of the Essay, ‘Of the Modes of Pleasure & Pain’, which indeed agrees with the subject matter of section 7 ‘Of Ethick in General’. Chapter 24 of Draft C would reappear largely unchanged as Chapter xx of Book II of the first and subsequent editons of the Essay.

[14] Date. Locke’s reference in ‘Of Ethick in General’ to a chapter of Draft C (see [13] certainly means that ‘Of Ethick in General’ was written after he had finished the chapter in question of Draft C. Draft C is dated ‘1685’. Moreover, the only possible reason for Locke to continue referring to a passage in Draft C once he would have available the finished text of the Essay, would have been the absence of this passage in the definitive text of the Essay. But we have already seen ([13]) that chapter II.24 of Draft C returned largely unchanged as chapter XX.xx in the first edition of the Essay. So, Locke’s reference to Draft C rather than the finished version of Essay in ‘Of Ethicks’, probably means that ‘Of Ethicks’ was written when the finished version of the Essay was not yet available. Locke finished the Essay in 1687 (see Rogers, ‘History of the Writing of the Essay’ [CHECK DEFINITIVE REFERENCE]. The year 1687 as terminus ad quem for ‘Of Ethicks’ agrees with the evidence provided by the numbers subsequently given by Locke to ‘Of Ethick’ as a chapter of Book IV of the Essay (see[7]): 2? - 24 - 21 - 22 - 21. The numbers 24 and 22 dare especially revealing. The last chapter of book IV in the first edition of the Essay is xx; inclusion of the chapter on ‘Enthusiasm’ would raise this number to xxi in the fourth editon, but at no time after the completion of the Essay has there been a chapter IV.22, let alone a chapter IV.24. So, the chapter numbers assigned to ‘Of Ethicks’ confirm its status as a fragment written before the Essay was finished (see also [15] below).

[15] Relation between ‘Of Ethick in General’ (MS c.28 fols 145-152) and the division of the sciences (MS c.28 fols 155-156). Although these two texts are currently presented as two separate manuscripts, there is clear proof that they originally belonged together. The sheets have the same size; the same lay-out in the from of a a single vertical pencil line, creating an inner margin; the same distance of XXX mm [CHECK] between this line and the spine (cf [4] and [EMPTY REF]). And they probably have the same watermark (cf [3] and [EMPTY REF]). In addition, compare the series consisting of the subsequent chapter numbers assigned to the division of the sciences, 23 – 20 – 21 – 20 (see [EMPTY REF]), with the series assigned to ‘Of Ethick’, 2? - 24 – 21 – 22 – 21 (see [7]). The last four numbers in the five-number series of ‘Of Ethick’ exactly match the four numbers in the series of the division of the sciences, augmented by one. Apparently ‘Of Ethick’ was projected as a chapter following the division of the sciences. In the first and subsequent edition of the Essay, a division of the sciences is the last chapter while there is no longer chapter ‘Of Ethick’. This provides an extra argument for the assumption (see [14]) that ‘Of Ethick’ was composed before Locke completed the final version of the Essay. More speculative but also more intriguing questions are prompted by the following two facts. Firstly, at the bottom of fol 156v of the division of the sciences, Locke wrote ‘58 sheets’ (see [EMPTY REF] ), which could very well be a statement of the total number of sheets of a manuscript X with additions to the Essay that ends with the division of the sciences but that does not yet (given the evidence of the series of chapter numbers) comprise ‘Of Ethick’. Secondly, at the bottom of fol. 145v, i.e. at the start of ‘Of Ethick’, we find the number ‘58’ (see [5]). Could this number have been used to connected ‘Of Ethick’ to the previous ‘58 sheets’ of ‘MS X’? Is it possible to find traces that show that the quire of the division of the sciences was ever stitched to other quires? And is it possible to find such traces in the quires of ‘Of Ethick? [RECHECK IN THE BODLEIAN; THE PROBLEM, HOWEVER, IS THAT THE SPINES OF MS c.28 FOLS 143-154 ARE INACCESSIBLE DUE TO PASTING BY THE BODLEIAN LIBRARIAN.] Finally, Draft C only gives the first two books of the Essay; ‘MS X’ was probably written shortly after (the first two books of) Draft C; and ‘MS X’ concludes with the projected last chapter (or rather the last two chapters if ‘Of Ethick’ is included) of the fourth book of the Essay. What does this imply for the relation between Draft C and ‘MS X’?

