Raleigh, Hariot, and Atheism in Elizabethan and Early Stuart England

Abstract

It has long been accepted as fact that Raleigh was an important figure in a coterie of maverick intellectuals, generally referred to as the School of Night. The assumptions are that this coterie was a structured group; that it concerned itself with iconoclastic attitudes toward religion and philosophy, politics, literature, and the sciences; and that the Raleigh coterie was in active opposition to a rival group, the members of which included the Earl of Essex, the Earl of Southampton, and William Shakespeare. However, two concerns need clarification to evaluate the evidence that Raleigh was a member of such a group: were the attacks on him as an atheist justified, and what were his attitudes toward intellectual pursuits ? It would then be most practical to ascertain on what evidence the School of Night theory is based, how it is presented and interpreted by twentieth century scholars, and whether or not earlier accounts of Raleigh ascribe to such theories, examining along the way what Raleigh's beliefs were as can be determined by his writings and what contemporary attitudes were toward Raleigh and his associates. It may then be possible to judge if there is justification for asserting that Raleigh was a leader--or even a member--of such a group, and indeed, if any such group is likely to have existed.In 1592, in answer to Elizabeth's proclamation against the Jesuits, Father Robert Parsons published his Responsio in which he deplored the notion that Raleigh might become a privy councilor and thus introduce an atheistic policy into England, through the agency of his conjurer, usually taken to be Thomas Hariot. An Advertisment, the English summary of the Responsio, repeated the charge but did not speculate on Raleigh's appointment to the Privy Council. “Of Sir Walter Raleigh's school of atheism by the way, and of the conjurer that is M[aster] thereof, and of the diligence used to get young gentlemen to this school, wherein both Moses and our Savior, the Old and New Testament are jested at, and the scholars taught among other things to spell God backward”.