Hobbes's Biblical Beasts: Leviathan and Behemoth Author(s): Patricia Springborg Source: Political Theory, Vol. 23, No.

2 (May, 1995), pp. 353-375 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/191883 . Accessed: 18/10/2011 21:25
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Political Theory.

http://www.jstor.org

BEASTS HOBBES'SBIBLICAL Leviathan and Behemoth

PATRICIA SPRINGBORG Universityof Sydney

Beyond the actual works of nature a poet may now go; but beyond the conceived to possibilityof nature,never.I can allow a Geographer makein the Sea, a Fish or a Ship, mile long, andthinkit done which by the scale of his map wouldbe two or threehundred but for ornament,because it is done withoutthe precinctsof his undertaking; when he it paints an Elephantso, I presentlyapprehend as ignoranceand a plain confession of Terraincognita. Hobbes'sAnswerto Sir William Davenant's DedicatoryPreface to Gondibert,1651, 81.

(1) HOBBES'S BEAST, THE BIBLICAL LEVIATHAN littlediscussed to to In Hobbes's published response Davenant's preface the dedicated him,Hobbes to Gondibert, reproves Davenant, rigorous acolyte who claimsto have learned epistemology his fromHobbes.Ghostsand the spooksareone thing,Hobbessuggests,butto abandon entireWestern fabulous tradition rhetoric poesywasto abandon of and whatdistinguished of civilization fromtherude culture theAmericas. Civilization theworkof is theimagination, and on "fancy," theonlyrestrictions its exercise werethose of appropriateness. is, asweshallshow, There symptomatic inHobbes's irony choiceof themetaphor theelephant. theseventeenth of In century, Leviathan was takenfor a greatship,a crocodile, a whale,andBehemoth an or for The credits Hobbes withlexicalinnoelephant. O4ordEnglish Dictionary vation,as the firstto use the termLeviathan-thebiblicalserpent sea or of a of Satan" monster, hugeshipor person immense powerandthe "great Isaiah27:1-as thesynonym a commonwealth.' for Hobbes's Leviathan is
POLITICAL THEORY, Vol. 23 No. 2, May 1995 353-375 ( 1995 Sage Publications,Inc.

353

354

POLITICAL THEORY/ May 1995

a of rather nature, than a indeeda workof theimagination,creature artifice vouches it. for mortal God,andscripture have considerable attention theiconography on of Commentators focused to believed havebeenproduced to the engraved frontispiece Leviathan, by Andrew underHobbes'ssupervision, perhaps and the the printer Crooke, and former tutorin drawing, the workof Hobbes's acquaintance Charles's Wenceslaus The an of Holler.2 frontispiece engraver depicts image Leviathan, sword crozier, gigantic and his of a kinglike figurewielding bodycomposed thesmallbodies thepeople hisrealm. of of Overhead thebanner flies headline is overearth compares than fromtheBookof Job41:334, "There nopower for of the without to him," conclusion whichis reserved thetext:"acreature Much attention beenfocused less has fear... kingoverallthesonsof pride." of names Leviathan Behemoth, what and in on the significance the biblical have would,in theseventeenth century, beena moststartling usage.Hobbes, and in choosing Leviathan Behemoth histitles,drops as hintsto make enough that it clearto his audience he refersto noneotherthanthe beastsof the familiar fromtheHebrew Apocrypha, and in Theogony associated chiliastic Howdoeshe meanthenames with then?3 And thought theSecond Coming. for doctrine? whatis theirsignificance his religious I In a recentarticle, TracyStrongargues, correctly believe,that"Godis modelof andforpower whichnoneonearth to givengeometry [Hobbes's] because mencannot compare," onlyreadit butsee it. He citesJob38:1-7, that thebeginning thepassage leadsto Hobbes's of headline epigraph:
Then the LordansweredJob out of the tempest:who is this whose ignorantwordscloud Braceyourselfandstandup like a man;I will ask questions,and my design in darkness? you shall answer.Wherewere you when I laid the earth'sfoundations? Tell me, if you know and understand.Who settled its dimensions? Surely you should know. Who stretchedthis measuring-line over it? On what do its supporting pillarsrest?Who set its comer-stone in place, when the morningstars sang together and all the sons of God shoutedaloud?(Job 38:1-7)4

Theinvention geometry credited theancient of is to Egyptians a rapid as methodto recalculate boundaries property washedaway by the annual of innundation the Nile. It was appropriate Godshouldhaveusedthe that in of language geometry theHebrew to theogony establish proprietorship his in anantediluvian world-and trump Egyptians. wasequally the It appropriatethatHobbes should havetaken as geometry proofof his epistemology. If whichlaidthefoundations theworld,belonged thedesigns of geometry, to of Godthat couldbeseen,theBiblebelonged a dispensation sacred to of texts thatcouldbe read,rendering superfluous interventions philosophers the of

/ Springborg HOBBES'S BIBLICALBEASTS

355

So andtheologians. evenJob41:9-11canbegivena more optimistic reading. is Thedivineshowof strength a showandtell:5
Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even in the sight of him? None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to standbefore me? Who hath preventedme, thatI shouldrepayhim? whatsoeveris underthe whole heaven is mine.

as of Leviathan beanimage theabsolutist projected a necessary, may state, almost natural,work of creation.But as a work of creationit is not of to for self-generating likeJob,we mustturn its author thesource its and, the of power.Absolutegovernments, Leviathans this world,from their in to archetypes ancient EgyptandBabylon theirearlymodemtypesin the werealsoconstructed. us see howtheywere Let papacy, Spain,andFrance, whencetheirpowerderives. built,Hobbessays, andthenaskthequestion as to and God'sanswer Jobwas intended to Leviathan Behemoth, perhaps Godswhohavea rolein theschemeof theimmortal are God. imply, mortal and Theyhavetheirowncyclesof generation decayandtheirmaintenance is also a workof art. Leviathan the state,created manin his imageas manis created is in by as of the imageof God,withdivinesanction, indirectly a continuation the or as of workof creation, directly an extension the original Fiat,by which the the worldwas made.Hobbesembroidered metaphor, focusingon the of a "artificiality" the stateby creating figurefor the stateas a speciesof with and Automata, a spring, string, wheelsas heart, nerves, joints,and and as life Soveraignty the "Artificiall Soul,""giving andmotionto the whole In first of body."6 theimportant chapter part2 of Leviathan, chapter "Of 17,
the Causes, Generationand Definitionof a COMMON-WEALTH," Hobbes

notedof thecovenants whichtheartificial by unityof thestateis created and its sovereign "the so in authorized: Multitude united onePerson, calleda is inlatine CIVITAS. is thegeneration that This of COMMON-WEALTH, great or morereverently) that of LEVIATHAN, rather speake (to Mortall God,to the whichwee owe under Immortal God,ourpeaceanddefence."7 this At is Leviathan nolonger bodypoliticbutthesovereign personithe point, who fies it. Returning chapter to theimageof theautomaton "the in 28 and nature and whichare,as it were,theNervesandTendons, of Punishment, Reward; thatmovethelimbesand Hobbes joyntsof a Common-wealth,"8 concluded:
HithertoI have set forth the natureof Man ... togetherwith the great power of his Governour,whom I comparedto Leviathan,takingthat comparisonout of the two last verses of the one and fortiethof Job; where God having set forth the great power of Leviathan, calleth him King of the Proud. There is nothing, saith he, on earth to be

