1. Hartz, Louis B., The Liberal ‘tradition in America: An Interpretation of American Political Thought Since the Revolution (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1955);Google Scholar and Pocock, J. G. A., The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975).Google Scholar See also, Pocock, J. G. A. and Ashcraft, Richard, John Locke (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1980);Google Scholar and Pocock, , “Between Gog and Magog: Republicanism and Ideologia Americana,” JHI 48 (1987): 325–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2. Diggins, John P., The Lost Soul of American Politics: Virtue, Self-interest, and the Foundations of Liberalism (New York: Basic Books, 1984);Google Scholar and Bellah, Robert and Associates, Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in the American Way Life (New York: Harper and Row, 1985).Google Scholar

3. See Pocock, , “Between Gog and Magog,” pp. 332–34.Google Scholar

4. Locke, John, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, ed. Nidditch, Peter H. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1975), pp. 9–10 (Locke's text is italicized).Google Scholar

5. The importance of medicine in Locke’s philosophy was first emphasized by Dewhurst, Kenneth, John Locke (1632–1704) Physician and Philosopher (London: Wellcome Historical Medical Library, 1963).Google Scholar A more recent treatment of this theme is found in Romancll, Patrick, John Locke and Medicine: A New Key to Locke (Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1984).Google Scholar

6. Fox Bourne, H. R., The Life of John Locke (London: H. S. King, 1876), II: 381Google Scholar; and Locke, John, Some Thoughts Concerning Education, in The Educational Writings of John Locke, ed. Axtell, James (Cambridge: Cambridge University press, 1968), pp. 148–49.Google Scholar

7. Cranston, Maurice, John Locke: A Biography (London: Macmillan, 1957), p. 425.Google Scholar

8. Bourne, Fox, Life of John Locke, II: 378.Google Scholar

9. Locke, John, Two Treatises of Government, ed. Laslett, Peter, revised edition (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1965), pp. 33–34, 421–29.Google Scholar

10. Ibid., Locke’s, medical orientation toward the problem of toleration was not made explicit in A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689), ed. Romanell, Patrick (New York, 1955), pp. 50–58Google Scholar; but it becomes evident when the Letter is compared to An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690, 1694), especially pp. 397–401; and Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693), pp. 164–65. Whatever the political basis of his fears of Catholic tyranny, his justification for them was grounded in medicine. See Ashcraft, Richard, Revolutionary Politics and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), pp. 99–100.Google Scholar Ashcraft argues, incorrectly, I think, that Locke's anti-Catholicism was “never accorded anything like a systematic intellectual consideration.” Rather than mere “polemics,” it rested squarely on his medical theory.

11. Becker, Carl, The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth Century Philosophers (New Haven, Yale University press, 1932). pp. 31–32.Google Scholar

12. This suggests a parallel between Becker's Heavenly City and Rorty's, Richard critique of Enlightenment conventions of scientific objectivity, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980).Google Scholar See also, Nelson, Richard, “Carl Becker Revisited: Irony and Progress in History,” JHI 48 (1987): 307–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar, especially note 33.

13. Berger, Peter, The Heretical Imperative (Garden City: Anchor Press, 1979), pp. 15–18.Google Scholar

14. Ibid., p. 126.

15. Ibid., pp. 7–16, and Walzer, Michael, The Revolution of the Saints: A Study in the Origins of Radical Politics (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1965).Google Scholar See note 21, below.

16. Ibid.; Berger, , Heretical Imperative, pp. 19–22.Google Scholar

17. Walzer, Revolution of the Saints; Berger, , Heretical Imperative, pp. 26–29.Google Scholar

18. See Heller, Erich, “Faust's Damnation: The Morality of Knowledge,” in The Artists Journey into the Interior and Other Essays (New York: Random House, 1965), pp. 3–45.Google Scholar “The demonic,” Heller's essay suggests, was not limited to the Lutheran tradition in Germany but followed the Reformation wherever it spread, retaining its hold on the secular Enlightenment imagination as much as it did on the religious imagination. See also, Zucher, Wolfgang, “The Demonic from Aeschylus to Tillich,” Theology Today 26 (04 1969): 48–50.Google Scholar

19. Arendt, Hannah, “Tradition in the Modern Age, “in Between Past and Future: Six Exercises in Political Thought (New York: Viking Press, 1961), pp. 18–26Google Scholar; and The Human Condition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958), pp. 257–61.Google Scholar

