Berkeley Newsletter

Number 1	October 1977

Editors:

E. J. Furlong and David Berman
Philosophy Department, Trinity College, Dublin

Contents

Editors’ Note 	   1
The Rev. Dr A. A. Luce 	   2
The International Berkeley Society 	   3
Roland Hall: ‘New Words’ in Berkeley’s writings 	   4
David Berman: Berkeley’s letter to H. Clarke 	   9
Bertil Belfrage: A new dating of Berkeley’s Draft Introduction 	 10
Reproduction of folio 17 of Berkeley’s Draft 	 12

© Contributors 1977

The Berkeley Newsletter is sponsored by the Royal Irish Academy
and the Philosophy Department, Trinity College, Dublin

Editors’ note

The Berkeley newsletter will list items of Berkeley interest which have not been included in Jessop’s Bibliography of George Berkeley (2nd ed. revised and enlarged, The Hague, 1973), or in “A bibliography of George Berkeley, 1963-1974” by Turbayne and Appelbaum (Journal of the history of philosophy, January, 1977).
Authors wishing to have their books, articles or notes listed should send a copy of the requisite information to the editors, who would be grateful for any other information relating to Berkeley publications.
It is hoped also to include notes on Berkeleian topics. Because of production costs a note should normally not exceed 1000 words. Contributions should be type written.
The Berkeley newsletter is to appear once a year.
The editors are grateful to Mr Roland Hall for much advice in preparing this first number.

The Rev. A. A. Luce, M.C. D.D.
Berkeley Professor of Metaphysics in University of Dublin

Readers may have heard of the death on 28 June 1977 of Dr A.A.Luce. He died as the result of a violent assault, by a mentally disturbed youth, while taking his daily walk. He was in his 95th year.
Obituary notices appeared in the Times and the Irish Times on June 29th.
A few weeks before his death Dr Luce had agreed that an unpublished paper written for a staff seminar in 1969 should be offered to Hermathena. It is entitled ‘The living thing’ and breaks new ground. Berkeley’s world consisted of mind and ideas. Where are we to place birds, flowers etc.? Dr Luce searches Berkeley’s writings for an answer to this question.
Hermathena is to publish a bibliography of his work.

The International Berkeley Society

After spending “a long time blundering about the ocean” George Berkeley and his party eventually arrived in January 1729 at Newport, Rhode Island, en route for Bermuda where he intended to found a missionary college.
He had still to receive a promised government grant of £ 20,000 from London. While awaiting this grant he bought a farm not far from Newport and named the farmhouse Whitehall. When it became clear that the grant would not be paid, he decided on advice to return to England. He sold his Newport farm, and gave the proceeds to Yale for the founding of scholarships. On returning to England he sent large gifts of books to Yale and Harvard. He made many American friends. Berkeley College, Yale and Berkeley, California are named after him. M. C. Tyler in his Three men of letters refers to “our great debt to one of the wisest, friendliest and helpfulest of European visitors who ever touched on these shores.”
1979 being the 250th anniversary of Berkeley’s arrival in Rhode Island, it was decided that the occasion should be suitably marked. A representative planning committee, with Professor Raymond Houghton, of Rhode Island College, as president, was formed. An initial conference was held at Newport from Friday, 28 April to Sunday, 1 May, 1977. There were various Berkeley-Newport events, including a service in Trinity Church, where Berkeley frequently preached. Professor E. J. Furlong lectured on “Berkeley as philosopher.”
The conference marked the birth of The International Berkeley Society. Later events are being planned in Newport for 1978-9.

“New Words” in Berkeley’s Writings

Roland Hall
University of York

Was Berkeley an inventor of words? The question is not easy to answer, because the words or senses that — so far as we know — appear for the first time in his writings may have been borrowed from sources not yet identified. In that case, from which writers does Berkeley borrow words?
As a step towards answering these questions, I provide below a list of words, and senses of words, that are first recorded in the Oxford English Dictionary from the writings of Berkeley. (The senses of words are marked by their O.E.D. sense-numbers.) Whenever I have found a word in an earlier author, I append that information. Readers can perhaps find other instances. It is frequently possible to antedate the O.E.D.
The list is not supposed to be exhaustive, either in the sense of containing all words that the O.E.D. reports first from Berkeley (though I have included all those known to me), or in the sense of containing all “new uses” in Berkeley’s writings. Unlike my investigation of new words in Locke, this note is not the result of a complete reading of the author’s works. It mainly stems from the perusal of the O.E.D. made in the course of that other investigation.1
References and abbreviations are taken from the O.E.D., and are in its style, though de-italicized. My own comments are in square brackets.