356

POLITICAL THEORY/ May 1995

with so Hee below compared him.Heis made as notto be afraid. seethevery highthing
him; and is King of all the childrenof pride. But because he is mortall,and subject to decay, as all otherEarthlycreatures andbecause thereis thatin heaven,(thoughnot are; on earth)that he should standin fear of, and whose Lawes he ought to obey; I shall in the next following Chaptersspeak of his Diseases, and the causes of his Mortality;and of whatLawes of Naturehe is boundto obey.9

innovation the reading the biblicalLeviathan, in of This is a startling in were in especially an age in whichallegorical interpretations eschewed of of did favour a literal reading thebible.Howprecisely Hobbes expecthis to And audience receivehis Leviathan? howwasit received? be here the A wordof caution between might introduced about distinction of a literalandan allegorical reading theBible.In his surveyof Protestant in writing, TracyStrong "Howto WriteScripture," rightlypointsout the of claimto "know" Bibleandnot the epistemic significance theReformers' as it." rule to merely "interpret" Interpretationanepistemic is post-Kantian, It on or moreaccurately, post-Buber. restsmostgenerally theclaimthatwe neverknowhow farourperceptual andlimitations skewour can categories a ideas.Following lineof thought initiated Hobbes explain we can to how by of from posittheexistence God,as Strong rightly pointsout,thinkers Locke claimed we mayinfer existence something we can that the of to thepresent if the nameit." However, faith-for thatis whatit was-that we canknow the Biblelayundisturbed theseconsiderations, whichrepresented by precisely a extensionof the Protestant philosophic untilthe great epistemic posture, hermeneutic watershed introduced Martin PaulTillich, Reinby Buber, and holdNiebuhr, members theGerman of critical schoolof thelatenineteenth centuries. is anopensecret current andearlytwentieth that hermeneutical (It andphenomenological schoolsowe their insights onceagainto a seachange in biblical onceagainfromtheGerman criticism, school.) A finalwordof caution: claimthat to Reformation commentators believed thatone could"know" Bibleis notto suggestthattheylackedsophistithe cationabout whattheyweredoing-which wasessentially workof "reina terpretation." Reformation exegetes,including Hobbes, knewexactlywhat they were doing becausefor the most partthey were activistsand their methodology institutionally was driven.Up to andincluding Locke,their was to epistemology designed cut the Church general, the clergyin in and out the particular, of theloopbetween authorized version theauthorizing and civil authority.'2Forthisreason, particularly problematic exegesisof obscure andancient texts,liketheBookof Job,waseschewed; where, texts ironically, whosepurposes notso different, Hobbes, were found bestproving his ground forthenewLeviathan.

/ HOBBES'S BIBLICAL Springborg BEASTS 357

(2) REFORMATION COMMENTARY AND BEHEMOTH ON LEVIATHAN

If Hobbes spunhis construction themechanical had of Leviathan of out the Book of Job,amongthe mostcitedandmostglossedbooksof the Old it He in Testament the Reformation, was surelynotdoneinnocently. must that of retranslation and havebeenaware thepurpose Reformation certainly in was reinterpretation to rejectallegorical favourof a literalreadingof because addressed it The the scripture. Bookof Jobwasfavoured precisely with God how theodicy problem: a beneficent maybe reconciled thepower at on of evil. It provided, the sametime, a text enjoining patience those But cautioned afflictedor persecuted. commentators againstmakingtoo of as are. muchof themoredifficult parts thebook,allegorical theyclearly
Job Expovndedby TheodoreBeza, partly in manner of a Commentary, partly in mannerof a paraphrase (1589?) is addressedto Queen Elizabeth

her of Protestants sought protection. is therefore who It on behalf theFrench It statesBehemoth be an one of themostpolitical to readings. verybluntly to elephantand Leviathan be a crocodile. Beza, concedingthe peculiar of the difficulties theBookof Job,makes casefora literal reading referring by of to appropriate standards biblical criticism: thisbooke,thenthewhich "But thereis nonein all theBible,if I be notdeceiued, notMoseshimselfe, no of in manie is greater antiquitie, placesmadeverieobscure vs andhard be to to of vnderstood, partly reason the profoundnes the thingesthemselues of by heredebated mostwise men,andnotto be conceaued eueryone, among of
partly by diuers straunge words & also phrases differing from the pure

Hebrue.""3 cautions He "to against presuming be ouerwise . . . wise aboue that whichis meete," the "the expressing viewthat: wisemenof other nations, whome the Greekescall Philosophers,haue, touching the true vse, merveilouslie it." a he prophaned Striking dark note, observes: "moreouer. . . the abuseof thisSciencehathbredthatdetestable Magick, Art whichis the of as welspring almischeife, alsothat falsediviningAstrologie, hauing which broken bounds trueNatural the of knowledge, entreth the verysecrets into of God,andatthisdayhathbewitched wholeworld."14 the Beza, one of the most sophisticated well readof the Reformation and biblical is commentators,as committed theabandonmenttheallegorical to of of interpretation scripture themostfundamentalist as preacher. forjust And thereasons Hobbes that wouldotherwise endorse: because allegorical constructswere abstractions, created host of monsters phantasms they a and the inhabiting darkregionsof superstition magic,the terrain the and of
papacy,the Spanish,heretics,and relics of gentilism.

358

THEORY/ May 1995 POLITICAL

had in of Englishstudyof "Gentilism," Herbert Cherbury, a pioneering "As statement: faras I canfind,thegreatLeviathan the included enigmatic haveleftus the whether Rabbins to wasknown theJewsonly,tho'I question of it. ThereareseveralReasonsmaybe given,why Fish any Description in in Animals Magnitude."'" plainly thiswork, exceedallother Quite should knewandadmired, whomHobbes and written an antiquarian diplomat by more. and was Leviathan a monster nothing and in with Culverwell, hisElegant Learned Others agreed him.Nathaniel
Discourse of the Light of Nature of 1646, addressingthe question whether

are had are on theLawsof Nature binding beasts, asked"What thoseLawes LeviaLion, by a devouring thatare.observed a rendingand tearing by for Leviathan a beast,andno extraortaking plainly than?"'16-like Herbert, on commentaries thebooksof Joband one dinary in thiscase.Reformation inparticular of interpretations, are condemnatoryallegorical Isaiah uniformly and are thatLeviathan Behemoth of scripture, insisting of thesepassages on oftendiffering whatbeaststheymightbe. Beza simplybeasts,although whichhathcontinued sinceOrigenes euer stated flatly"Iomitthatcustome the senceof thesacred to theframing text time,I saynotof inuerting natural and it.""7 but of certaine allegories, euenof marring peruerting straunge as interpreted demonstrations Thebeasts theBookofJobwereregularly of more."8 George So Abbott exhorts, and simply of divine omnipotence nothing well the Whale[Leviathe [Behemoth].... consider "Consider Elephant to than]""JohnOecolampadius (Halschein), whomBezarefers,headsup He on l'elephant."20 hopesto lay alternative his comments Job40:10,"Voici to as possibilities restwitha reviewof theHebraists well as theReformers to as on the subjectof Job'sbeasts,findingno exception theirtreatment even by suchdiversefiguresas the Hebraists RabbiAbenEzra, animals, Moshe Egyptian, Luther, Thomas and Rabbi the Zwingli, Moshe, Levi,Rabbi makescertainobservations the use of the on Oecolampadius Aquinas.2' of noting derivation the for singular, Behemoth, theelephant, Hebrew plural, He "addition." is one fromtheHebrew verb"Lauah," signifying Leviathan on "tail attributing of thefew to comment Behemoth's stifflike a Cedar,"22 rather to modeof speaking."23 themetaphor, unconvincingly, a "hyperbolic
JohnCalvin,in his Sermons ofMaisterIohnCalvin,vpontheBookeof Iob,24

of the notedalso that"thewordeBehema addressing question Behemoth, that are beastes simplya Beast,andvnder name Oxenandallother signifieth is it Behemoth simplytheplural Behema. of "Neuertheles comprehended";
cannot be coniecturedwhat kinde of beast it is thathee speakethof, except it bee an Elephant,by reason of the hugenesse of that beastes body."The

BIBLICAL BEASTS 359 Springborg / HOBBES'S

"if we not servesa purpose: we werewise ynough, needed to goe hugeness the of men outof ourseluesto behold maiestie God:howbeit mustbe sentto in of thebeastsbicause theirvnthankfulnesse,thattheyknownotGodas he for the "haue need sheweth hymselfevntothem"; thisreason unregenerate vs of & as of suchemirrours aresetbefore herein respect theElephants other commentators Leviathan reads like Reformation likebeasts."25 Calvin, other of divinepower: "it as andBehemoth simpledemonstrations unfathomable
is purposely said, that these Elephantswere created with us . . . so as men

He whentheythinke thereon."26 adds, besidesthemselues mustbe rauished in "likebeast," thiscasea whale.It is a reading is Leviathan simplyanother to of theBookof Jobon whichHobbes's extrapolation thesecular sovereign as here. Leviathan depends, we haveargued forestalls other with Calvin quickly any possible interpretation, a lengthy of discursus thenecessity a literal on interpretation.27
to Thereis one peremptorie reason shewevs thatwe musttakethistextsimplyas it & For how to standeth, notshiftingly. we haveseenheretofore it wasGodsintent teach a to menafter grosseandhomely ownesmallcapacitie, that and maner, according their is his doingthereof to theendthathis mightie should thebetter be vnto power proued
them.28