20. Pocock, , Machiavellian Moment, p. 550.Google Scholar

21. Mosse, George L., The Holy Pretence: A Study of Christianity and Reason of State from William Perkins to John Winthrop (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1968), pp. 17–33Google Scholar; and Gilbert, Felix, “Machiavellianism,” in Dictionary of the History of Ideas: Studies of Selected Pivotal Ideas, ed. Wiener, Philip (New York: Scribner, 1973), 3: 116–26.Google Scholar

22. See Walzer, Michael, Revolution of the Saints, pp. 27–35Google Scholar; Weber, Max, The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Parsons, Talcott (London: 1930)Google Scholar; and Oestreich, Gerhard, Neostoicism and the Early Modern State (New York, 1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar Each confronts the creative-destructive dualism of the Reformation in a different way, but each assumes a relationship between Protestantism and modernization. Calvinism is presented as being in tension with traditional society, appealing to conscience to justify disobedience. At the same time, Calvinists are described as opposing disorder and demanding the imposition of discipline. For Walzer, , “Calvin's thought begins with alienation and ends with a new religious discipline” (Revolution of the Saints, p. 30).Google Scholar Therefore, his explanation stands between Weber's emphasis on economics and Oestreich's emphasis on militarization. Despite their differing interpretations of its consequences, each begins his analysis with the dilemma of “pluralism"; the attempt to defend the autonomy of the individual conscience, without promoting chaos.Pocock's criticism that Walzer uncritically assumed a modernization theory in interpreting this dualism may be applied equally to Weber and Oestreich. See Pocock, , Machiavellian Moment, p. 374.Google Scholar But this criticism has also been leveled against Pocock, in Noble, David W., The End of American History: Capitalism, Democracy and the Metaphor of Two Worlds in Anglo-American Historical Writing, 1890–1980 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1985), pp. 142–43.Google Scholar A medical interpretation, rooted in religious conceptions of the demonic, and closely related to classical conceptions of political virtue, avoids this modernization argument. It also suggests a pattern for integrating the dilemmas within the mission of the Puritan saints in England and in the American colonies, without appealing to a division of old and new worlds.

23. Medical theory for Locke was a logic grounded in experience, just as was Calvinist theology. Neal Wood's division of right and left Baconians, with Locke on the right, is seriously challenged by Ashcraft, who places him with the Radical conspirators. See Ashcraft, , Revolutionary Politics, pp. 331–37, 417Google Scholar; and Wood, Neal, The Politics of John Locke's Philosophy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), pp. 84–87.Google Scholar Once more, Wood's similar division of Calvinism from Baconianism in Politics of John Locke's Philosophy, pp. 30–31; and John Locke and Agrarian Capitalism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), p. 99Google Scholar, deemphasizes the strong Calvinist context which was common to both Bacon and Locke, as pointed out by Hill, Christopher, in Intellectual Origins of the English Revolution Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965), 92–94Google Scholar; and Webster, Charles, The Great Instauration: Science, Medicine and Reform, 1626–1660 (New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers, 1976), pp. 24–25.Google Scholar It is impossible to separate what is Calvinist from what is Baconian in origin because the Protestant terms of his rejection of religion would have been indistinguishable from his respect for it in his method. See Quinton, Anthony, Francis Bacon (New York: Hill and Wang, 1980), pp. 1, 9–10.Google Scholar Ironically or not, the Puritans found themselves congenial to Baconianism. Ramism, with its emphasis on the practical, has been open to the same double interpretation as Baconianism. See for example, Selinger, Suzanne, Calvin Against Himself: An Inquiry in Intellectual History (Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1984), p. 178.Google ScholarOng, Walter, in “Ramism,” Dictionary of the History of Ideas, pp. 42–45Google Scholar, denies that Ramism influenced medicine. But Cotton Mather incorporated Ramist and Baconian ideas in his medical view of sin, and drew on Sydenham, as well. See Mather, Cotton, The Angel of Bathesda, ed. Jones, Gordon W. (Barre, MA: American Antiquarian Society and Barre Publishers, 1972)Google Scholar; and Palmer, Thomas, The Admirable Secrets of Physick and Chyrugery, ed. Forbes, T. R. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1984), pp. 2–22.Google Scholar

24. Ashcraft, , Revolutionary Politics, pp. 77–78.Google Scholar Medicine, as a mediating science fit well with Locke's political stance as the mediator of Shaftesbury's circle in exile, and Locke's own preference for mediating roles, such as tutor and secretary.