acutangular, a. Obs. 

alto-relievo
Antiphologistic, sb.
	1732 Minute Philos. II.93. [The reference is wrong: it should be VII.297.]
1717 in Fraser Life (1871) 550.
1744 Siris [§] 59.	

a posteriori )
a priori       )
arenation
banking, vbl.sb
caricatura Obs.2B
characterize 4
characterizer
convergency
convertibly
counter-pillar [Counter-8]
curvilinear
disembrangle, v. Obs.

divergency
evasive 2
free-writing [Free D.1c]
hamate
haziness sb.
homoiusousian sb.
igniform, a. rare.
ill-coloured 3

immaterialism
impote, v. Obs. rare -1

indecisive

infinitesimal. a.
insular, sb.
interpunctuation
materialist, sb.2
minimum 3
minutely 2	1710 Princ.Hum.Knowl. §21. [Several examples have been  found in earlier authors.]
1717 in Fraser Life (1871) 587.
1735 Querist (L).
1732 Alciphr.V. §20.
1744 Siris §191.
1732 Alciphr.V. §20.
1709 Th.Vision §35.
1710 Princ.Hum.Knowl. I. §142.
1717 Tour in Italy §14.
1710 Princ.Hum.Knowl. Introd. §10.
1726 Let. to Prior 19 July Wks. 1871 IV.130. [cf Principles §98, I am... embrangled in inextricable difficulties.]
1709 Th.Vision §6.
1744 Siris §107.
1732 Alciphr.II. §6.
1744 Siris §227.
1709 Th.Vision §71
1732 Alciphr, VII. §12.
1744 Siris §322.
1749 Let. to Prior 2 Feb. in Fraser Life viii (1871) 319.
1713 Hylas & Phil. III. Wks.1871 I.352.
1721 Let, to R.Nelson 6 Oct. in Fraser Life iv (1871) 93. [The marking means, no other example was known to the O.E.D. editors.]
1726 Let. to T.Prior 12 Nov. in Fraser Life iv (1871) 137.
1710 Princ.Hum.Knowl. §132.
1744 Siris §109.
1717 Jrnl.Tour Italy 7 Jan., Wks. 1871 IV. 513.
c 1705 Commonpl. Bk. Wks. 1871 IV. 472.
1709 Th.Vision §54
1732 Alciphr. I. §10.	

nihilarian Obs. rare -1
outness

overbearing, ppl. a.2
overdraw 4. Banking.
province 8

rabbit-hole
radious, a. Obs.1b
reduced 2d
refractive lb
refractive 2a
repel 5c
repellent 2
rise, sb. 5c
roadsman
rooted 2c
roving, ppl.a.4
school-ethics
self-determined
Shabby 3. ta. Obs.rare -1
shelf lc
sofa 2
soluble 5
stay-maker
stinted 3b
strigose. a1 Obs.
stubbed 4+b	1705 Commonpl. Bk. Wks. 1871 IV. 426.
1709 Th.Vision §46; 1710  Princ. Hum. Knowl. §43. [B. also uses the word at Th. Vision §126 and §154, and in the First Dialogue; an earlier use, in T.Taylor trans- lation of Malebranche, has been reported by Luce, Berkeley and Malebranche (1934) p.46 and by Conroy in Philosophy 1968, p.239.]
1732 Alciphr.VI. §32.
1734 Let. to Prior 30 Apr., Wks.1871 IV.227.
1709 The.Vision §115; 1710 Princ. Hum. Knowl. §101. This sense occurs earlier in Locke, Essay IV.xxi. §5, The three great Provinces of the intellectual World.
1705 Cave of Dunmore in Fraser Life (1871) 507.
1709 Th.Vision §90; 1733 Th.Vision Vind. §50.
1732 Alciphr. VI. §22
1709 Th.Vision §34.
1717 Jrnl. Tour Italy 19 Sept., Wks. 1871 IV. 589.
1744 Siris §227.
1744 Siris §237.
1721 Prev. Ruin Gt.Britain Wks. 1871 III. 211.
1741 in Lett. C’tess Suffolk (1824) II.180.
1744 Siris §119
1725 Proposal Wks. 1871 III. 227.
1710 Princ.Hum.Knowl. I.§100. 145.
1732 Alciphr. VII. §22.
1705 Cave of Dunmore Wks. 1871. IV. 504.
1732 Alciphr. II.§24.
1717 Tour of Italy Wks. 1871 IV. 530.
c 1705 in Fraser Life (1871) 422.
1730 Let.Wks. 1871 IV. 172
1710 Princ.Hum.Knowl. §81.
1708 Commonpl. Bk. Wks. 1871 IV. 478.
1744 Siris §105.	