"As touchingthe worde About Leviathanhe is even more emphatic: the it a Leuiathan, through wholescripture signifieth Whale." he makes But to in someconcession allegorical men to inferthe interpretation, allowing of powerof thedevilfromthestrength thesebeasts.29 Calvin concedes allegorical that certainly interpretations abound,30 so but was biblical criticism strongly thenewProtestant committed disposing to of and them,as relics of Catholicism the powerof the Church interpret to that scripture, he enjoinshis congregation reflecton thewhale,"isit not to anincredible to thynge see so hugea creature, liuingin thewater? Whowere ableto fashion moulde so great, the of huge,andstrong beast."31 a
In fact, in his Commentary vpon the Prophecie of Isaiah, dedicated to

Prince England, of James andPrincess of Henry, son I, Elizabeth, wife, his andperhaps intended a different for Calvin audience, doesgiveanallegorical of not interpretation, making Leviathan onlya figurefortheDevil butalso fortheKingof Egypt. on 27:1 Commenting Isaiah ("In daytheLord that will visit Leuiathan pearcing that Serpent, Leuiathan crooked and that Serpent, withhis soreandgreat mightie and sword: willkilltheDragon is in and that thesea"),he remarks: mineownepartI makeno question by way "For but of Allegorie speakes of Satan his wholekingdome, he here and describing it

360

THEORY/ May 1995 POLITICAL

as of beast." signification Leviathan The of under figure somemonstrous the is a figurefortyrants, Egypt,andSatan quiteexplicit:32
the The Prophetspeakesheereof Gods iudgementin generall,andso comprehends whole kingdomof Satan.For hauingspokenbeforeof the vengeanceof God againsttyrantsand and vnbeleeuerswhich had shed innocentblood, he now passethon further, publisheth the edict it selfe. The word Leuiathan is diuerslieexpounded,but generallieit signifies a serpent,or the whales and fishes of the sea, which are as monstersin regardof their excelliue greatnes.Now howsoeuerthisdescription agreesto the king of Egypt,yet vnder this one he meantto comprehend the enemies of the Church. all

forceof Leviathan and full Luther understood welltheallegorical Martin he In his Magnificat,33 shows how the Bible demonizes"the Behemoth. it of proud, those"forlorn people" theBookof Job:"Sometimes callsthem sometimes who stoptheirearslest theyhear;34 stubborn unicorns;35 adders sometimes sometimes sometimes roaring lions;36 greatimmovable rocks;37 andmuchelse besides." Leviathan Behemoth demonizaand are dragons;3' well in tionstoo:"Equally aretheydepicted Job40 and41, wherethesame means a kindof peoplearecalledBehemoth 40:10ff,41:10ff].Behema [Job but means number suchanimals, other a of in singleanimal, behemoth words, and of a racewhichhasananimal mind, doesnotallowthespirit Godin it."39 In the sixteenth Luther already had of century, given a racialreading the "The Bibledescribes them[Behemoth] havinganeye likethered as terms: is to of dawn,forthere no measure theircunning, theirskinis so tough and thatthey only scoff at a stabor a sting."Referring to Leviathan, now he "the continued: monsters" scalesoverlap, leavenointervening and space; for holdcloselytogether, thespirit Godcannot thesepeople and of enter them."40 sexual harrassment attheUniversity Pennsylvania 1993 of case (Afamous in on the turned whether Hebrew wordfor"water-buffalo" constituted racial a was slur;thewordin question "behema.") It seems then thatReformation commentators well awareof the were for referents Leviathan Behemoth thepowerful and in allegorical statesof ancient But EgyptandAssyria. perhaps because theseallusions implied an immanent of critique secular nation states-alreadyalarmingly fragile,and thereadier persecute, morefragile were-or because Reformto the the they ersdiscouraged apocalyptic speculation-and thesewereapocryphal textstheyfoundit politicto playthemdown.ThisHobbes notwillingto do, was in findingfertilematerial the Book of Job for his mortal commonwealth, personified the sword-wielding by sovereign, workof artifice a bothfearsomeandfragile, mandated Godto reignin historical by time,thatsliverof created theinterstices eternity. in of temporality

/ Springborg HOBBES'S BIBLICALBEASTS

361

CATCHING (3) BRAMHALL LEVIATHAN It wasquitea sheerperversity Hobbes's to makesuchplayof the on part of Job,and,trueto form,he seemedto intendit as a beastsof the Book withBishopJohnBramhall, provocation. When,in a seriesof exchanges to to Bramhall putin printhis objections his religious Hobbeschallenged
doctrine,he offeredhim the title "Behemoth against Leviathan."4' Bramhall,

rebuttal thetheological of of whosesystematic has chapters Leviathan never and to been surpassed, who referred thatworkas "Monstrum horrendum,
counteredwith, "The catching of informe, ingens, cui lumen ademptum,"

or The Whale."42 ironywasnotlostonBramhall LEVIATHAN,theGreat that Hobbes,who arguedso systematically shouldhave againstphantasms, to monster characterize commonwealth.43 resorted a mythical to his Bramhall wasnottheonlycriticto remark thispeculiarity, subject Alexander on the of Drawnoutwitha Hook(1653),buthe was certainly Ross's,Leviathan the He mostthorough. dared Hobbesto showthathe himselfwas not Leviathan-a possibilityon which subsequent commentators, pointingto the resemblance Leviathan's in one of theversions thefrontispiece that head of bears to the author, have speculated.44 Bramhall tauntsHobbes,whose he Leviathan, says, is a man-fish, the Palestinian Dagon,45 like idol rather thana whale-fish, biblical the original:
his Leviathan,or mortalGod, is a meerphantasme his own devising,neitherflesh nor of fish, buta confusionof aman anda whale,engendered his ownbrain:notunlikeDagon in the Idol of the Philistims, a mixtureof a god and a man and a fish. The true literall Liviathanis the Whale-fish.

Bramhall challenges Hobbes rhetor, triedto summon existence the who into a polityby persuasion, invoking classical heroes, Hercules, Pericles, the and proverbial Pythagoras. one sawmoreclearly No thanBramhall brazenthe ness of Hobbes'sheresy.He who in work afterwork had damnedthe opinionated of philosophers the Greekschools for contaminating early with Christianity theirteachings, dared himselfto offeran opinionon the Christian commonwealth convicted as an heresiarch-"asecond that him at Pythagoras, least." Hobbes himself themonster, was among thechildren all of pride, great the Leviathan incarnate:
And for a metaphorical Leviathan,I know none so properto personatethat huge body as T H. himself. The Leviathandoth not take his pastime in the deep with so much freedom, nor behave himself with so much height and insolence, as T H. doth in the Schooles, nor domineerover the lesser fishes with so much scorn and contempt,as he

362

THEORY/ May 1995 POLITICAL

doth over all otherauthours,censuring,branding,contemning,proscribingwhatsoever is contrary his humour; to bustlingand bearingdown before him whatsoevercometh in his way, creatingtruthand falsehoodby the breathof his mouth,by his sole authority, without other reason; A second Pythagorasat least. There have been self-conceited personsin all Ages, butnonethatcouldever Kingit like him over all the chldrenofpride. (Job 41.34.) Ruit, agit, rapit,tundit& prostemit.46

has and Bramhall Hobbes'smeasure knowsthathe can convicthim of
inconsistency:
I have providedthree good harpingirons for my self to dart at this monster,and am resolvedto trymy skill andfortune,whetherI canbe as successfulagainstthis phantastick Leviathan,as they are againstthe trueLeviathan.47

Bramhall's discursus thewhale-fish on Leviathan shaped thestructure is to eachlineof argumentharpoon whichto spear of theological a with rebuttal, morevulnerable he thinks thesmallfrywhoassailhim.The than to Hobbes, of passage mayalsobe readas anelaborate allegory thethreat posedto the unitarystate by nonconformists, sects. Hobbes's namelythe Protestant to heterodoxy opensthedoor, of ironically, theveryproliferation opinion he is most concerned forestall.Bramhall to paintsfrightfulimages of the in consequences the littlemousethat"stealeth thorough Elephants the up to trunke eathis brains, him making diedesperately the mad"; Indian that rat into "creepeth the belly of the gapingCrocodile, knaweth bowels and his and and asunder"; the sword-fish thethrasher-fish join forceswiththe that Greenland fishermen overwhelm to "at Leviathan, lastto draw formidathis ble creature the shore,or to theirship,andslice himin piecesandboile to himin a Cauldron, tunhimupin oil."48 metonymy Leviathan and The of was thesynecdoche thestate. of Hobbeshadoffered his criticstheintolerable to provocation an alleof gorical of interpretationscripture, against which so heavily they enveighedevenashe denied spiritual ghostly the and beingsto whichthey,inconsistent by turn, in subscribed notions thesoul,angelsanddemons.49 of Leviathan's pointwas the spectre countervailing of power.The ghostlypowersof the pope, as King of Fayrieland, wererealenough; as realhadbeen the just demonized powerof pharaonic EgyptandAssyria thefledgling to Israelite state.Is the commonwealth a Leviathan inversion render then by to the papacyanti-Leviathan? Hobbessaw himselfas Leviathan Perhaps with respect the Church, to fish-man demonin the serviceof the state,and and revelledin it, just so long as it did not cost him his head.In the Historia his Ecclesiastica, enchiridion elegaicprose,he nicelyturns metaphor in the of Leviathan. The ancientimperialstates,those mightybeasts,Egypt,