25. Locke's medical vision might be said to have extended the universal vision of the “Great Instauration,” much as the Philosophes built their city of man on the medieval “City of God.” See Webster, , Great Insaturation, pp. 6–12, 15, 141–43Google Scholar; and Becker, , Heavenly City, pp. 29–31.Google Scholar

26. See “Report on the Trial of Mrs. Ann Hutchinson,” in The Antinomian Controversy, ed. Hill, David (Middleton, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1968):Google Scholar “And so your opinions fret like a gangrene, and spread like a leprosie, and infect farr and near and will eate out the very bowells of religion, and bath so infected the churches that God know whan they may be cured” (p. 373). Note that these words of the English theologian, John Cotton, were addressed to the American colonist, Ann Hutchinson.

27. Miller, Perry, The New England Mind: From Colony to Province (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1953), pp. 346-50Google Scholar; and Cotton Mather, The Angel of Bathesda. Not only did Mather merge religion, agriculture and medicine as did Locke, but he also related Dr. Thomas Sydenham's views on hysteria to social problems, as did Locke. Despite these similarities, Locke is often viewed as modern and innovative while Mather is seen as defending a lost traditionalist cause against progress.

28. Walzer, : “The French Calvinist, Lambert Daneau, in a book on natural philosophy, translated into English in 1578, insisted that the fall had corrupted not only human nature, but nature in general: ‘It was the cause of the appearance of the plague and poison'” (Revolution of the Saints, p. 160).Google Scholar The same analogy was used before Calvinism, as well, by republican political theorists. But a figure such as Guicciardini, for whom the image of the doctor expressed the ideal of political leadership, used an analogy of skill in containing imbalances, rather than a restoration of original health, Pocock, , Machiavellian Moment, pp. 137, 251Google Scholar; and Temkin, Owsei, The Double Face of Janus and Other Essays in the History of Medicine (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1977), pp. 42–47.Google Scholar

29. Dubos, Rene, The Mirage of Health (New York: Harper, 1959), pp. 130–36Google Scholar; Foucault, Michel, The Birth of the Clinic: An Archaeology of Medical Perception, trans. Smith, Sheridan (New York: Pantheon Books, 1973), pp. ix–xix, 22–30.Google Scholar Foucault argued that at the time of the English Revolution of 1640, medical practice and religion reinforced each other through “the myth of a total disappearance of disease in an untroubled, dispassionate society restored to its original state of health” (Ibid., pp. 31–32). The observer-doctor attempted to learn the course of inner disease before it became manifest, much as the Puritan theologian attempted to learn the course of latent sin before it became manifest in the community. Both struggledwith the consequences of Predestination —one physical and one spiritual — and both chewed speculation and looked instead to experience. See also Pauck, Wilhelm, The Heritage of the Reformation, rev. ed. 7(Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1961), p. 69Google Scholar; and Hopfl, Harro, The Christian Polity of John Calvin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), pp. 73–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Webster, , Great Instauration, pp. 115-22.Google Scholar

30. Locke, , An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, 250–58.Google Scholar

31. Dewhurst, Kenneth, Dr. Thomas Sydenham (1624–1689): His Life and Original Writings (BerkeleyUniversity of California Press, 1966), p. 6.Google Scholar Dewhurst connects Sydenham's medical approach to his Puritan world view. Sydenham's own view of religion and science is presented in “Theologia Rationalis” (pp. 145–59). A concise statement of Sydenham's medical view is found in his essay, “De Arte Medica,” dated 1669. Though Locke was given credit for the essay in the past, Dewhurst says that it is now believed that Locke only served as Sydenham's secretary (pp. 79–84). See also, Veith, Ilza, “On Hysterical and Hypochondriacal Afflictions,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine (30), 233–40.Google ScholarRomanell, , John Locke and Medicine, pp. 16, 88Google Scholar, discusses the relation of medicine as an indirect way to knowledge, to Locke's philosophy. See notes 32 and 42, below.