subsultive, a. rare.
suggest 4
sweetishness
tangible 3
tar-water
tendency
trachea 2. Bot.
trajet
treatment 3
twenty-four 2
unamicable
uncemented
uncultivated lb
undefinablenessundoubling 2unfair 2

unguardedlyuniversality 2bvegetate lbvigil 5virtuoso 3vulnerary lcwell-connectedwell-judgedwidespreadwrong-headedyoungster 3	1750 in Gentl.Mag. XX. 167/1.
1709 Th.Vision §25; Th.Vision Vind. §39.
1752 Th.Tar-Water Wks. 1789 II.645.
1709 Th.Vision §96.
1740-1 Let.T.Prior 8 Feb.; 1744 (title).
1732 Alciphr. II. §21.
1744 Siris §32.
1741 in Fraser Life viii. (1871) 268.
1744 Siris §95.
1735 Querist §125.
1732 Serm.to S.P.G. Wks. 1871 III.245
1717 Jrnl. Tour Italy 28 May, Wks. 1871 IV.552.
1725 Proposal Wks. 1871 III.227.
? 1705 in Fraser Life (1871) 437.
1735 Free-think. in Math. §1
1713 Hylas & Phil.II. Wks. 1871 I.319.
[An earlier use, in 1700, is in Locke, Essay IV. iii. 6 (ed.4).]
1713 Guard. No.3 P1.
1712 Pass. Obed. Wks. 1871 III.138.
1744 Siris §177.
1747 Tar-water in Plague Wks. 1871 III.481.
1743 in Fraser Life viii. (1871) 289.
1744 Siris §61.
1734 Analyst ii.5.
1725 Proposal Wks. III.230.
1705 Commonpl. Bk. Wks. 1871 IV.434.
1: 1732 Alciphr. VI. §26; 2: 1735 Querist §436
1732 Alciphr. VII. §20.	

Each word appears in context, of course, in the quotations in the O.E.D. have not generally checked the O.E.D. quotations against the originals.

Going beyond the O.E.D.

It is sometimes possible to discover, even in the main works of so celebrated an author as Berkeley, an earlier use of a word than any that the O.E.D. has managed to record. In a very rapid search of the Principles and the Dialogues, I have come up with the following:
generalize. O.E.D. a1751 -. 1710 BERKELEY Princ. Hum. Knowl. Introd. §11. Men who use Language are able to Abstract or Generalize their Ideas.
immaterialist [O.E.D. 1724 -.] 1713 BERKELEY Hylas & Phil. III (Jessop edn.) 254. It is not .. to be expected, that any man, whether materialist or immaterialist, should have exactly just notions of the Deity.
inactive [O.E.D. 1725 -.] 1710 BERKELEY Princ.Hum.Knowl. §39. The Objects of Sense Exist only in the Mind, and are withal thoughtless and inactive. [I have found an earlier use, Power in 1664.]
undulatory, a. [O.E.D. 1723 -.] 1710 BERKELEY Hylas & Phil. III (Jessop edn.) 182. The latter is merely a vibrative or undulatory motion in the air.
unperceiving, a. [O.E.D. 1723 -.] 1710 BERKELEY Princ.Hum.Knowl. §7. Now for an Idea to Exist in an unperceiving Thing is a manifest Contradiction. §9 Neither They nor their Archetypes can Exist in an unperceiving Substance. §41 No Body will pretend that real Pain either is, or can possibly be, in an unperceiving Thing.