/ Springborg HOBBES'S BIBLICALBEASTS

363

for and are and Assyria, Rome,haveall beenhooked; snares beingprepared a on Ecclesiastica includes longdiscursus theserpent therest.TheHistoria its arts andtheensnaring of thepapacy, hooksandluresof manycolours:50
But now the Pope his end compleatlygains, And leads the People, andtheirPrince,in Chains: Now vast Leviathanthe Hook receives, And Behemothhis woundedNostrilsgrieves: All gently own the Pope's ImperialSway Where'rthe Romaneagles wing theirWay.... No craftyAnglerwill his Artdespise, Thoughin his Nets a scantyProfitlies; And ever busy'd in his small Affairs, He mends his Nets, or strictlyviews his Wares, His Lines new models, or his Hooks surveys, And ev'ry Thingin decentOrderlays; Gay gaudyFlies of ev'ry Sort are seen, and The brightCarnation the lovely Green..... Thereskimmingcross the Streams,with sov'reign Skill, Fishes kill. The pointedHooks th'unwary

was the the of Theinversion Leviathan nowcomplete: Papacy usurps role out with with of ancient Israel, "draw[ing] Leviathan anhookeorhistongue Thosepitiable(but Satanic) a corde," piercingthe nostrilsof Behemoth. the and monsters Egyptian Assyrian states, respectively, personifying ancient and commonwealth, now havegivenway to the greatwhale,the Christian Hobbes's on thebeastsof Job thePopeactstheroleof GodtheFather. play and the of Is goesfarbeyond allegory enters realm blasphemy. it anywonder of themanwas accused heresy?

AND THEGALLIC HERCULES (4) LEVIATHAN

Butperhaps arelookingin thewrongplaceto establish meaning we the The of Leviathan. kinglyfigurewearing four-arched the crown,wielding his of of scepterandsword,naked, bodycomposed the manypersons his overa almost benignly realm, maynotbe "thecoiledone"at all.Presiding modeltownspread beforehim,the spiresof churches the orderly out and of civility, streets model a Leviathan, that whothisfigure wouldseem if is is, a guardian civilization no monster.51 of and Arrayed under insigniaof the civilandecclesiastical, A respectively, symmetrical are cameos. castle power is juxtaposed thearkas seatof power; crownversus mitre, to potent the the and symbols.Over againstthe canonstandsthe divine thunderbolt; the

364

POLITICAL THEORY/ 1995 May

the of and banners battlestandards jostlingcivil powersarepittedagainst dilemmas ecclesiasof Trinitarian threepronged, forks,andthetwo horned The is ticalcontroversy. denouement ineachcasedifferent: theoutcome war, the of civil strife;the courtof excommunication, outcomeof doctrinal and of Who shires, fields,shown malfeasance. is theguardian cities,villages, Is in the frontispiece? it the GodlyPrince,and if so, how could he be
Leviathan?52

Neither is in of Thedepiction Leviathan thefrontispiece counterintuitive. frommedieval a shipnora whale,it is muchmoreanimagedrawn organic is tradition than theories kingship a biblical of image.There a moreobscure in one to whichHobbes maybe appealing, to whichhe makesallusion the mentioned Diodorus by body of the text, andthatis the GallicHercules, the Rhetor Lucian tells and to alluded byApuleius, of whom Syrian Siculus,53 Namedby theCelts"Heracles he sucha strange Ogmios," was old, story.54 and as bald,naked exceptforlion'sskin,wrinkled, "burned blackas canbe, the of like anold sea-dog." he carries equipment Heracles, cluband But the from He thequiver, "isHeracles headtoheelasfarasthatgoes."55 differs and in "That Heracles old of fromthe classicalHeracles a surprising respect: theirsdragsafterhima greatcrowdof menwhoareall tetherd theears" by a fluent Greek, offered in Lucian who to his tongue.56 reports Celticstranger, of to "read [him]theriddle thepicture":57
with in that is WeCeltsdonotagree youGreeks thinking Hermes Eloquence: identify we withit, becausehe is farmorepowerful Hermes.... In general, than we Heracles was consider therealHeracles a wisemanwhoachieved that everything eloquence by as andapplied force.His arrows represent words, suppose, I persuasion his principal make their wounds souls. in keen,sureandswift,which

Not by chance,Hobbesinvokesthe image of the GallicHerculesto describe "Artificiall his tied Man,whichwe call a Common-wealth," by "Artificiall by Chains,called CivillLawes,which [citizens]themselves, have fastnedat one end, to the lips of thatMan, or mutualcovenants, to Power; attheother and Assembly, whomtheyhavegiventheSoveraigne With endto theirown Ears."58 thisallusion, demonstrates only not Hobbes but with hisclassical of knowledge alsohisacquaintance traditions monarchy learned firsthandin France. at scripted triumphal Henry forhis carefully II, as entryintoParisin 1549,hadchosentheGallicHercules aneffigyof the was by king.Cladonly in an animal skin,his pediment a ship,flanked two with the legend:"trahimur, seqvimurque nakedmen raisinga cartouche volentes."59 to that the Referring thefouraccompanying statues personified

/ HOBBES'S BIBLICAL Springborg BEASTS 365

their chained thelipsof theking,it translated: arepulled ears to Estates, "we andwe followfreely."60 that Lucian Themessage rhetor between reports: "youknowthekinship is II well.Eloquence the earsandtongue,",61 onethatHenry hadlearned was rhetoricians authors mirrors and of lesson that the Renaissance taught. the Gaullaume Bude had firstproposed modelof the GallicHercules to du Jean Iin who Francis his 1518Institution Prince.62 Bodin, intheMethodus
observed that "before the time of Henry II . . . we never used the word

in the in "there 'Majesty' addressing king,"63 De la Republique is declared, morenatural, forthesujects conforme than nothing to themselves untothe unto manners, thedoingsandsayingsof their prince. . . havingtheireyes, theirsenses,andall theirspirits, of He whollybentto theimitation him."64 of the thentooktheliberty advising prince his proper on comportment:
a Wherefore prince is wise is, so oft as he should that showhimself untothe people he mostseldom should prepare so (which should do) as himselfe, thathe mayuntoall men seemeeven in his face andcountenance carrywithhim a certaine to stateand majestie stillmixtwithmodestie, especially hisspeech, yet but in which should always be maiesticall sententious. and

TheHeracles taught eloquence who by the forsaking club,his arrows words,
became a Renaissanceimage for lex animata,the king as animatelaw. While

Petrarch spokeof "healing and speech," Francis aspired "doulce I to eloet quence royalbonte," eloquence whichBodinwasmindful the the of was language which with Francis hadin factdealt I withtherebels LaRochelle: of "with maiesite his speech[he]terrified the of them" obedience.65 into Nor was eloquencethe only lesson the Gallic Herculestaught.The classical tookoverthecharacteristicshisrivalHermes, thecivilizer hero of as of peoples,whotaught agriculture, protected cities.HisEastern provenance back Geofrey in crept 1510edition thefalseBerosus Troy's of [Babylonicus]; andin 1529Champfleury him"notonlyKingof Gaulbutalsoa great made II magician, and astronomer, evenfounder Paris."66 of Henry himselfat his 1550ceremonial entryintoRouenhadbeengreeted a pageant by depicting the Christian as theantique king Hercules, slayingthehydra, accompanied and by Orpheus the ninemuses.67 bestiary the Bookof Jobrelates The of to etymologically the hydra othermonsters the EastMediterranean and of mythcycle,Leviathan among them. Hercules' nakedness, portrayed the 1649royalentry as in statue, firsta at potentclassicalpagansymbol,was both an evocationof the medieval doctrine theKing'sTwoBodiesanda satire of uponit. It evoked man,as the