32. Sydenham's insight that hysteria was not gender specific, despite the etymology of the word, reflects a significant turn from the Galenic system. Locke Applied Sydenham's conclusions to the Clarkes’ son, the subject of Some Thoughts Concerning Education. Note the description of nervous illness in women, which Locke wrote in his journal about 1683: “Idle and delicate women who haveing little business to take up their time and thoughts give way to their imaginations and phansys, have more longings and more marked and monsterous children than women either of strong mindes or constant imployment. Therfor, the lazy dames of Citys are more subject to the inconveniencys than the strong country labourers.... To women that are much liable to this may prove a rational remedy to finde some constant imployment for them that may keepe them busy” (quoted in Dewhurst, , John Locke, pp. 161–62Google Scholar). See Veith, “On Hysterical and Hypochondriacal Afflictions,” p. 234, for Sydenham's earlier but similar description of hysterical symptoms in women, written in 1681–82: “As to females, if we except those who lead a hard and hardy life, there is rarely one who is wholly free from them — and females, be it remembered, form one half of the adults of the world” (p. 234).

33. Dewhurst, , Dr. Thomas Sydenham, p. 57.Google Scholar

34. Ibid., p. 34.

35. Locke, John, “Letter to Dr. Thomas Molyneux,” no. 1593, The Correspondence of John Locke, ed. Beer, E. S. De (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), 4: 628–29.Google Scholar

36. Locke's letter to Molyneux was written in January 1693, while Locke was working on the chapter on the “Association of Ideas,” which he added to the fourth edition of An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, published later that year.

37. Dewhurst, , Sydenham, pp. 40–41.Google Scholar

38. Ibid., pp. 53–54.

39. Veith, , “Hysterical and Hypochondriacal Afflictions,” pp. 234–36.Google Scholar

40. Ibid., p. 235.

41. Ibid., pp. 239–40.

42. Romanell, , John Locke and Medicine, pp. 124–25.Google Scholar Romanell argues, contra Dewhurst, that Locke was the source of Sydenham's medical innovations. This argument is unsupported by any new evidence, but reflects the pervasive assump tion that a genius such as Locke must have shaped his age. See Romanell, pp.13–18, 76–85, 162–65; and Pocock, , John Locke, 8.Google Scholar Romanell, for example, emphasizes Locke's Calvinist upbringing and says it — and his medical training —accounts for Locke's “accent on the limitations of human understanding,” over aconian optimism, pp. 117–118. Yet, earlier, he argued that Locke must have influenced Dr. Sydenham because his Puritan dogmatism gave way, through Locke, , “to an agnostic mind with almost full consciousness of human fallibility” (p. 78).Google Scholar

43. Locke, , Some Thoughts Concerning Education, p. 114.Google Scholar Locke routinely gave medical advice of all kinds in the course of his correspondence with the Clarkes, from which Some Thoughts was composed. See Stannard, Jerry, “Materia Medica in the Locke- Clarke Correspondence,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine (37), 201–05;Google ScholarDewhurst, , John Locke, pp. 295–98;Google Scholar and Romanell, , John Locke and Medicine, pp. 120–21.Google Scholar

44. Ibid., Locke, , Some Thought Concerning Education, p. 139.Google Scholar

45. Ibid., pp. 149–50, 155.

46. Ibid., 136–37, 150–53.

47. Ibid., p. 164.

48. Ibid., p. 165.

49. Ibid., p. 176: “tis a hard matter wholly to prevent the mischief. You will have very good luck, if you never have a clownish or Viscious servant and if from them your Children never get any infection.”

50. Ibid., pp. 178–79.

51. Ibid., p. 239.

52. Ibid., p. 214.

53. Ibid., p. 244.

54. See Laslett's, Peter introduction to Locke, Two Treatises of Government, pp 69, 79.Google Scholar My argument is that the Essay, Education and the Two Treatises can be recciled when viewed from a medical rather than a defense of rights position. Much of the most obvious medical language in the essay, which I discuss subsequently, was added after 1681–82 and Sydenham's explorations into hysteria. See, for example, the following paragraphs in the Second Treatise: 60, 171, 212, 219, 220. Dating other such passages is more doubtful, but Sydenham influenced Locke's thinking before 1681–82, as well.

55. Ibid., pp. 418–31; Ashcraft, , Revolutionary Politics, pp. 75–76.Google Scholar

56. Ibid., Ashcraft, pp. 578–80.

57. Laslett, , Introduction to Locke, Two Treatises, pp. 98–99.Google Scholar

58. Ibid., p. 77.

59. Ibid., Book Two, pp. 319–23

60. Ibid., pp. 455, 459.

61. Ibid., p. 369.

62. Ibid., p. 350.

63. Ibid., p. 459.

64. Ibid., pp. 350, 352. Laslett, however, denies that the Essay, the Two Treatises and the Education represent an integrated effort to establish a central thesis, as suggested here, by a medical paradigm. See pages pp. 99–100.