Alternative dates: see Sargentich, ‘Locke and Ethical Theory’, p. 24: ‘Although the first manuscript piece, “Morality”, is undated, since it is highly hedonistic, it was probably written relatively late in Locke’s life.’ But ‘pleasure’ is a pervasive element in practically all of Locke’s ethical fragments, so its appearance does not contribute much towards dating the fragment. Goldie, in Locke, Political Essays, p. 267 suggests as dates c. 1677-1678 [WHY?].
The last part of this text, captioned under ‘Law’, is dated c. 1693 by Goldie, in Locke, Political Essays, p. 328 [WHY?].
On the same grounds Locke probably ordered Brownouver to copy sections 10 and 11 from Draft B rather than from Draft C, i.e. because these passages were not any longer contained by Draft C. [CHECK] Locke’s long quotation from Draft B in ‘Of Ethick’ does not mean that ‘a part of it must have been written as early as 1671’ (i.e. the date of composition of Draft B), see Nuovo, ‘Introduction’ to Locke, Writings on Religion
See von Leyden, introduction to Locke, Essays on the Law of Nature, pp. 69-70.
It is possible that Locke deliberately refrained from giving a number to 27 bis, since it seems to continue a sentence started in paragraph 27; a similar continuity, however, can be noticed between pars 33 and 34, and yet Locke did assign two separate numbers to these two textual units.
It is possible that Locke deliberately refrained from giving a number to 27 bis, since it seems to continue a sentence started in paragraph 27; a similar continuity, however, can be noticed between pars 33 and 34, and yet Locke did assign two separate numbers to these two textual units.
Cf. Heawood, Watermarks, Nr. 3138.
For a similar use of pins by Locke, see his Journal for 1690, MS Locke f.10, pp. 24-25.
For a similar use of the word ‘Understanding’ for a quire that contains additions to the Essay, see MS Locke c.28, fols. 115-116.
The main instances of use of this different ink are listed in the annotation to the text.
The place that Locke prescribes here is indeed the place that it has been given both in C-1706 and in the present edition; this place results once his instructions in MS e.1 pp. 113-114 concerning the introductory paragraphs on pp. 114-116 of the same MS are carried out (see below, [54]).
In the present edition, this sentence is given in the collation of MS e.1 with MS c.28.
Corr. 2243, VI, p. 87.
Corr. 2262, VI, p. 123.
Corr. 2310, VI, p. 190.
Corr. 2340, VI, pp. 243-244: ‘J’avois resolu de faire quelques additions, dont j’ai déja composé quelques unes qui sont assez amples, et qui auroint pû <paroitre> en leur place dans la quatriéme Edition que le Libraire se dispose à faire, Et j’aurois voluntiers satisfait a votre desir ou au desir d’aucun de vos amys en y <inserant> les preuves de l’unité de Dieu qui se presentent à mon Esprit. Car je suis enclin à croire que l’Unité de Dieu peut etre aussi evidemment demonstre que son existance; et qu’elle peut etre établie sur de preuves qui ne laisseront aucun suject d’en douter. Mais j’aime la Paix, et il y a des gens dans le monde qui aiment si fort les criailleries et les vaines contestations, que je doute, si je dois leur fournir de nouveaux sujets de dispute.’
Corr. 2624, VI, p. 704: ‘On m’a dit que vous aviez encore composé un autre Ouvrage de Philosophie de la maniere de conduire son esprit dans la Recherche de la Verité. Si cela est, vous courez risque de’être un peu importuné de le publier, et de me voir dans le nombre de ces importuns. Il n’y a point de livres, dont le Public ait tant besoin que de ceux-là.’
Corr. 2649, VI, pp. 758-759.
Guenellon, born in France, was one of the principal doctors of the St. Pieters Gasthuis in Amsterdam from 1684 to 1720. He and Locke had become acquainted in Paris around 1678 and met regularly again during the latter’s exile in the Dutch Republic. Cf. Corr. 831, II, p. 738, n. 2.
Corr. 2785, VII, p. 156, n. 1.
Corr. 2743, VII, p. 105: ‘Monsieur le Clerc m’a dit que vous travaillez a un nouvel ouvrage, pour decouvrir les maladies de l’esprit, c’est une nouvelle obligation que le public vous aura, quel bien ne sera ce pas, si vous pouvez guerir les hommes de leur fausses idees, et les mettre par methode dans le chemin de la verité!’
Corr. 2835, VII, pp. 212-213: ‘mes amis qui ont lu vótre traitté de l’entendement me demandent souvent, sur ce qu’on leur a fait esperer, si vos reflexions sur les erreurs de lentendement verront bien tost le jour. il jugent par l’excellence de ce que vous avez publiez, que le public vous en sera fort obligé.’