366

POLITICAL THEORYMay1995 /

fromtheking,whoin theclassical "double funeral" represented was distinct In quitesimplyas an old man'sbodyin a shroud.68 France, personaof the out theking,decked inroyal the regalia, under represented officeof kingship the as to a specialaspect: king-in-parlementopposed onemanrule.Itwasto of thisidealof therobed that ceremonial statue thenaked Henry king the king in ears the II,drawing fourestates tow,bound their to thelipsof theking, by It a of of was a directaffront. suggested rupture traditional patterns consulbetweenking andpeople,anda turnto tancy,of listeningand speaking, baseduponimperial edictsandfearassociated withHispanogovernment of V the 11.69 Papalism, courts Charles andPhilip Whatcould the Gallic Herculeshave meantto Hobbes,whose only of heroby namearedisparaging? book 1 chapter mentions the classical In 12 of Leviathan Religion,Hobbesrefersto Hercules on withBacchusas added the"Legislators theGentiles" thebenefit of for "mongrill Gods," by of theignorant thepanoply "ministeriall to of and Gods," anthropomorphized . "endowed. . withlands,andhouses,andofficers, reveunues, apart and set fromallother humane and uses;that consecrated, made is, holyto thosetheir in Hercules Idols."70 to appears again book2 chapter devoted the"Office 30, of the SovereignRepresentative," a discussionof the psychologyof in as of rewards punishments levers power might havebeenwritten and that well the greatcommentator theRoman on by Preferment and Empire, Polybius. beneficesaresigns not"of Gratitude, of Fear:[nor]does it tendto the but but Benefit, to theDammage thePublique"':71 of
It is a contention Ambition, thatof Hercules theMonster with like with Hydra, which having many headsforeveryonethatwasvanquished, grewupthree. in like there For whenthestubornnesse one Popular manner, of man,is overcome Reward, with there arisemanymore(by theExample) do thesameMischief, hopeof like Benefit: that in andas all sortsof Manifacture, alsoMalice so encreaseth beingvendible. by

Althoughapparently observations passing,Hobbes's in references are reliable cluesto theGallic Hercules celebrated sixteenth as in century France. Hiscareer notendwithHenry whoaspired tounfettered did II, both one-man rule of Polybianmonarchia72 the territorial and ambitions civilizing of who turned swordsinto ploughsharesandspearsinto pruning Hercules, forks.73 Henry theformer IV, Protestant of Henry Navarre, judging who, Paris wortha Mass, converted Catholicism, to fathered CatholicHenrietta the of Maria, Queenconsort Charles andlater, I, withSully,authored Edict the of Nantes,could be said to demonstrate sort of religiosityof which the Hobbesapproved.74 Succeeding III Henry (1551-89),whosereignoversaw bitter civil warbetween Protestants Catholics, latter and the united a holy in

Springborg / HOBBES'S BIBLICAL BEASTS 367

the leagueunder Ducde Guise,Henry in thefailingdaysof theEmperor IV, ambitions become to and Rudolf harboured II, Kingof theRomans takeup the whosesuccessin theBalkans thecudgelsof Christianity against Turks, had the to at the battleof Kanizsa shamed Hapsburgs.7" Henry's marriage of with from Maria Medici de' brought it vistas aChristendom, thedominions to united seento herald renovatio a of Austria ItalyandSpain, against Islam, in was of Christian empire whichtheGallicHercules radically redeployed. Parisas Perseus, who slew the dragon HenryIV,who in 1594hadentered the as to a was Spain, Medusa, it threatened devour chained virgin, portrayed and as variously Caesar, Alexander, Augustus, Constantine, Charlemagne.76 were Buthis mostsymptomatic personifications as theGallicHercules, just that of because thesymbolic of complexity thelegendary progenitor so many linespermitted.77 princely as In 1592at the heightof thecivil war,Henry Hercules, armed witha the club,wasportrayed "dragging [three-headed] Cerberus fromthe dog up with that under-world arope,signify[ing] byhisresplendent virtue Prince the and withjustandhallowed subdues expelsvicesfromhis nation laws,"the His were Antonio Ricciardo Venetian Brixiano, reported.78 armaments strikIV as bearer after ing.Onmedal medal, Henry is portrayed Hercules-Hermes, Hermes' a and wand of peace,his weapons caduceus a club.Thecaduceus, conflates staffof surmounted entwined by serpents, imagesof the serpent of Mosesandtheecclesiastical the scepter, whichit wasperhaps prototype. of Leviathan noticeably is Of thesetheequipment Hobbes's similar. IV Hercules to the By noaccident, Henry asGallic aspired unite twoheads of theeagle,ecclesiastical civil,longa dream theGallican and of Church, in whichthekingwassaluted founder theChurch France, as of of protector of dans cities,and"Empereur sonRoyaume."79 imperial The renovatio to was combine classical the mission Heracles-Hermes aChristian of civilizing with peacein whichtheFrench ruledas priest prince. king and Vanquisher the of he Medusa theinfidelabroad, conquered la ceducee sa clemence and de "par et vertu" home,80an imageexquisitely at crafted engravers medals, of by of and humanist architects, designers royalentries, historians, philologists, andpoets.IsaacCasaubon, dedicated commentaries Polybius who his on to him author peace,haven thosewhoarein of for Henry hailed as "mighty IV, of dangerandsole anchor a Europe and long storm-tossed blownoff her Honored'Urfe's famous allegorical-pastoral course."'8' novel L'Astree, whichtellsof theHerculean travails a youngprince, of finallyadmitted into the company thedivineAstraea, of heralding newageof civilization a and to peace,wasdedicated Henry to whomthemonumental of Olivier IV, work de Serres,Le Theitred'Agriculture 1601,was also dedicated.82 of These

368

POLITICAL THEORY/ 1995 May

werededicated eloquence, by theword to rule and pastoral pacificallegories of instead by theclub. to Preface Gondibert, to answer Davenant's dedicated him Hobbes's to showsthe master muchmoreattuned thanhis acolyteto andhis theories, trends. all thathe campaigned For and Frenchliterary rhetorical against had the Hobbes no desireto extinguish imagination: fairiesandfantasms, and thosegrateful "fancy," its works.It is from"fancy," "whence proceed and similies,metaphors other tropes, whichboth by poets andorators have and it in theirpowerto makethingspleaseor displease, showwell or ill to Leviathan's as successliesin theeconomy of others, theylikethemselves."83 must combinethe emblemsof Leviathan rhetoric.The sword-wielding church stateon a missionof peace.If theproject theGallicHercules and of was a Counterreformation was its imperialdream,Hobbes'sLeviathan of antithesis: Protestant Prince,vanquisher the many-headed papaland who Presbyterian hydra, wouldfinallybring peace. Now we see why Hobbesthe materialist crusader and against fantasms to dared invokeimagesof JobandtheApocrypha, riddles setting allegorical ruled byhistheory hisfollowers solve.Leviathan out for to officially walked the a tightrope between Godlyprince protestantism theGod-king of and of tradition. in this pagan Multiple itsappeals, synthetic GallicHercules, figure, of OldTestament evocation thehumanist and king, prince theBookof Job, to as was as offensive onetradition it was attractive another. to Hobbes had overdone If "thetongue manis a trumpet warre, sedition," it. of of and the of absolute monarch like spectre aFrench who ruling Pericles, "byhiselegant and and speechesthundered lightend, confounded wholeGreecet'selfe,"84 wasmorethantheseventeenth century Englishman prepared take. was to Hobbesindulged insolent in in invoking irony the Lucian rhetor, author of thenotorious Sale.85 Hepaints a Philsophiesfor "rhetors,vilerace,drawn by greedof moneyandfanning earsto peopleproudbutpoor,who take nothingseriouslyunlesstold themby bearded philosophers with austere wholelivesanaffront their teachings."86 faces,their to own Lucian, historian of the GallicHercules rhetor and whodeplores rhetoricians, Hobbes, all is of andHobbes, author Leviathan, Lucian. Leviathan theFrench is If is King, the SpanishEmperor, Pope, and the Counterreformation the league,that makestheEnglish that parliament, nestof Presbyterians, Behemoth. Hobbes effected setof startling had a reversals onlycontrived make that to him more heretical, more politicallydangerous, more theologically and controversial. Givenhis irrepressible this disposition, couldhavebeenmore or less intentional. he hadserious For philosophical reasons naming for his booksthe way he did,whichcontroversy sometimes obscured. of Memory theOldTestament creator God,theGodof fear, couldnotbe expunged from