65. Locke, , Essay Concerning Human Understanding, p. 396.Google Scholar Locke plainly used the concept of madness to refer to what we today would call mental illness. See also, Some Thoughts Concerning Education, p. 243; King, Lester S., The Philosopy Medicine: The Early Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978), pp. 241–44;CrossRefGoogle ScholarVeith, , “On Hysterical and Hypochondriacal Afflictions,” p. 42;Google Scholar and Schneck, Jerome M., “Thomas Sydenham and Psychological Medicine,” Bulletin of the History of Medicine (31), 1034–36.Google Scholar

66. Ibid., Locke, , Essay Concerning Human Understanding, p. 397.Google Scholar

67. Ibid.

68. Ibid., pp. 395–99.

69. Ibid., pp. 399–401.

70. See Kuhn, Thomas, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970)Google Scholar; Barnes, Barry, T. S. Kuhn and the Social Sciences (New York: Columbia University Press, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Gutting, Gary, ed., Paradigms and Revolutions: Applications and Appraisals of Thomas Kuhn's Philosophy of Science (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1980)Google Scholar. King, Lester denies that Kuhn's theory has application to medicine, but stresses the importance of the physician's interaction with “intellectual, economic, religious and political environments, all of which bear on theory and practice” (Philosophy of Medicine, p. 11).Google Scholar

71. See Tully, James, A Discourse on Property: John Locke and His Adversaries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980), p. 137CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dunn, John, Locke (New York, 1984), 44–45Google Scholar; Wood, Neal, John Locke and Agrarian Capitalism, pp. 15–17Google Scholar; and Ashcraft, Richard, Revolutionary Politics, pp. 270–75.Google Scholar

72. Shaftesbury's infamous reputation was not necessarily undeserved because it was not shared by Locke. See Ashcraft, , Revolutionary Politics, pp. 79–83Google Scholar; and Laslett's, Pete Introduction to Locke, Two Treatises of Government, pp. 37–50.Google Scholar

73. Rorty, , Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, pp. 11–12; 160–64Google Scholar; Romanell, , John Locke and Medicine, pp. 12–17, 105–15Google Scholar. Locke’s pragmatic medical method appeared to present a solution to the limits of knowledge, but Locke’s pragmatic method was a disguised cultural particular. Locke’s effort to cure poverty and to stop the social spread of madness through a medical method was instrumental but not impartial.

74. Criticism of medicine’s disguised political role has accelerated since the 1960’s, during the years of disillusionment with liberalism in the Atlantic political culture. See for example, Foucault, Michel, Madness and Civilization: A History of Insanity in the Age of Reason, trans., Howard, Richard (New York: Pantheon Books, 1965)Google Scholar and Birth of the Clinic; Thomas Szasz, The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct (New York:. Hoeber-Harper 1961)Google Scholar and Law, Liberty and Psychiatry: An Inquiry into the Social Uses of Mental Health Practices (New York: Macmillan, 1963)Google Scholar; James, H.Jones, , Bad Blood: The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment (NewYork: Free Press, 1981)Google Scholar and Jay Lifton, Robert, Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide (New York: Basic Books, 1987)Google Scholar, to name a few examples.

75. This, at least, would appear to be the case, if the early capitalist” interpretation of Locke as presented by Macpherson, C. P., in The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism: Hobbes to Locke (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1962)Google Scholar, is doubtful. Once more, although Ashcraft suggests that Locke was a different sort of ideologue than McPherson’ it is legitimate to ask if Locke was used as a servant for power, even in his own day. See Ashcraft, , Revolutionary Politics, pp. 85–87Google Scholar; Dunn, , Locke, p. 45Google Scholar; and Laslett, , Introduction to the Two Treatises, pp. 37– 40.Google Scholar

76. See for example, Wise, Gene, American Historical Explanations (Homewood, II: Dorsey Press, 1973), pp. 89–97, 229–35Google Scholar; Wightman Fox, Richard, Reinhold Niebuhr: A Biography (New York: Pantheon Books, 1985), ix, 256–60Google Scholar; Bellah, Robert and Associates, Habits of the Heart; Christopher Lasch, The Culture of Narcissism: American Life in an Age of Diminishing Expectations (New York: W. W. Norton, 1978)Google Scholar and The Minimal Self: Psychic Survival in Troubled Times (New York: W. W. Norton, 1984).Google Scholar

77. Diggins, , Lost Soul of American Politics, pp. 324–40, 369.Google Scholar