Berkeley’s Letter to H. Clarke
D. Berman

The following letter by Berkeley to Dr Henry Clarke, Vice Provost of Trinity College, Dublin, has never been completely published. It was first published in part — from “I would not suppose ...” to “... being with sincere regard” — by J. H. Bernard in Peplographia Dublinensis (London, 1902), p. 77 note, and reprinted by Dr Luce in volume viii of the Works of George Berkeley, p. 276. According to Bernard the letter was “in the possession of the Bishop of Ripon and was written in 1745...”. From the precise date of this letter (now available) we can see that the intended visit to Dublin discussed in our letter, is the same as that alluded to by Berkeley in a letter to Gervais of 24 Feb. 1746 (Works, viii, pp. 283-4). The autograph letter to Clarke is now in the Lambeth Palace Library (Ms. 1719, f.67). I am grateful to the Archbishop of Canterbury and Trustees of the Library for permission to publish it.

Revd Sir,	Cloyne March 24 1745-6

It is now several weeks since I received a letter from you which supposed my going to Dublin. I had indeed for some time past projected such a journey. But an illness gotten by cold had left me so tender that I could not venture my self on the road. The same cause still renders my journey doubtful. But I would not suppose your affairs are at all the worse for my not being in towne; for, to speak the truth, I could have been of no use with my Lord Lieutenant, unless he had given me a decent opportunity of speaking to the point, by consulting or advising with me about it: a thing which I had no right to expect. I have been told his excellency expressed a particular esteem for you publickly at the castle, on occasion of the compliment you made him on his first arrival. This personal prepossession in your favour, grounded on his own sense of your merit, is in my opinion worth twenty recommendations, even to those great men in power who alone have a right to make them. To conclude I wish you all success in your undertakings being with sincere regard

Revd Sir,
     Your faithful &
          Obedient Servt
               George Cloyne.

A New Dating of Berkeley’s Draft Introduction
Bertil Belfrage
Lund University

The manuscript of what Professor Jessop has called the Draft Introduction to Berkeley’s Principles (Ms No. 453 at Trinity College, Dublin) is in its first composition very carefully written; even italics are written out, catchwords are added and corrections are rare. The conclusion is that the Draft was originally intended to be printed in its first, unrevised, stratum.1 Later, however, Berkeley revised it, and his changes, no longer very neatly written, were such that he could hardly give it to a printer without copying it anew from beginning to end. Another observation is that there are dates written in the margin from Nov. 15 to Dec. 18, 1708. These dates mark daily portions (Sundays excluded) mostly of about one page. According to the received view, these dates in the margin were included in the first stratum of the Draft, thus dating this manuscript as having been written at the end of 1708.2
But it is clear that these dates were not intended to be printed; and, reminding ourselves that, normally nothing is included in a manuscript one sends to a printer but what is intended to be printed, my conclusion is that the dates belong to some later stratum of the Draft Introduction, not to the first, as we have all — myself included — hitherto taken for granted.
So far, I have argued from the following premisses:
(1) The Draft Introduction was intended to be printed in its first stratum.
(2) If a manuscript is prepared for printing, then all parts of it are intended to be printed, except, maybe, technical information to the printer.
(3) The dates in the margin were not intended to be printed; neither would they be of the least interest to the printer.
If we accept these premisses, we must also accept their logical consequence:
4) The dates in the margin do not belong to the first, unrevised, stratum of the Draft Introduction.

If they do not refer to the first they belong to some later stratum of the manuscript.
This conclusion is further supported by considering the purpose for which Berkeley may have written those dates: Why should anyone write any such dates in a manuscript intended for publication? But to write a date in the margin of a manuscript being revised or rewritten, is an effective may to indicate where to begin the next day’s work without having to go through already revised material. So whereas the dates fulfil a good purpose in the latter case, it would be quite unreasonable to include them in the first stratum of the manuscript — and this is so even if Berkeley did not intend to print the manuscript in its first stratum.
On this basis my conclusion is that the dates in the margin do not refer to the time when Berkeley wrote his Draft Introduction in its first stratum; thus they refer to some later stratum. If. so, the Draft Introduction is not written at the end of 1708; it is an earlier contribution of Berkeley’s hand.
How much earlier is, at the moment, an open question that could hardly be answered without taking into account other of Berkeley’s early writings