Springborg / HOBBES'S BIBLICAL BEASTS 369

of he not of the dispensation theNew Testament, maintained; onlybecause therealityof powerpolitics-old statesandold scoresto settle-but, more of as due seriously, to thehermeneutics power. Leviathan, an awefulfigure the God of might,personated OldTestament who hadbuilttheworldlike a Its wallsandits starry wereopen worlds. storm roof templepoisedbetween the God forallto see.By sucha showof strength, creator assailed men,who who his couldnotdenyhimortheLeviathans personified power-the latter like Beelzebub werebeasts,but somehow partof the divinedesign.That his Hobbesshouldhavedesignated ownChristian commonwealthLeviaa thanis as muchanexpression his relentless of as honesty it is of his desire to provoke. Likethekingdoms old-as thecreation menno better of of and no worse-it wasthesortof stateonemightexpecta Henry to leador,at IV I. onetime,a Charles

NOTES
1. The OxfordEnglish Dictionary(OED, 1989ed., vol. 8, 869)gives several meanings for the term up to and including the seventeenth century including, firstly, a monster, in the seventeenthcenturymeaningof marvel:"thename of an aquaticanimal(real or imaginary)of enormoussize, frequentlymentionedin Hebrewpoetry,"as in 1382, Wyclif, Job xl[1.] 20 [21] Whethermaist thou drawenout leuyethanwith an hoc? 1535 CoverdalePs ciii[i.] 26, Thereis thatLeuiathan,whom thou hastmade,to take his pastymetherin. 1555,Eden, Decades, To Rdr. (Arb.) 51 The greateserpenteof the sea Leuiathan, haue such dominionin the Ocean. 1591, to Spenser,Vis. World'sVan.62, The huge Leuiathan, dameNatureswonder;secondly,"aman of wast and formidable power or enormouswealth":1607, Dekker,KntsConjur. The lacquyof 60, this greatleuiathanpromisdehe shouldbe maister.c. 1630, Sanderson,Serm.11.3 So can the 10, Lord deal ... with the great. . . leviathansof the world;thirdly,"AfterIsaiahxxvii.I.) The great enemy of God, Satan":1382 Wyclif, Isa. xxvii.I, In that dai viseten shal the Lord in his harde swerd . . . vp on leuyathan. . . a crookidwounde serpent.c. 1400 Destr.Troy 4423, This fende was the firstthatfelle for his pride... thatlyuyatonis cald. 1412-20, Lydg.Chron.Troy,II. xvii, The vile serpentthe Leuiathan.1447 Bokenham,Seytnys (Roxb.) 150, By the envye deceyvyd of hys enmy Clepydserpentbehemoator levyathan.1595, B. Barnes,Spir.Sonn. li, Breakethou the jawes of old Levayathan, VictoriousConqueror; fourthly,"attrib. and passinginto adj.when sense: Huge, monstrous:1624, Middleton,Game at Chess, II. ii, This leviathan-scandal lies that rolling Upon the crystal watersof devotion. The OxfordEnglish Dictionary (OED) acknowledges that after 1651 the meaningof the termwas changedforever,by Hobbesuse of it to mean "Theorganismof politicalsociety, the commonwealth" (OED, 1989 ed., 869). 2. See KeithBrown, "TheArtistof the LeviathanTitle Page,"BritishLibraryJournal4, no. 2 (1978): 24-36; ArnoldA. Rogow, ThomasHobbes: Radical in the Service of Reaction (New York:W. W. Norton, 1986), 156-60; A. P. Martinich,The TwoGods of Leviathan(Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress, 1992), 362-5; andTracyStrong,"Howto WriteScripture: Words, Authority,and Politics in ThomasHobbes,"CriticalInquiry,20 (Autumn 1993): 128-59, esp. 128-30. I wish to expressmy sinceregratitude the Folger Instituteof the Folger Shakespeare to

370

THEORY/ May 1995 POLITICAL

Libraryandits staff,whereI beganthis workandfromwhomI was the recipientof a grant-in-aid; JohannandMargaret HarrisStaiblein, to LarryBryant,AlanCromartie, Sommerville,andPatricia my colleagues there, for useful discussion and assistance; to the Woodrow Wilson Center, Washington,D.C., where as a Fellow for the 1993-4 academicyear I have had the pleasureof completing it; and to the Editorand anonymousreadersof this journal.I am indebtedto Alan Cromartiefor specific informationon Herbert,Culverwell and the biblical commentaries;to LarryBryantfor his excellent work on the Gallic Hercules;and to PatriciaHarrisStablein for sources on big fish stories, includingher own (unpublished) "No Whale Is an Island." 3. Iconographicinvestigationsare less fruitful.Of the books consulted on monsters and marvellousbeasts:Christopher Antichristin Seventeenth Hill, Century England(Oxford:Oxford UniversityPress,1971);C.J.S.Thompson,TheMysteryandLoreofMonsters(London:Williams and Norgate, 1930); Heinz Mode, Fabulous Beasts and Monsters (London:Phaidon, 1975); Monstreset Demons et Merveillesa lafin du MoyenAge (Paris:Payot, 1980), ClaudeKappler, only Mode makes mention of Leviathan or Behemoth. Mode (1975, 118, 119, 120, 153) reproducesthe text of Isaiah 27:1, setting it in the context of a brief discussion of Tiamatand and dragonfiguresof earlierMesopotamian NearEasternliterature, accompaniedbyanexcellent line drawingof Leviathan(a dragon)andBehemoth(a hippopotamus) WilliamBlake, 1825, by too late for ourpurposes.Eventhe compendiousworkof P.GasparSchott,S. J., Physica Curiosa, sive Mirabilia naturae et artis (1667), ranging from angels and demons to biological and astronomicalmarvels,includesno mentionof Leviathanor Behemoth.This despitementionof Egyptianconjurorsturningrods into serpents(Schott, 1667, bk. 1, chap. 20, 58); brief mention of Job 1:3 of the Book of the Apocalypse on the precursorto Antichrist(Schott, 1667, bk. 1, chap. 19, 51) and Isaiah 13:5, 20 on the extermination the Babyloniansandtheirplace being of takenby dragons(Schott, 1667, bk. 3, chap.2, 360); anda chapterdevotedto Egyptianmonsters and deformities(Appendixto bk. 12, chap. 6, 1377-8), mattersof relatedinterestto Hobbes. 4. Strong,"Howto WriteScripture," Victoria 147. Silver,in her"Critical Response,I:AMatter of Interpretation," CriticalInquiry20 (Autumn,1993): 160-71, arguesagainst Strongthat the Leviathanis a figure for "theworld'sfundamental intransigence-its resistanceto explanation" (p. 164). This is, I think,quite wrong,if only, as I shall show, on the groundsof anachronism. 5. Quotedin Silver, "CriticalResponse,"164-5, as evidence of God flexing his muscles in the creation of Leviathan, symbol of the intransigence of the world and resistance to explanation. 6. Leviathan,1, 1991 ed., 9. 7. Ibid., chap. 17, 87, 1991 ed., 120. 8. Ibid., 166, 1991 ed., 220 9. Ibid., 166-7, 1991 ed., 220-1. 10. Strong,"How to WriteScripture," 132-3, 149. 11. Ibid.It is important emphasizethatReformation to epistemicrevisionsto the allegorical traditionof Catholicismrepresentedan institutionalchallenge in the first instance, and philosophic changes only as a consequence.Allegoricalinterpretation openedup a vast terrainof had possible meanings, giving the Churchthe scope it needed to claim institutionalauthorityover the sacredbooks. The Protestant to backfor the commonreaderhad attempt claimthe scriptures its analogue in Hobbes's attemptto claim back civil society and its full arrayof institutions, includingphilosophyand government,fromthe domainof an imperialchurch.It represented at once a democraticappealto the equalityof all believersandan institutional counterclaim against the Church.For this reason,I think thatTracy Strongis rightto see the Protestantposition on the question of how we can know the scripturesas Hobbes's paradigmfor how we can know God and, further, how we canknow thatcivil government divinelysanctioned.In each of these is cases, "know"is the operativeword, the "leap of faith"that Silver objects to and that Strong

