He that hath wife and children hath given hostages to fortune, for they are impediments to great enterprises, either of virtue or mischief. Certainly the best works—and of greatest merit for the public—have proceeded from the unmarried or childless men, which both in affection and means have married and endowed the public. Yet it were great reason that those that have children should have greatest care of future times, unto which they know they must transmit their dearest pledges. Some there are, who though they lead a single life, yet their thoughts do end with themselves and account future times impertinences. Nay, there are some other that account wife and children but as bills of charges. Nay more, there are some foolish, rich, covetous men that take a pride in having no children, because they may be thought so much the richer. For perhaps they have heard some talk, “Such an one is a great rich man,” and another except to it, “Yea, but he hath a great charge of children,” as if it were an abatement to his riches. But the most ordinary cause of a single life is liberty, especially in certain self-pleasing and humorous minds, which are so sensible of every restraint, as they will go near to think their girdles and garters to be bonds and shackles.
Unmarried men are best friends, best masters, best servants but not always best subjects, for they are light to run away; and almost all fugitives are of that condition. A single life doth well with churchmen, for charity will hardly water the ground where it must first fill a pool. It is indifferent for judges and magistrates, for if they be facile and corrupt, you shall have a servant five times worse than a wife. For soldiers, I find the generals commonly in their hortatives put men in mind of their wives and children, and I think the despising of marriage among the Turks maketh the vulgar soldier more base. Certainly wife and children are a kind of discipline of humanity; and single men, though they may be many times more charitable because their means are less exhausted, yet on the other side, they are more cruel and hardhearted (good to make severe inquisitors) because their tenderness is not so oft called upon. Grave natures, led by custom, and therefore constant, are commonly loving husbands; as was said of Ulysses, “He preferred his old wife to immortality.” Chaste women are often proud and forward, as presuming upon the merit of their chastity. It is one of the best bonds both of chastity and obedience in the wife, if she think her husband wise, which she will never do if she find him jealous. Wives are young men’s mistresses, companions for middle age, and old men’s nurses. So as a man may have a quarrel to marry when he will. But yet he was reputed one of the wise men that made answer to the question when a man should marry: “A young man not yet, an elder man not at all.” It is often seen that bad husbands have very good wives, whether it be that it raiseth the price of their husband’s kindness when it comes—or that the wives take a pride in their patience. But this never fails if the bad husbands were of their own choosing, against their friends’ consent, for then they will be sure to make good their own folly.
Canadian subscribers add $10; All other international subscribers add $40.
Comments Post a Comment »
Why do we still revere this old reprobate? He was writing during a period when the Church had relatively recently cast off the bonds of celibacy, and they had been the guardians of knowledge and education from the Dark Ages. Today we can clearly state that most important and influential men were in fact married with children from science to politics, if this really needs to be said at all. So should this piece really of interest to anyone but Elizabethan obscurists, because all it does is elevate the antiquated ideas of the affluent Elizabethans who were still having a fresh love affair with the Ancient Greeks? Frankly I don't find it amusing, and nor would you if you were with the 50% that were still facing 30% less income in the present day.
Plato and his ilk have had a toxic effect, particularly on British culture to this day. Greek "culture" was based entirely on their slave economy. The best ideas of the Ancient Greeks were stolen from cultures already in decline or that they had decimated and enslaved, destroying their indiginous language, and rewriting their religion and their history in the process, so we can only speculate what those cultures held, and archeologists are yearly having their assumptions exploded. The fact that the Romans imported almost all of Greece's slaves and continued to have a thriving culture centuries after the Greeks were left to fester (pretty much explaining their current attitudes and conditions) only helps confirms this hypothesis.
Bacon is a prime example of the modern need to replace religious saints with secular ones. He said and did nothing new or of consequence for the modern student, and indeed most of his opinions reflect a force for reaction, simply replacing the divine hierarchy with an academic one. I am sure that today he would be promoting eugenics. Paradigm shifts in science and technology have come largely from amateurs or people outside the establishment, which he detested the idea of. I very much agree with those that argue that the sole reliance on institutionalized science which he spearheaded has led to less imagination, and more corruption and entropy.
Posted by Greta on Wed 15 Feb 2012