Corr. 3429, VIII, pp. 171-172. De Beer assumes that the MS is MS Locke e.1. The Observator was a newspaper.
Corr. 3647, VIII, pp. 412-414.
Yolton, John Locke a Descriptive Bibliography, nr. 249, p. 299.
Cf. Essay, notes on p. 640 and p. 454 respectively.
Nidditch, ‘Introduction’ to Essay, p. xxix.
The first entry on fol. 69v and the entries on fol. 70r are in the hand of Locke, who can be seen here initiating his new servant in the art of book-keeping.
MS Locke c.24, fol. 285r, Corr. 3188, VII, pp. 676-677.
The identification of Shaw as the scribe of MS c.28 fols. 121-130 is mine; however, credit for the identification of Shaw as the scribe of MS e.1 pp. 210-216 as well, and the subsequent use of Locke’s ledgers to test (and confirm) both hypotheses goes to Prof. M.~A. Stewart. In addition, Prof. C. Dekker was so kind as to submit both hypotheses to careful paleographical scrutiny; he could confirm that both hands belong to the same person.
Cf. Greetham, Textual Scholarship, p. 172 and pp. 211-213.
Cf. Locke’s farewell letter to P. King, 4 and 25 October 1704, Corr. 3647, VIII, p. 416: ‘If my Paraphrase and notes on the Ephesians are not wholy transcribed before I dye (as I fear they will not. For however earnestly I have pressed it again and again I have not been able to prevaile with Will to dispatch the two first Chapters in three months) you must get it to be transcribed out of my filed papers after I am dead, that so it may be in a condition to be in a condition to be printed. Will after all I think be the fitest to transcribe them because he can read my hand and knows my way of writeing with the use of the references.’
Corr. (no number) VIII, p. 424.
MS Locke c.35, fol. 6v.
Corr. 3647, VIII, p. 417, n. 1.
MS f.10, p. 495.
MS c.1, p. 342.
MS f.10, p. 492.
Op. cit. no page number.
This fact confirms my assertion that MS c.28 did not function as printer’s copy for C-1706.
For what probably amounts to an internal reference to the Essay that was left unchanged, see par. 64: ‘this essay’.
That pp. 52-56 give a part of the Conduct seems to have escaped Long, A Summary Catalogue, although he remarks, p. 30: ‘The draft [containing both the Essay-part and the Conduct-part] is longer than the printed version [containing only the Essay-part].’
‘Introduction’ to C-1996, p. vii.
Cf. Heawood, Watermarks, Nr. 3138.
For a similar use of pins by Locke, see his Journal for 1690, MS Locke f.10, pp. 24-25.
For a similar use of the word ‘Understanding’ for a quire that contains additions to the Essay, see MS Locke c.28, fols. 115-116.
The main instances of use of this different ink are listed in the annotation to the text.
Cf. Heawood, Watermarks, Nr. 3138.
For a similar use of pins by Locke, see his Journal for 1690, MS Locke f.10, pp. 24-25.
For a similar use of the word ‘Understanding’ for a quire that contains additions to the Essay, see MS Locke c.28, fols. 115-116.
The main instances of use of this different ink are listed in the annotation to the text.
Cf. Heawood, Watermarks, Nr. 3138.
For a similar use of pins by Locke, see his Journal for 1690, MS Locke f.10, pp. 24-25.
For a similar use of the word ‘Understanding’ for a quire that contains additions to the Essay, see MS Locke c.28, fols. 115-116.
The main instances of use of this different ink are listed in the annotation to the text.
Cf. Heawood, Watermarks, Nr. 3138.
For a similar use of pins by Locke, see his Journal for 1690, MS Locke f.10, pp. 24-25.
For a similar use of the word ‘Understanding’ for a quire that contains additions to the Essay, see MS Locke c.28, fols. 115-116.
The main instances of use of this different ink are listed in the annotation to the text.
Cf. Heawood, Watermarks, Nr. 3138.
For a similar use of pins by Locke, see his Journal for 1690, MS Locke f.10, pp. 24-25.
For a similar use of the word ‘Understanding’ for a quire that contains additions to the Essay, see MS Locke c.28, fols. 115-116.
The main instances of use of this different ink are listed in the annotation to the text.
Cf. Heawood, Watermarks, Nr. 3138.
For a similar use of pins by Locke, see his Journal for 1690, MS Locke f.10, pp. 24-25.
For a similar use of the word ‘Understanding’ for a quire that contains additions to the Essay, see MS Locke c.28, fols. 115-116.
The main instances of use of this different ink are listed in the annotation to the text.