/ Springborg HOBBES'S BIBLICALBEASTS

371

reasserts. (See Strong's "CriticalResponse II: When Is a Text not a Pretext?A Rejoinderto VictoriaSilver,"CriticalInquiry20 (Autumn1993): 172-8, esp., 172-4). Seventeenthcentury propositionsconcerningmattersfor whichwe haveeven fewer guidelinesthanforunderstanding the scripturedo not lend themselves to redescription for instance," 'interpreting' existence as, the of God," or " 'interpreting' legitimacy of the sovereign." Semanticallyincongruousand the politically dangerous,they offer no warrantfor the redescription" 'interpreting' Bible," either,languagethatexegetes are carefulnot to use. with disempoweringthe Church,see PatriciaSpringborg, 12. For Hobbes's preoccupation to "Hobbeson Religion,"in the Cambridge Companion Hobbes,ed. by TomSorrell(Cambridge, forthcoming);and "Hobbes,Heresy and the Historia Ecclesiastica,"Journal of the History of Ideas (October 1994). On anti-clericalismas the obsession in the age of Locke, see J.A.I Champion,The Pillars of PriestcraftShaken:The Churchof Englandand its Enemies, 16601730 (Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1992). 13. TheodoreBeza, Job Expovnded TheodoreBeza, Partly in Mannerof a Commentary, by Partly in Mannerof a Paraphrase (Cambridge,1589, STC 2020), Dedicatorie,4. 14. Ibid., 8-9. 15. EdwardHerbert,TheAncientReligionof the Gentilesand Causes of ErrorsConsidered of (London: 1705 ed.; Folger Library,153296), 134. English translation De religione gentilis, errorumque apud eos causis (Amsterdam,1663; FolgerLibrary:150363.B1805). 16. NathanielCulverwell,An Elegantand LearnedDiscourse of the Lightof Nature(1646), ed. by RobertA. Greenand High MacCallum(Toronto: Universityof TorontoPress, 1972), 41. 17. TheodoreBeza, Job Expovnded, Dedicatorie,4-5. 18. Hugh Broughton,an Hebraistand scholar,noted in his title the time he expended on interpretation comparedwithtranslation: HughBroughton, Iob. Tothe King.A Colon-Agrippina studie of one moneth,for the metricall translation.But of Many Yeres, EbrewDifficulties. for Part 2 is Iob. Broughton tofamiliardialogueandparaphraseforeasier entendement (n.p., 1610, STC 3868). He skips over Job, chapters38 to 42, with the general commentthat God's point here is to teach people: on the one hand,that his demonstrations power are visible; on the of other,thatprobingthem too deeply for meaningis a show of prideof just the sortfor which Job took our punishment.Broughton's comment amounts to a confession of failure with this particularset of "'ebrew difficulties,"which is to say that he is more open than most of his commentators contemporary (Ibid.,144). This translation, with a politicalpurposeno doubt,had been made for King JamesI. Earlier,in his translation TheLamentation Ieremy(1606, 34), of of dedicatedto "Henry,Princeof GreatBritany," Broughtonhad cross-referenced dragonand the ostrichof chapter4:3 of the Lamentations ("Eventhe Dragonsopentheirbreast,they give suck to their whelps: the daughterof my people is like the cruell:as the ostrichin the wildernes")to the unicornof Job 39:14, suggestingsome unfathomable associationbetweenthese apocalyptic beasts. The choice of Job andthe Lamentations Jeremiahas texts for royaldedicationcould, of as in the case of Beza, simply be to exhortthe Princeto constancyand couragein times of trial, with no particular, negative,focus on the apocalypticcontent,as the Broughton'ssubtitlefor or the Lamentations(1606), which "Stirrethall to attentionof God's OrderedProvidence in Kingdomesconfusion,"would suggest. 19. George Abbott, The Whole Booke of lob Paraphrased, or Made easie for any to understand(London, 1640, STC 41), 256, 259. 20. Jean Oecolampadius, Expositionde M. Iean Oecolompadesvr le Livrede Iob. Traduit de Latinen Fran,ois (Editionpremiere,Geneve, 1562,Floger Library218-628q), 487. 21. Ibid., 488-9. Oecolampadius'account is one of the most comprehensivesurveys of of interpretatons BehemothandLeviathanin Bible commentaries. 22. Job 40:17.

372

POLITICAL THEORY! May 1995

23. Behemoth'stail stiff like a Cedarin the Book of Job, would have been readas a figure for Lebanon. 24. John Calvin, Sermons of Maister John Calvin, vpon the Booke of Iob, trans. Arthur Golding (London, 1584 STC 4447), 730b, 43ff. 25. Ibid., 731a, 4-11. 26. Ibid., 731a, 16-21. 27. Ibid., 732b, 33ff. 28. Ibid., 732a, 53ff: "HowbeitbeforeI goe any further, wherashere is so long a discourse vpon the said king of beasts of the land whiche I said was an Elephant,(albeitthatit bee named we here by the generaltermeof Behemoth)& also vponthe Leuiathan: haueto marketherupon how men haue bin of opinion,thatby an allegorythe diuel is spokenof here, ratherthaneither the Elephantorthe Whale,andthatthey hauegone abouteto prouethatfanasticaldeuise of theirs by this, thatin the end is said, thatthe said whale is the king of the childrenof pride." 29. Ibid., 733a, 6-11: "Neuerthelestruely,by conueying the discoursefrom the one to the to other,a manmightas wel vse this similitudeof the WhalesandElephantes, makemenperceiue how greatly the power of the Deuil ought to fray vs, seeing he is termedthe princeof the ayre and of the world." 30. The most common usage of the words "allegory," "allegorical" to and includingthe up sixteenthcentury,was to designatea particular of tradition biblicalinterpretation, Tyndalein his Obedienceof a Christian Man,of 1528 (Works,vol.1, 303) declaring: "Theydividethe scripture in four senses, the literal, tropological, allegorical and analogical." Wyclif, on Gal. 4:24, remarkedeliptically, "The whiche thingis ben seid by allegorie, or goostly undirstandinge." to W. Fulke (Heskins.Parliament,1579, 11) referred "wickedallegorizingvpon the scriptures"; and, in the same vein, Jortin(Serm, 1571, 1771 ed., I.i.2,) declared:"ThePaganPhilosophers fell into the Allegorizingway,"OxfordEnglishDictionary, 1989 ed., vol. 1, 333. 31. Calvin, 1584 ed., 733b, 11ff, 28ff; "If we beare away this singlenes, it will stand vs in bettersteed then all curiousexpositions that canne be deuised, as when these Allegorimakers serchedout his ribs & backbones,& treatedalso of his skin & of this & that,& to be short,there was not that peece of him, whereinthey found not some toy or other.But this is as it were to make the holy scripturea nose of waxe, by transfourming from the naturalsense." it 32. John Calvin, A Commentary vpon the Prophecie of Isaiah (Translated ovt of French. . . by C. C. London(1609, STC 4396), 260b. 33. The ReformationWritingsof Martin Luther.Translatedfrom the definitive Weimar edition by Bertram Lee Wolf (London:Lutterworth Press. 1956, 2 vols.), vol. 2, 231. 34. Ps. 58:4. 35. Ps. 22:21. 36. Ps. 7:2. 37. Jer.5:3. 38. Ps. 74:13 39. Luther,TheReformation Writings,1956 ed., vol. 2, 232. 40. Ibid. 41. Hobbes's challenge is issued in his "Animadversions upon the Bishop's Epistle to the Reader,"in The English Worksof ThomasHobbes, ed. by Sir William Molesworth(London, 1839-45; 11 vols, referred as E.W.),vol. 5,25-6, prefacingTheQuestionsConcerningLiberty, to Necessity and Chance, ClearlyStatedand DebatedbetweenDr Bramhall,Bishopof Derbyand Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury(1654). It is interestingto speculate at what point Hobbes decided to use the title Behemothhimself, the work thatwas completedin 1668 and published only in 1679. Hobbesis mute on the significanceof its title, at which we can only guess. Did the

/ Springborg HOBBES'S BIBLICALBEASTS

373

Long Parliamentin any way resemble Behemoth as a figure for the Assyrians, land of Nebuchadnezzar the Towerof Babel? and 42. John Bramhall, Castigations of Mr Hobbes his Last Animadversions,in the Case ConcerningLibertyand UniversalNecessity. Withan ApprendixConcerningthe Catching of or LEVIATHAN, the Great Whale(London, 1658, STC B4215), Preface,ii. 43. Ibid., iii: "I do believe there never was any AuthourSacred or Profane, Ancient or or Moderne,Christian, Jew,Mahumetan, Pagan, thathathinveighedsofrequentlyandso bitterly and against allfeignedphantasmes,withtheirfirstdevisers,maintainers, receivers,as T.H. hath done, excludingout of the natureof thingsthe souls of Men, Angels, Devils, andall incorporeal and Substances,as fictions,phantasmes, groundlessecontradictions. Manymenfearthemeaning of it is not good, thatGod himself mustbe gone for company,as being an incorporeal substance, nature.So much T. H. himself seemeth to except men will vouchsafe by God to understand intimate." 44. Brown, "TheArtistof the Leviathan"; Strong,"Howto WriteScripture." 45. OED: sea monster,half man half fish. Therewas a long traditionof big fish stories, in Norse, French Romance, Celtic, and Old English legend, and other folklore far afield. See, CorneliaCatlinCoulter,"The 'GreatFish' in AncientandMedieval Story,"Transactions the of American Philological Association 57 (1926): 32-50; Michael N. Nagler, "Beowulf in the Contextof Myth,"in OldEnglishLiterature Context,ed. by J. D. Niles (Totowa,NJ: Rowman in and Little field, 1980), 143-56; S. J. Parsons,"LestMen Like Fishes . . . ," Traditio3 (1946): 381-8. 46. Bramhall,Castigationsof Mr.Hobbes, iv. 47. Ibid. Bramhallexpandson his image:"Myfirstdartis aimedat his heart,or Theological partof his discourse,to shew thathis principlesarenot consistenteitherwith Christianity, any or otherReligion. The second dartis aimedat the chine [OED: backbone],wherebythis vast body is unitedand fitted for aminalmotion,thatis, the politicalpartof his discourse;to shew that his principlesareperniciousto all formesof Government, all Societies, anddestroyall relations and between man and man. The thirddartis aimed at his head or rationalpartof his discourse;to shew that his principlesare inconsistentwith themselves, and contradictone another. him Let take heed, if these three darts do pierce his Leviathanhome, it is not all the Dittany [OED: pepperwort,cure for monsters]which growethin Creetthat can make them dropeasily out of his body, withoutthe utteroverthrowof his cause." 48. Ibid. 49. For more detailed studies of Hobbes on these particularreligious doctrines see the following pieces by PatriciaSpringborg, "Leviathan the Problemof EcclesiasticalAuthorand ity," Political Theory 3, no. 3 (1975): 289-303; "Leviathan,the ChristianCommonwealth Political Studies24, no. 2 (1976): 171-83. Incorporated," 50. ThomasHobbes,Historiaecclesiastica carmineelegiaco concinnata,ed. with a preface by ThomasRymer(London:AndrewCrooke, 1688). English paraphrase, TrueEcclesiastical A HistoryFromMoses to the timeof MartinLuther, Verse(London, 1722), lines 1225-35, 1688 in ed., 57, 1722 paraphrase, 97-100. pp. 51. This is the spirit of Tracy Strong's descriptionof the frontispiecein "How to Write 130. Scripture," 52. HenryVIII claimed a super-kingrole in medievalmysticalbody language"Weas head and you as members,we are conjoinedandboundtogetherin one body politic,"cited by Ernst H. Kantorowicz,TheKing'sTwoBodies:A Studyin MedievalPolitical Theology(Princeton, NJ: PrincetonUniversity Press, 1957), 228; but even he does not quite qualify for the might and terrorof Leviathan.

374

POLITICAL THEORY/ May 1995

53. DiodorusSiculus, Libraryof History,trans.C. H. Oldfather(London:Heinemann,Loeb ed., 1935), 4.19, 405. 54. Citedby CorradoVivanti,"HenryIV,The Gallic Hercules,"Journalof the Warburg and CourtauldInstitutes30 (1967): 185. ed. 55. Lucian, "Heracles,"in Works, by A. M. Harmon(London:Heinemann,Loeb ed., 1913), vol. 1, 63. 56. Ibid., 65. 57. Ibid., ?3-6, 1913 ed., 65-7. 58. Leviathan, 1991 ed., 147; noted by QuentinSkinner,"ThomasHobbes on the Proper Transactions the Royal HistoricalSociety 40 (1990): 121-51. Significationof Liberty," of 59. Forthis accountof HenryIV as the GallicHercules,I am indebted LawrenceM. Bryant, to "Politics, Ceremonies, and Embodimentsof Majesty in Henry II's France," in European Monarchy,its Evolutionand Practicefrom RomanAntiquity ModernTimes(Stuttgart: to Franz SteinerVerlag,1992) 127-54. 60. Ibid., 136-7. 61. Lucian, "Heracles," 1913 ed., 67. 5, 62. Bryant,"Politics,Ceremonies,andEmbodiments," 140. 63. Ibid., 136. 64. JeanBodin, TheSix Bookes of a Commonweale, trans.R. Knolles (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1962), 503, 506, cited Bryant, "Politics, Ceremonies, and Embodiments," 135-6. 65. Bodin, TheSix Bookes,3.3, 378, cited Bryant,"Politics,Ceremonies,andEmbodiments," 141-2. 66. R. E. Hallowell, "Ronsard the Gallic HerculesMyth,"Studies in the Renaissance9 and (1962); cited Bryant,"Politics,Ceremonies,andEmbodiments," n. 47. 141 67. Bryant,"Politics,Ceremonies,andEmbodiments,"150. 68. Emst H. Kantorowicz,The King'sTwoBodies:A Studyin MedievalPolitical Theology (Princeton,NJ: PrincetonUniversityPress, 1957), 498 n. 6. 69. Bryant,"Politics,Ceremonies,andEmbodiments,"144-5. 70. Leviathan,1991 ed., 80-1. 71. Ibid., 241. 72. Polybius, 6.7.9-6.9.1. 73. Vivanti,"HenryIV, The Gallic Hercules,"190. 74. As TracyStronghas pointedout. 75. Vivanti,"HenryIV, The Gallic Hercules,"177-8. 76. Ibid., 179-83. 77. See Jean Seznec, La Survivancedes dieux antiques (Paris, 1940), 28ff, cited Vivanti, "HenryIV,"183. 78. Antonio RicciardoBrixiano, CommentariaSymbolica..in quibus explicanturarcana pene infinitaad mysticam,naturalem etoccultamrerum significationem (Venice 1591, autinentia 33), cited Vivanti, "Henry IV," 184. 79. Antoniola Penna,Orazioe l'ideologia delprincipato(Turin,1963), 180-1;ErnstBloch, Les Rois Thaumaturges (Paris, 1961), cited Vivanti,"HenryIV," 180-1. Rousseaureferredto Hobbes as that "Christian who unitedthe two heads of the eagle, The Social Contract, author," 1762, bk. 4, chap. 8, trans.MauriceCranston(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1968), 180. 80. Vivanti,"HenryIV," 190. 81. Isaac Casaubon,Epistolae...eiusdemdeicationes, praefationes,prolegomena (Rotterdam, 1709), vol. 1, 87; cited Vivanti,"HenryIV,"193-4. 82. Vivanti,"HenryIV," 194-5.

/ Springborg HOBBES'S BIBLICALBEASTS

375

83. See Hobbes's Answerto "TheAuthor'sPrefaceto his muchhonour'dFriendMrHobs," by Sir William D'Avenant, and Hobbes's Answer, in Gondibert:an Heroick Poem (London, 1651, STC D325), 78-9. of 84. Hobbes, De Cive, chap. 5, on Imperium,in The English Works ThomasHobbes, ed. by Sir William Molesworth(11 vols, London, 1839-1845, referredto as E.W.), vol. 1, 88. 85. I thankthe anonymousreaderof this journalfor remindingme of the title of Lucian's otherfamous work.For the Lucianictraditionmore generally,see D. Duncan,Ben Jonson and UniversityPress, 1979). Cambridge the LucianicTradition(Cambridge: 86. Hobbes added,while "anyonewho decriesthe priestsis hunteddown as a blasphemer, atheist,heretic."Historia Ecclesiastica, lines 385-460, 1688 ed., 19-22; 1722 ed., 28-33.

Patricia Springborgteaches in the Departmentof Governmentat the Universityof WilsonInternational Scholarin 1994-95, she is now a GuestFellow Sydney.A Woodrow FoundationResearch and at the BrookingsInstitutionas the recipientof a MacArthur WritingGrant.